Christian facists on the march?

Mark1031 said:
@ Kathryn

Well I was using a condesending liberal shorthand for the religious right agenda, sorry. But that was not my point. My point was you said this:



Now I understand that christians do this and that it is in fact a very christian thing to do. However I am taken aback by the argument that this is part of the political activists christian agenda. Where was this agenda presented by political activists? I checked Robertson and Dobson web pages. 2 leading political activists. The closest I could find was a Robertson campaign for Darfur. And if this was the real agenda you would line up politically with Dems.


Which is precisely why the Christian Right is abandoning the Republican Party. This is why the Democrats won. Christians are abandoning political activism.

Here is a clip from Jerry Falwell's next in line from September:

Re: Foolishness of abandoning the concept of liberty:

I had always believed that Christian conservatives were among our country's most ardent defenders of liberty and constitutional government. All that I knew and understood from my schooling at Thomas Road Baptist Church and the Thomas Road Bible Institute, plus all of my involvement and effort in Jerry's Moral Majority, convinced me that if we Christian conservatives believed anything, we believed in freedom and constitutional government. Am I now to understand that we are supposed to support a Big Brother philosophy to government and must willingly surrender constitutionally protected liberties?


On the Iraq war:


As to the war in Iraq, do we Christians really desire that our young men and women continue to die in another non-declared, no-win war? Is it wrong to wonder whether this never-ending "war on terror" really serves the cause of national security or rather the commercial interests of globalists?

Do Evangelicals really have a litmus test whereby any future president must be determined to continue and perhaps expand constant interventionist policies, nation-building, and preemptive invasions of foreign countries?

Must we be equally determined to turn the United States into an Orwellian nightmare until life in America looks like one giant airport terminal? None of this reflects historic Christian conservatism as I ever understood it!

On Republican party political activism:


For the record, however, I believe evangelical Christians for too long have been unduly wedded to the Republican Party. In my opinion, this has seriously hampered and compromised their ability to stand courageously and independently for critical principles affecting our liberty and national autonomy.

Instead of playing politics and trying to figure out who can win, Christian conservatives need to circle the wagons around truth and constitutional government and let God determine the winner. We need to remember the sage counsel of John Quincy Adams who said, "Duty is ours; results are God's." Besides, we haven't done a very good job of picking winners; why don't we let the Lord do it for a change?
 
augurey said:
Katheryn, if you had the power, what would you do with the Muslims in America?


If I had the power, I would stop immigration completely to those applicants who contend that there is a second political ideology that will hold all others in submission to it's rule. Then, I would make sure that before any citizenship were finalized, all applicants were to agree that they would accept the American Constitution above ALL other political and social contracts.

Any and all immigrants, whether Catholics from Mexico, Socialists from Europe, Buddhists from Vietnam, Hindus from India, Communists from Russia or East Europe, and Muslims from Islamic countries, all must agree to assimilate into American culture, speak English and keep our customs. No multiculturalism at all, no dual standard for women or nonbelievers, no quest for Sharia law. We are Americans here, a melting pot of those from around the world.

I don't think many would disagree with me. We have seen the multicultural madness in Europe and want none of it. Here, you want to be an American, or you do NOT come here.
 
Katheryn said:
No multiculturalism at all, no dual standard for women or nonbelievers, no quest for Sharia law. We are Americans here, a melting pot of those from around the world.
What is "the melting pot" if not multiculturalism? If we attempt to freeze our culture exactly as is, aren't we effectively taking the pot off the fire?
 
#18
Little Raven
On Walkabout




Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,119 But don't think the fun is limited to the Religious Right. Oh no.

Have no fear, there's daggers enough for all.
Quote:
What does the 2006 election signify? What should conservatives do? On email lists, I have been hearing the same story: “It’s the fault of the neocons.” “These neocons have completely screwed us over.” And you know what, they are right.

Conservatives should whole-heartedly rebuke the neocons and their reptilian allies. Neocons should be removed from places of power. They should be fired from editorial positions. And, in some cases, they should be deported.

