no, the resounding answer is that there is no answer. since you have it figured out, where do you draw the line on what can be incorporated into the government from religion and what can't? i mean, the Bible says 'thou shall not kill" and we have laws against murder. should we get rid of those? it also says somewhere in there (or at least it better) to not eat meat on fridays during lent but we didn't make a law against that. should we make one? if enough people feel a certain way it can be incorporated. if they don't and they like their meat on fridays and catholics be damned, then it won't. and i won't profess to know a ton about iraq and iran, but if they all rule b/c the people vote them in and agree with everything they say, then i guess that's how they wanna be ruled. if they suppress the people and keep the country in poverty and don't rule by the people's will and the people hate them, then i guess we can complain about it and get a jab at islamic theocracies somewhere in there. are there any fundamentalist christian theocracies anywhere?* *and no one say America edit: oh, and i'm not exactly down with an evangelical revolution as it sounds a bit extreme. edit part 2: what does evangelical christian refer to? on election night i thought they said it was the same as born-again christian but then i think they said something like 1/3 or 1/4 of the voters in missouri were evangelicals which sounded enormously too high to only be comprised of born-again. i figured the vast majority of christians were just whatever they had always been and that being born-again was a fairly small percentage of the overall christian population. or does evangelical just refer to being more activist in the practicing of your faith?
What exactly are you thiking of? For example: have gays ever in our history had the right to marry? Another: Roe v. Wade is only 31 years old. That means that it was enacted after the Bicentennial Celebrataion of this nation. What are these rights that evangelicals are trying to strip away?
Let me know when Falwell and Robertson start teaching blind hatred of other natons and energizing young people to be manipulated by their "elders" to be walking pipe bombs.
the biggest problems I see with the country being run by a "evangelical christian" is that they want to have the law of the land conform directly with their beliefs.....and that means that everyone, regardless of their religion(which isnt all christian may I remind you) will be forced to comply with the beliefs of one religion. btw...this isnt new....the evangelicals have been planning this for years.. I saw a broadcast years ago where the evangelicals were discussing what they could do to motivate their people to becomes more involved in politics so that they could push thru more of their beliefs to become law. wish I could remember where I heard that...but suffice to say that I tried to state it as close as possible to what I remember.. I dont have a problem with laws against things that all people find morally reprehensible....but making laws to outlaw things that only a segment of the population believe in is not necessarily a good thing in a county with the wide variety of belief systems that America has.
good luck finding ANYTHING that all people find morally reprehensible in the united states. you guys know how i feel about falwell and robertson. i would rather they not take the approach they take.
heh....I was referring to things like murder, stealing and stuff like that. things that most sane people dont want legal ina civilized society... but I think you knew that....
what i'm ultimately saying is you can't shield a culture's values from its legal system...from its own code of "right and wrong." you just can't. to pretend that the law has nothing to do with anyone's sense of morality, and whatever guides that, is ridiculous.
that would be all and good if all of the culture believes the same way as the evangelicals.....which they dont. let me put it this way as a example of what Im talking about.... Evangelicals would ban music or miovies they deem obscene....rock music in particular.. do you want laws made to ban things they deem unacceptable? kep in mind the difference between evangelicals and mainstream christaianity. there is a difference.
define evangelical. i see that term thrown around all the time, and i'm not even sure what it means. i would call myself evangelical, because i share my faith...an evangelist. because i believe Christ to be unique. i think your fears about "evangelicals" as those who supposedly turned out the vote in this election are unfounded. i'm ultimately saying that judeo-christian ethic is at the heart of western law...and has been for centuries. and i find that those who say, "the law and morality should be separate" are the same persons who will scream about what's fair/right/wrong/unethical in their own pet issues. we all do it. because we all have some sense of a moral compass that says, "man, that's just wrong."
Boundaries, limits, or rules are inescapable in a civil society. The right to define the rules is the essence of the political process, and some group is going to do it. We vote to see which one.
