"I am a Christian first and last … I am a member of Team Jesus Christ." - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-25-2005, 08:56 PM   #61
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by LPU2
I grew up an evangelical and nothing scares me more than the political power of the evangelical church.
Amen
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-25-2005, 08:58 PM   #62
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
It's not just what I believe. These are credible accusations. Watch the movie "Stolen Honor" sometime.

http://www.stolenhonor.com/
That film is as credible as the "Swift Boat" ads. That is, it isn't credible. It was wholly made to be a large political attack ad.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 04-25-2005, 09:04 PM   #63
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
And this translates into a call for violence HOW? You are making the same logical stretch Ted made. Has it ever occurred to you that he was talking about divine justice?
Interestingly enough, that's exactly what the OT commandment, "Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain" was referring to. Contrary to popular opinion, saying "bad words" has absolutely nothing to do with this commandment. It had to do with the practice of people invoking God to slander their enemies.

By Tom DeLay implying that he knows EXACTLY what God would do in this situation and then cursing the judges supposedly on behalf of God, he's technically broken a commandment. At least, with this interpretation, assuming it's correct. How amusing.

I think DeLay was probably stewing up rhetoric for the GOP's impending attempt to remove the Senate filibuster. After all, that's exactly what the GOP did this Sunday with evangelical Christian groups. How shameless of them all.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 06:30 AM   #64
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 02:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Irvine, for someone who preaches tolerance, you are one of the least tolerant people in these forums. And you're rude, also. Have I ever made any personal insults against you?

As I stated in my own post, Irvine. "Influence" is one thing, but what Hilary suggests goes beyond "influence".

And this translates into a call for violence HOW? You are making the same logical stretch Ted made. Has it ever occurred to you that he was talking about divine justice?

It's not just what I believe. These are credible accusations. Watch the movie "Stolen Honor" sometime.

http://www.stolenhonor.com/


i'm not going to respond to much, because Melon has already made the points i would have.

i apologize for the "nutty" comment -- i should have made the distinction that the commetns/beliefs i find "nutty," not the individual person. i can see how you found that rude, and i apologize.

i also think you misunderstand the notion of tolerance. no, i don't tolerate ideas i find abhorent. i argue them, debate them, and do my best to change minds. that's my responsibility as a wide awake citizen. what i do tolerate, and would fight to the death for, is your right to hold any and all of these, imho "nutty," positions. i don't understand how some people -- on the left and on the right -- will make a claim without any credible evidence and then when the are challenged whine about how people aren't tolerating their poorly reasoned views. i don't respect arguments that don't make sense, but i respect the right of everyone to hold them and to express them. for example, one of the posters i respect the most is also one of the most conservative out there. but his arguments, while i don't agree with them, are soundly argued. that, i respect. your rational for labling the said Democratic senators were not well argued, and as such, i am going to challenge them, because that's always been my understanding as to what FYM is supposed to be about.

no, i don't preach tolerance. i don't want tolerance. i don't even want acceptance/understanding. what i want is to be treated like a full citizen. i don't give a damn what anyone thinks about what i do behind closed doors, what i do object to is 1) the labeling of such as objectively "sinfu" and that it's somehow against God's plan (as if a human could know such a thing), and 2) legislation passed on the basis of the above narrow worldview.

i'm much more of a libertarian than a liberal, when it comes to social issues. i dont' need tolerance, i need the right wing to stop using government to regulate my personal life.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 06:50 AM   #65
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,255
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Been reading this, staying out of the discussion about what people are nutty and what people aren't, and just going to say that I agree with this post:

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i'm not going to respond to much, because Melon has already made the points i would have.

i apologize for the "nutty" comment -- i should have made the distinction that the commetns/beliefs i find "nutty," not the individual person. i can see how you found that rude, and i apologize.