What would be done in a just world? All neocons should be removed from the Republican Party. First of all, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld should be ousted. Neocon publications like Weekly Standard, American Spectator, Wall Street Journal, First Things, and Commentary should be condemned. Thugs like Wolfowitz, Perle, Kristol and Podhoretz should be expatriated.

David Frum, Feith, and Ledeen should be removed from US soil. Propagandists like Medved, Krauthammer, Jaffa, Jonah Goldberg, and Neuhaus should be ostracized. The neocon henchmen like Specter, McCain, Condoleezza Rice, Fred Barnes, David Brooks and Andrew “Bareback” Sullivan (all radical left-wing activists in disguise) should be shut out from all discussion. And traitors like Alberto Gonzales, Linda Chavez, and Gutierrez should all be deported to Mexico.

Real conservatives (such as those you would find at the American Conservative or Chronicles Magazine) have been vindicated. They have always been right about these traitorous Trotskyites.

__________________
"They stole my sister away!" she cried, "To be a nasty goblin's bride!"

I remember that before the Iraq War, I didn't like it but was appeased by the likes of Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, and John Kerry who were FOR the Iraq War, Democrats all. When there was bipartisanship on the war, the little guys thought, "Well, they must know something we don't, they are all agreed!"
 
ComradeDavo said:
If you take facism too essentially mean enforcing your morals onto others, then the Christian right fit that defintion.

I mean one defintion about on the web is

''A social and political ideology with the primary guiding principle that the state or nation is the highest priority, rather than personal or individual freedoms''

Change that to

''
A social, religious and political ideology with the primary guiding principle that the state/nation and religion is the highest priority, rather than personal or individual freedoms
''

And the Christian right fit the bill!

I got that defintion from http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...:Fascism&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

I can say the same exact thing about liberal Democrats.
 
JollyRoger said:
How do liberal Democrats impose their morals on you?
By trying to legalize gay marriage, maybe? Or like, everything else they believe in and try to legislate?

I can't even believe some people are seriously discussing this.

Both parties, both idealogies, and everything else tried to impose their morals on everyone else.. that's how things work.
 
Little Raven said:
What is "the melting pot" if not multiculturalism? If we attempt to freeze our culture exactly as is, aren't we effectively taking the pot off the fire?

"Melting pot" is the exact opposite of 'multiculturalism'.

A melting pot means that you put all the Italians, Irish, Chinese, former African slaves, Germans, English convicts and puritans, Mexicans, Scandanavians, Poles, etc etc, put them into a pot all together, the melt into ONE CULTURE: American.

Muticulturalism has lots of pots with separatist ideology. Bring your culture here, practice it separate from everyone else, keep your language and customs the same.

No melting into one culture - keep it as many (multi).
 
Little Raven said:
But don't think the fun is limited to the Religious Right. Oh no.

Have no fear, there's daggers enough for all.

This is scapegoating at it's finest, let's not forget these neocons got their views through the political system, they would never have done that without the support of the religous right and the more "liberal" Republicans. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. One thing I can't stand is a sore loser, worse is a sore loser who blames everyone but himself and others, as if they were heavily criticisng the situation and not jumping whole heartedly on the band wagon. At least Bush was decent enough to own up to his errors, albeit in his usual dimplomatic style, ie a bit contradictory(but hey that's politics)

I acknowledge that these people aren't indicative of Republicans as a whole, at least if this web site is anything to go by, and other Republican views I have seen,these guys and girls sure are whiney though.:rolleyes:

Katheryn you should stick to defending your faith, your much better at that than you are at disparriging other faiths. :goodjob:
 
Katheryn said:
Pushing sex education down kids throats when they are TOO YOUNG!
The public school system is run by politicians of many stripes. Sex education generally requires parental consent. You are also free to home school or send your kids to private school.
 