Tsk, tsk, tsk, I find it highly ironic that people who most likely are descendents of the Puritans, who fled England because the Anglican controlled government was intolerant to their beliefs, now want their government to be shaped by their church much like the Anglican church shaped the British. You guys are asking for a disaster and you don't even know it. The Bible isn't the only source of morality in this world. There have been billions of people who have shared similar morals and beliefs without being christian. Bhudist monks walk the path of Jesus better then any of you guys ever will. If I remember correctly, John Locke's letter on toleration said that the government should only concern itself with the most basic civil interests; life, liberty, health, and property. You don't need to be a chrisitian to believe in those. The government's job is to protect these interests. Anything considering people's salvation is outside of the government's interest. What else is there for evangelicals to push that isn't based on salvation? Gay marriage may be illegal, but that doesn't mean gays don't have a right to get married. We're arguing that their rights are being denied. You don't have to agree with gay marriage, but that doesn't mean you can deny gays their rights. It's as simple as that. It's because of that obvious simplicity that the only counter argument is ridiculous crap like "defense fo marriage." Ok, tell me what are you defending marriage from?
Solid, I can understand where you are coming from, but Falwell elicits a response from moderates and liberals because they seek to LIMIT the rights of American citizens. This makes a person bolt for one side or the other...there is NO middle ground on the Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage. I see other poster's in this board who are conservative partisans to the extreme who I don't fell are very religious nor do they necessarily support this Christian Conservative movement. Yet you support the republican party's pandering to this Christian right merely to build a voting bloc which is EXACTLY what Dubya did. The prevailing feeling, that I see anyhow, is: "Yeah, they might be a little over-the-top and cooky, but they are OUR bloc and on OUR side so they must be our allies. We'll make sure that they don't get to FAR out of hand; throw them a bone, let em' think their voice matters." However, that sentiment is not only going to blow up in the Republican party's face, it will to the rest of America when they are able to push their EXTREME agenda. NO I don't want to live in a theocracy or have the "Mullahs" decide what I can watch or what type of music I can listen to. This fear is what drives liberals and moderates to react so vehemently against these so called "morality crusades". Jerry Falwell and his ilk would GLADLY strip rights away from Americans if they thought it was in conflict with their religious views. HOW IS THIS NOT TROUBLING TO YOU AMERICA?? You do realize that they want to amend the constitution to TAKE AWAY rights from a segment of Americans? The last time that happened was when a bunch of white, middle class and upper crust Christian women decided that drinking was far too immoral an un CHRIST-LIKE. Worked out REAL well didn't it? I'm sorry, but I am honestly troubled by the growth of the Christian right and Falwell-esqe politics having a say in how I am governed when the spirt of their movement is to LIMIT the rights of Americans. You say we are alarmists, I say we are watchdogs.
evangelical....to me, what that means is someone who feels that their religion calls for them to shove their religion down the throats of everyone, whether they want it or not..... note: From what I have read of your posts, I dont honestly believe you are that way, so please dont think I mean to automatically denigrate you... no...I dont think so...I have extensive experience with those types...I grew up a Southern Baptist....and was active in my church until I had the misfortune of discovering rock...and then I was condemned for listening to the "devil's music" by the hypocrits that supposedly cared for my soul. In my experience, the evangelicals are the most activist of christians...the ones that feel that if you believe different from them, you are going to hell unless you come around to their view. My point...and it has nothing to do with any "pet issues" of mine...is that as Oski said much better than I can...it is not the governments place to be legislating morality in a democratic republic... I dont want nor do I need the government to be telling me what top do with my body or mind as long as I am not hurting anyone else... If I injure, maim or kill someone thru my own negligence in my pursuit of happiness...then I shoud be punished by the state...but the state has absolutely ZERO business telling me what to do, say, watch or listen to in the privacy of my own home...which is exactly what the activist evangelicals want to do..... they may start out talking about the hot topics as far as their political activism goes....but I guarantee that it wont stop there....once they have the power...they WILL attempt to legislate decency in media... They have been talking about that for years...can you say PMRC?
exactly how I feel....and in case noone has paid any attention to my previous posts in this forum....I am the classic definition of a moderate....fiscally conservative....morally liberal. Neither a democrat nor a republican. well said....this is alot of what my fears are MadMax.....you may think I am over reacting...but I grew up around evangelicals...I know what they are up to...and it scares the bejesus out of me that they might accomplish what they want.