i also think you misunderstand the notion of tolerance. no, i don't tolerate ideas i find abhorent. i argue them, debate them, and do my best to change minds. that's my responsibility as a wide awake citizen. what i do tolerate, and would fight to the death for, is your right to hold any and all of these, imho "nutty," positions. i don't understand how some people -- on the left and on the right -- will make a claim without any credible evidence and then when the are challenged whine about how people aren't tolerating their poorly reasoned views. i don't respect arguments that don't make sense, but i respect the right of everyone to hold them and to express them. for example, one of the posters i respect the most is also one of the most conservative out there. but his arguments, while i don't agree with them, are soundly argued. that, i respect. your rational for labling the said Democratic senators were not well argued, and as such, i am going to challenge them, because that's always been my understanding as to what FYM is supposed to be about.

no, i don't preach tolerance. i don't want tolerance. i don't even want acceptance/understanding. what i want is to be treated like a full citizen. i don't give a damn what anyone thinks about what i do behind closed doors, what i do object to is 1) the labeling of such as objectively "sinfu" and that it's somehow against God's plan (as if a human could know such a thing), and 2) legislation passed on the basis of the above narrow worldview.

i'm much more of a libertarian than a liberal, when it comes to social issues. i dont' need tolerance, i need the right wing to stop using government to regulate my personal life.
Well said .

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 04-26-2005, 08:34 AM   #66
The Fly
 
earthshell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 282
Local Time: 07:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
(Kerry is a 100% legit vietnam war hero who saw the folly of the US government and did the right thing -- to come back hom and do what he could to get our troops out of there ... communist sympathizer? please, please -- point to a shred of evidence to support such a piece of nonsense rather than this fact-free "i believe" refrain.)
oh run, it's the commies! communism isn't necessarily a bad thing. the capitalist system benefits the rich, whereas communism we are all equal and provided for.

i wonder what jk would think of this endorsement...

http://communistsforkerry.com/
__________________
earthshell is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 08:43 AM   #67
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by earthshell
whereas communism we are all equal and provided for.
Tell that to all the people jailed and executed under communist rule for speaking against the government or for practicing their religion. Probably 80% of the people on the Interference forums would be dead or incarcerated by now under Communist rule, including me.

People are not equal under communism. In communism, you're working for a government that rules you financially.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 08:49 AM   #68
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:57 AM
I don't shed a tear for the death of communism. In some ways, it was more blunt than capitalism. Communism, at least, outright told you that the government owned your land. Capitalism lies to you, says that you own your land, but if you don't pay your property taxes ("rent"), the government can take it away. Even then, the government can still cry "eminent domain" and take it anyway for cheap.

On the other hand, communism argued that the power was in the "people." In that regard, it was a complete and blatant lie. All it did was shift the dominant hegemony from one group (aristocrats/business elite) to another--and they became the new aristocrats/business elite within a short period of time.

Communism deserves to die for being as open to corruption as capitalism.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 09:56 AM   #69
The Fly
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in temporary exile
Posts: 61
Local Time: 07:57 AM
Just ask Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa how great communism was, Walesa in particular because he was a shipyard worker in Gdansk and they got their union smashed. Havel didn't have much fun in prison, where he landed after he put some of the "wrong" stuff in his plays. Awhile back we could asked Pope John Paul II about being a priest in Poland during the time it was behind the Iron Curtain. I have my criticisms of capitalism also, and do not like pure laissez-faire economics. There needs to be government intervention in economics so some of the problems solved by laissez-faire economics can be remedied. But communism was a brutal, unjust system that's better off dead. It was a rulership of an elite, the elite owned just about every damn thing. Party members' wives in Poland were flying to Paris every week to have their hair done while Polish workers struggled.
__________________
verte is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 05:02 PM   #70
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
RIGHT-WING JIHADISTS CHIP AWAY AT AMERICANS' LIBERTY

Sat Apr 23, 7:58 PM ET

By Cynthia Tucker

It would be comforting -- but naive -- to dismiss House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as a harmless, charmless churl who appeals only to a tiny, ineffectual group inhabiting the far religious right. In fact, the DeLay wing of the Republican Party is on the rise, and its antediluvian agenda represents a serious threat to American democracy.