Katheryn said:
"Melting pot" is the exact opposite of 'multiculturalism'.
Ok..but by that definition, shouldn't immigrants coming here attempt to change our culture as much as they like? Why shouldn't Muslims quest for Sharia law? Assuming they do so via our political process, that's just 'melting in,' right? Ditto on things like enforcing the learning of English. If there's a county where the majority of the people speak Spanish, (and you'd better believe there are) why shouldn't everyone just speak Spanish? It'll all melt together eventually...
 
JollyRoger said:
The public school system is run by politicians of many stripes. Sex education generally requires parental consent. You are also free to home school or send your kids to private school.

Sex education does not require parental consent.

http://www.nclrights.org/publications/pubs/optout_qa_1104.pdf

Arnold Schwarzeneggar just signed into law MANDATORY education requirements on transgender (including cross dressing) gay and and other sex education requirements. This includes CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS, if they get a penny (or any of their students get a penny) from the state of California.

So, the "opt out" doesn't mean anything in California any longer.

It is law.
 
Katheryn said:
Sex education does not require parental consent.

http://www.nclrights.org/publications/pubs/optout_qa_1104.pdf

Arnold Schwarzeneggar just signed into law MANDATORY education requirements on transgender (including cross dressing) gay and and other sex education requirements. This includes CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS, if they get a penny (or any of their students get a penny) from the state of California.

So, the "opt out" doesn't mean anything in California any longer.

It is law.

good stuff - sex education is too important to be left completely in the hands of the parents ...

edit: relavated statement slightly
 
Katheryn said:
Sex education does not require parental consent.

http://www.nclrights.org/publications/pubs/optout_qa_1104.pdf

Arnold Schwarzeneggar just signed into law MANDATORY education requirements on transgender (including cross dressing) gay and and other sex education requirements. This includes CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS, if they get a penny (or any of their students get a penny) from the state of California.

So, the "opt out" doesn't mean anything in California any longer.

It is law.
Arnold Schwarzeneggar is not a liberal Democrat. Plus - you can opt out. A private school can refuse to take money from the state.
 
Little Raven said:
Ok..but by that definition, shouldn't immigrants coming here attempt to change our culture as much as they like? Why shouldn't Muslims quest for Sharia law? Assuming they do so via our political process, that's just 'melting in,' right? Ditto on things like enforcing the learning of English. If there's a county where the majority of the people speak Spanish, (and you'd better believe there are) why shouldn't everyone just speak Spanish? It'll all melt together eventually...

If everyone did this, it would be chaos. It is chaos in many areas here in Southern California with the Mexican bilingualism problems. Schools are failing because of it. When you have 30 kids in a class, and only 20 speak English, it is a recipe for failure for ALL the kids.

They can 'quest for Sharia law' all they want in their current country.

Here, we have a constitution that guarantees women EQUAL RIGHTS, as well as to gays, minority religions, and others. Our Bill of Rights GUARANTEES freedom of expression that is forbidden in Sharia (ie the cartoons).

In fact, Sharia is treasonous. It demands that clerics/caliphs become the law of the land.
 
JollyRoger said:
Arnold Schwarzeneggar is not a liberal Democrat. Plus - you can opt out. A private school can refuse to take money from the state.


Fine. When we get vouchers.

You cannot opt out. Read the link. It says so. Read #7 in the pamphlet.

Evidently you can opt out of the "putting the condom on the cucumber" video. But you cannot opt out of the sexual diversity - as I mentioned before - the gay, cross-dressing, transgender, bisexual teaching.
 
ComradeDavo said:
If you take facism too essentially mean enforcing your morals onto others, then the Christian right fit that defintion.

I mean one defintion about on the web is

''A social and political ideology with the primary guiding principle that the state or nation is the highest priority, rather than personal or individual freedoms''

Change that to

''
A social, religious and political ideology with the primary guiding principle that the state/nation and religion is the highest priority, rather than personal or individual freedoms
''

And the Christian right fit the bill!

I got that defintion from http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...:Fascism&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
That is the biggest, most offensive and ridiculous statement I have ever heard. I thought peope like the guy in the OP were rare, but I see I was wrong. Drawing parallels between Christianity and fascism? I wish I could find that republican...
 
Back
Top Bottom