I absolutely hate it when my church becomes political but I think I hate it even more when my govenment becomes religous. We went to church and it was like my preacher was actively campaigning for Bush. Sorry dude, I love the way you preach but dont tell me how to vote and try telling me how Bush is a man of God. I dont want to hear it. It really really bothered me.
Congratulatory letter to President George W. Bush from Dr. Bob Jones III November 3, 2004 President George W. Bush The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: The media tells us that you have received the largest number of popular votes of any president in America's history. Congratulations! In your re-election, God has graciously granted America—though she doesn't deserve it—a reprieve from the agenda of paganism. You have been given a mandate. We the people expect your voice to be like the clear and certain sound of a trumpet. Because you seek the Lord daily, we who know the Lord will follow that kind of voice eagerly. Don't equivocate. Put your agenda on the front burner and let it boil. You owe the liberals nothing. They despise you because they despise your Christ. Honor the Lord, and He will honor you. Had your opponent won, I would have still given thanks, because the Bible says I must (I Thessalonians 5:18). It would have been hard, but because the Lord lifts up whom He will and pulls down whom He will, I would have done it. It is easy to rejoice today, because Christ has allowed you to be His servant in this nation for another presidential term. Undoubtedly, you will have opportunity to appoint many conservative judges and exercise forceful leadership with the Congress in passing legislation that is defined by biblical norm regarding the family, sexuality, sanctity of life, religious freedom, freedom of speech, and limited government. You have four years—a brief time only—to leave an imprint for righteousness upon this nation that brings with it the blessings of Almighty God. Christ said, “If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my father honour” (John 12:26). The student body, faculty, and staff at Bob Jones University commit ourselves to pray for you—that you would do right and honor the Savior. Pull out all the stops and make a difference. If you have weaklings around you who do not share your biblical values, shed yourself of them. Conservative Americans would love to see one president who doesn't care whether he is liked, but cares infinitely that he does right. Best wishes. Sincerely your friend, Bob Jones III President BJIII:lw PS: A few moments ago I read this letter to the students in Chapel. They applauded loudly their approval. When I told them that Tom Daschle was no longer the minority leader of the Senate, they cheered again. On occasion, Christians have not agreed with things you said during your first term. Nonetheless, we could not be more thankful that God has given you four more years to serve Him in the White House, never taking off your Christian faith and laying it aside as a man takes off a jacket, but living, speaking, and making decisions as one who knows the Bible to be eternally true. http://www.bju.edu/letter
how 'bout these: Her name is Yoshimi she's a black belt in karate working for the city she has to discipline her body 'Cause she knows that it's demanding to defeat those evil machines I know she can beat them Oh Yoshimi, they don't believe me but you won't let those robots eat me Yoshimi, they don't believe me but you won't let those robots defeat me Those evil-natured robots they're programmed to destroy us she's gotta be strong to fight them so she's taking lots of vitamins 'Cause she knows that it'd be tragic if those evil robots win I know she can beat them Oh Yoshimi, they don't believe me but you won't let those robots defeat me Yoshimi, they don't believe me but you won't let those robots eat me
nice post, master baiter. From the opposite side of the spectrum, I teach at a fairly liberal Jesuit Catholic university, and even though the place as a whole seems to feel that Bush is predominantly anti-Christian in his policies and that Kerry would make a more moral leader, there is *no* statement from the leadership (e.g. our president, analogy to Bob Jones I guess) about voting preferences. The students encouraged to read, think, and vote accordingly, but there is not a 'correct' view enforced, at least from the leadership here. (There are, of course, profs with some very strong, vocal views that do emerge in the classroom, but more rarely than you might think).
That is the beauty of the Jesuit order and their quest for enlightment in spirt and mind. You post makes me feel SOOO much better after reading Daddy Jones' letter above....
