I agree. While no fan of Falwell or Robertson, I can't abide by the demonization of them. Do you? Are you really implying that they recruited members to specifically bomb abortion clinics? Comparing either one of these men to the mullahs we hear about is dead wrong. Perhaps the closest thing we have to the mullahs is some of these para-military outfits like the ones that spawned McGey and Nichols. Those outfits are likewise peri-religious.
LOL!!! There have been two similar circumstances in my life. One time (in my apartment, not band camp), a pair of Jehovah's Witnesses came by and I invited them in for a chat. They left my place with very strange looks on their faces once they realized that they were talking to someone who has done a fair bit of spiritual self-discovery. This other time, an ex-girlfriend invited me to her house where a couple of 19 year old Mormons attempted to convert me. I was truly dismayed that they could fully believe that Jesus had dropped off golden books in Utah for John Smith to translate, but couldn't fathom that Jesus spent a fair amount of time studying with the masters of the far east during his human lifetime. I just attributed it to the naivete that comes with youth.
It's like a comedian I saw once...His response to bums,if they asked him for some change, as to ask them "Do you have Jesus in your heart friend?", invariably they would say yes, at which point he said he would get a crazy look in his eys, pull out a knife and say "well I guess we better cut him outta there!"
I didn't say that those two men specifically recruited people to perform such horrific acts, but I will maintain that there were (and probably still are) priests, ministers, or other clergy who recruited members of their "flock" to do such things. Again, I wasn't comparing THOSE two men to the mullahs, but there are certainly plenty of examples of Christian clergy who preach hate (of sinners, people in other religions, gays, whatever) and vitriol. That tiny percentage of Christians are the people that would be analogous to the tiny percentage of Muslims who do the same thing.
De Tocqueville called it in 1830. Here's a sample I often think of in relation to modern politics from a chapter called Tyranny of the Majority: http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/1_ch15.htm It is a fate that evangelical Christians and homosexuals both share living in a democracy -- they can't have their way, respectively, simply because they are in the minority. They must find a way to live with it or find allies to change things. I don't know if I'd call that a good thing, but a fairly unavoidable thing given the nature of democracy, and even government in general. On a different subject, I have to complain about a vagueness in public discourse that makes talking about religious matters difficult and an easy mark for propagandistic measures. That is, no two people, it seems, have the same definition for "evangelical." And, to make it more difficult, I think the definitions used by those who call themselves evangelical is much different from that used by those who call others evangelical. As long as we can't settle on a definition, I think it'll be used to keep camps split. (Btw, dictionary.com is little help, since they list many definitions.)
No, just because my definition is different doesn't mean my view is narrow. MadMax practices his faith the way he thinks a Christian should. MadMax doesn't think he's going above and beyond, he thinks he's doing what he's supposed to do. Instead of categorizing himself, he should just view it as being a Christian. There's a difference between going out and telling the world and going out and forcing the world. To me, the only eventuality of trying to mix government and religion is that the government will start forcing people to follow it's tenets and morals. As for the 2nd part, I've never said Falwell should shut his trap, have I? I say why I think he and others are wrong. If Cameron Diaz made some statement about everybody needing to ditch their cars and buy hybrids, you'd post a and then say something like "she needs to know her place and shut her trap." I've never said he can't mix religion and politics, I've said he can't mix religion and government. That is a huge difference. Nice try though.
No, I remember it, the Parents Music Resource Center. That was Tipper Gore's big thing in the mid-'80's. It's still around, although I don't think Tipper is associated with the group any longer. They are still in the business of attempting to censor music, if I'm not mistaken. What do religion and morality have to do with each other, anyway? Some of the worst atrocities have been done under the auspices of one religion or another for thousands of years. And equally awful atrocities were perpetrated by the "Godless Communists" for 70+ years. For one religion or another, or one sect of a religion or another, to have the audacity to attempt to force their will, their "morality" on others is the height of hubris. Keep D&D Civil!!
Mullahs can bring a lot more power to bear than Fallwell ever will be able to. Thus they are more dangerous and more likely to seek to directly RUN the government, as opposed to influence it. They are also more likely to win office, which makes not much difference when evaluating on principle but definitely on scope of the potential problems. Mullahs also are in a religion that has a flat hierarchy in countries with mostly Muslims, so they are rarely denounced by other religious leaders as would happen here if Falwell pushed for laws etc that Catholics, for example, didn't want. There is more balance here. Also our evangelicals don't call for suicide bombers or mass violence and the mullahs do. Or at least a lot of them in a lot of different countries do. A full scale assault on power from a right wing evangelical in the US looks like Pat Robertson in '88 and that's not as scary as the Taliban.
Call him Mullah Fallwell. I call him Jerry Falwell, radical cleric. Remember Falwell said that we brought 9/11 on ourselves by having the ACLU and secularism and gay rights. Bin Laden and his ilk probably believe just like this, too. Falwell and these radical Christian clerics are whackjobs who along with the fat cats who are worried about taxes on multi-million estates are in control of the GOP. It ain't your uncle's GOP. .