That's no exaggeration.

If the DeLay wing gets its way, the entire nation will live according to the rigid rules of a handful of self-righteous folks who distrust modernity. They would dictate the way we worship, live, work, have sex and even die.

While five years' worth of political analysis has made much of the nation's cultural divide -- a bitter disagreement over social issues that cleaves the nation roughly in half -- the fact is that the entire country is being manipulated by a much smaller group. (Only 13 percent of Americans approved of Congress' intervention in the painful Terri Schiavo case.)

After President Bush's re-election, the news media swooned over vaguely worded polls showing "moral values" were the most important consideration for 22 percent of voters. But we don't really know what voters had in mind: Did they mean opposition to gay marriage, or did they mean support for programs for the poor?

Nevertheless, the generals among the religious extremists -- men such as James Dobson of Focus on the Family -- have used those polls to exaggerate their influence and browbeat less reactionary Republicans into supporting their agenda. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has presidential ambitions, is the latest to bow before them.

Don't be fooled into believing that the DeLay-Dobson axis represents the beliefs of most ordinary, God-fearing Americans, Christian or otherwise. It doesn't. Consider just two issues that represent the extremists' views -- the chorus of complaint against federal judges, as well as an increasingly vocal opposition to contraception.

After judges refused to ignore the law in the Schiavo case, religious extremists stepped up their attacks, suggesting that the federal judiciary is dominated by liberals out to ruin a moral America. In fact, more than half of the 821 active federal judges (445, or 54 percent) were appointed by Republicans, according to the Federal Judges Biographical Database.

Florida Judge George Greer, the main judge in the Schiavo case, was elected to the circuit court after a stint as a Republican on the Pinellas County Commission. He has been described as a conservative Christian. But Greer, who has weathered death threats, is apparently not conservative enough to satisfy the DeLay faction.

In one of his recent harangues, DeLay claimed Congress should have stopped the courts' expansion of individual liberties long ago. "The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn't stop them," he said, according to The Washington Times.

Perhaps most Americans associate the phrase "right to privacy" with the Supreme Court's 1973 ruling legalizing abortion. But the high court supported a constitutional right to privacy in its 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, when it struck down a state law that made birth control illegal. Writing for the majority, Justice William O. Douglas said, "We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights ..."

According to recent polls, 94 percent of Americans find contraception morally acceptable, and 78 percent of Americans believe pharmacists have no right to refuse to fill the prescriptions. Yet there is an increasingly vocal group of extremists who want to deny adults the right to contraception.

Across the country, women are complaining of ultraconservative pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions, sometimes quizzing women on their marital status before making a decision. The next thing you know, they'll be barging into your bedroom to make sure you're wearing your flannel nightgown.

These extremists have much in common with the jihadist wing of Islam. While Christian extremists usually don't practice violence, but merely threaten it (see Greer, above), they share with extremist Muslims the belief that all people should be forced to live according to their views. That's about as un-American as it gets.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 06:14 PM   #71
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:57 AM
Sorry deep, but it's hard for me to imagine that an article that starts off with the 3 words "right-wing jihadists" would be objective at all.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 06:15 PM   #72
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 03:57 AM
Site your sources please.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 09:26 PM   #73
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:57 PM
it is an op-ed 80s

Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Site your sources please.
Yahoo News site
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 10:25 AM   #74
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 03:57 AM
That article is crap.

We better watch out for all those right-thinking Christians. After all, they are no good hate mongers who want everybody dead.

x100
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 10:33 AM   #75
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 03:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
Sorry deep, but it's hard for me to imagine that an article that starts off with the 3 words "right-wing jihadists" would be objective at all.
Let me try to prove you wrong...

Right-Wing Jihadists Convert To Christianity?
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com