Five years from now -- ten years at most -- equal rights for gays and lesbians will be on this list. Five years from then, religious people will proudly own that accomplisment as though they were for it all along (although they'd opposed it, much like they once opposed interracial marriage), along with the rest of your list. But that's the usual state of affairs. rhester: You listed a lot of important social changes that the Church had no part in. That's fine. They're conservative by nature. But since you listed them, here's a challenge: Name one social change that should take place BEFORE it happens (just ONE). Can you do that? Cause I don't think you can. Prove me wrong.
Batman Jones- Thanks. I like the challenge. I think. Could you rephrase the question because I don't understand what you are asking. i am slow Do you mean name a significant social change like integration or women's right that should take place and will take place Or do you mean name one that will take place before it happens?
Sishir Chang ditto No doubt about it, the internet has opened the world's communication lines. I would like to repeat I don't believe Democrats are against people of faith. Sometimes we see people against something we hold dear and we assume they are against us or against God. I don't view it that way even if it is true. I view it as we are for them, love means sincerely desiring the best for someone else. Love should not be focused upon one's own interests, but the best interest of others. There is a great book written by Myrna Grant called "Vanya" It is the story of a young Russian boy who enters the Russian army in 1972 (this is non-fiction). It is a biography. Vanya was a Christian enlisted in the Russian Army at a time when only atheistic communism was allowed. He would begin each morning with prayer. However one morning he was late for role call. When the officer asked him why he was late, he was honest. The army disciplined him and told him not to pray. His response was that he would be the best soldier he could be, but his faith prevented him from ceasing to pray. The army soon began to make an example of him in there required teachings of communism. They told him that he could pray in his mind as long as no one else new he was praying. This was there message of freedom of religion. They actually said that. Soon though many soldiers were being affected because word spread. The Russian officers knew Vanya was exemplary in every area except he would not denounce God. Of course this 'problem' only drew attention. The commanding officer told him that as long as his faith did not have any influence on or offend anyone else he could continue. (again 'their' freedom of religion) But he being the only Christian in an entire army base sort of added to the talk and focused attention on the situation. The Russian Army immediately saw the threat and began to be more aggressive to force him to keep his faith to himself (he was still praying, but now he was giving honest answers to others who asked what was happening). That made the crisis worse for the Commanding Officer. But the irony was that the 'freedom' he was offered was the freedom to not have any religious expression. The 'freedom' he was offered was that religion is a private matter and no one else needs to know anything about it. Vanya did not start out to try and express his religion, however he never gave a dishonest answer when questioned by other soldiers. Many soldiers questioned him and soon the commanding officers found out that as much as they tried to supress his prayers, his answers both to them and to other soldiers were only spreading the message that he was religious. The Russian Army decided he must be silenced. They started with persecution. The more they beat him and imprisoned him the more other soldiers became curious about why a good soldier was being mistreated. The problem got worse. Finally they murdered him. His parents fought in the legal system over his murder but never got anywhere. The story was spread throughout Russia (with documentation that is copied in the book) and finally found its way to Europe and the biography was published. I give this book to most people I meet simply for one reason. You cannot read the book without feeling a deep sense that the same attitudes and premises in the Russian Army regarding religious expression back in 1972 are the same attitudes and premises in America today. It is a chilling read for a pastor. So maybe this subject for me is not about the Constitution or Republican Right Wing Fanatics or Social Progressive Democrats. I think for me it just raises questions about why I feel so uncomfortable praying at work. Or why kids feel so intimidated reading a Bible in the school lunchroom. Or why city council in Houston has protected us all by removing a Bible that was placed in a monument donated to the city in honor of a homeless shelter. I saw that monument. The city admitted no one even bothered to stop and look into it and see that a Bible was laying there under a glass case. Maybe it didn't belong there on a public place. I don't know why I feel so uneasy when govt. makes so much ado about nothing. Thanks for the time.
Rhester; That certainly is a gripping and disturbing story. Clarifying my own POV I am not against religion and personally believe that we as humans need faith of some sort. My concern is of religious expression being tied to the power and symbolism of the state. If it was about governments banning private personal expression of religion I would be arguing just as hard against that.
Sishir Chang- If it turns bad it won't be 'private' expression or 'personal' expression that gets banned. That will be legal in the worst of tyranny. You know free thought as long as you don't say it, publish it or communicate it to anyone else. My church each month sends money overseas to try and help Christians in nations where they are imprisoned, beaten, raped, murdered and denied basic human dignity. For all the bad the "so-called" Christians do who use hate and violence to spread the religion, there have always been remnants of those who were like Christ their savior. I have met many like this in third world countries. They don't have TV shows nor do they drive big cars and ask for donations. They are truthful, upright, full of sincerity and integrity, humble, kind, sacrificial, morally pure and loving. They are not better people, mostly they are people that just seem like the least and the last. They are the ones less in the limelight and much more aware of their need for Jesus Christ. They find little strengthto be good inside themselves. They seem to always be dependant upon God. They are like lambs among wolves in many nations. These are the Christians if you knew them you could best relate to. If things go bad here some day for these type Christians, I believe I could count on you to take a stand against the persecution of the religious. I really mean that.