I would have far more respect for him if he didn't leave the care of his other posts to his sons. All hail King Falwell.
Lynchburg, huh? Hey, mcmark, I see your "Dumb All Over" and raise you "The Meek Shall Inherit Nothing" Some take the bible For what it's worth When it says that the meek Shall inherit the Earth Well, I heard that some sheik Has bought New Jersey last week 'N you suckers ain't gettin' nothin' Is Hare Rama really wrong If you wander around With a napkin on With a bell on a stick An' your hair is all gone . . . (The geek shall inherit nothin') You say yer life's a bum deal 'N yer up against the wall . . . Well, people, you ain't even got no kinda Deal at all 'Cause what they do In Washington They just takes care of NUMBER ONE An' NUMBER ONE ain't YOU You ain't even NUMBER TWO Those Jesus Freaks Well, they're friendly but The **** they believe Has got their minds all shut An' they don't even care When the church takes a cut Ain't it bleak when you got so much nothin' (So whaddya do? Hey!) Eat that pork Eat that ham Laugh till ya choke On Billy Graham Moses, Aaron 'n Abraham . . . They're all a waste of time 'N it's your ass that's on the line (IT'S YOUR ASS THAT'S ON THE LINE) Do what you wanna Do what you will Just don't mess up Your neighbor's thrill 'N when you pay the bill Kindly leave a little tip And help the next poor sucker On his one way trip . . . SOME TAKE THE BIBLE . . . (Aw gimme a half a dozen for the hotel room) FZ
On the same note, it was Pat Robertson who said that the massive Florida wildfires a few years back was God's punishment for Walt Disney World having "Gay Day." That is just as ridiculous as anything Jim Jones, Reverend Moon, David Koresh, or any other religious nut has ever said.
Spending alot of time listening to people yap on the subject quite a bit on the radio recently, it seems that the most basic, broadest definition is that an "evangelical" is someone who attends church regularly -- this is what they use as the question in the exit poles. This, of course, is a pretty silly definition. From dictionary.com, here is the "by Hoyle" definition: When I think of the term in it's most pejorative sense, I generally most closely associate with #3, in the sense that I think of a specific type of person who believes that the bible as it was presented to them it their prefered version (king james?) is the direct word of god, untouched by human imperfection, and it's meaning is un-nuanced, and clearly evident. As God has made THE TRUTH evident to everyone these people are so sure of their rightness that they feel (rightly, IMHO, given this assumption) that it is important to make sure that everybody else knows their truth. They also believe that the Bible as a document can always be refrenced as a final arbitrator on all issues of truth. This type of person to be offensive becuase they use their evangelising as a defense mechanism to avoid questioning and examining their own issues. They seem to be smugly self-assured and unwilling to ask hard questions about themselves. etc, etc... For me, these people were actually the greatest impediment to belief in God. I had to realize that anybody who claims to speak in the name of God should be suspect, that many of the people who claim to believe in God don't. When Jesus walked among the evil, the sinners, the tax collectors, & the prostitutes, he didn't chastice them or try to force them to act in accordance with the will of God, but rather he tried to show them the mercy and love of God, and let their internal dialog lead them closer to God. People like Faldwell seem to have more in common with the dictionary.com definition of pharisees I don't mean to be obsequious, MadMax, but I wan't to make clear that I'm not trying to imply that you fit within the definition I've layed out. Though I find much of your philosophy to be in conflict with mine, you do about as good a job of straddling the line between mainstream religious conservativism and what I consider to be true Christian faith, piety, and compassion. Back to the subject at hand, from what I'm able to determine from alot of the pundits, many of the people who voted for Bush were actually not alligned with him regarding many of what are considered to be his more conservative positions on things like abortion and the like. I really doubt that Faldwell is doing anything but living a pipe dream.
Very well put, Ottoman. I think it is difficult when Christians all want to do their best, and the loudest voices are praising those that react and exhibit behaviour like Falwell's etc. There is a culture in many congregations, where they don't exclude people or chastise those that don't follow conservatism, but the general atmosphere is one of promoting the a conservative bent in life style, or at least the appearance of one. Like anything else people want to belong and fit in, and by denouncing certain behaviours, lifestyles etc. those people will be seen favorably by their congregation and ministers. They will receive even more praise if they publically admit or pay lip service to their unworthiness and sinful nature while denouncing others too. It's a strange thing to see. I certainly don't believe all congregations are like this, but there are plenty that are that I've seen, and others that sound like it from what I've heard.
Thanks for the link. I'm still reading it. There are many links, and I really want to understand what they are saying. So far I can say their goals certainly seem laudable. I'm trying to understand the religious part of the philosophy. I see that they don't force belief or discourage disbelief in a higher being, as an official part of their criteria. It almost seems like one could be a practicing Christian and a member of this group at the same time. Also from my own viewpoint, Christianity is largely concerned with many of the same goals. It's frequently not practiced that way, but it is how I view Christianity. I will definitely finish reading all the links, and information that you provided, and try and find out more. Thanks.
