Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    . It's skin-deep diversity. No mental diversity is allowed.
    Which is why it's important to have more cultural diversity. You do notice who is usually running the progressive show, right? White, middle class people. They not only try to make demands on what it takes to be a good feminist, progressive, or whatever, but they're also in the business of saying what makes a good Christian (have to be our politics or you're going to hell). They're sort of arrogant on both sides of the aisle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanie View Post
    Which is why it's important to have more cultural diversity. You do notice who is usually running the progressive show, right? White, middle class people. They not only try to make demands on what it takes to be a good feminist, progressive, or whatever, but they're also in the business of saying what makes a good Christian (have to be our politics or you're going to hell). They're sort of arrogant on both sides of the aisle.
    But Christianity is a religion with 2,000 years of history and precedent, and there is a doctrinal idea of what a good Christian is, just as there is a doctrinal idea of a good Jew (I fall short, but I blame the bacon). The ideal Christian or Jew seeks a relationship with God. One can argue whether or not a given political position constitutes a good idea, but you cannot say that abortion is consistent with Catholic theology, or that homosexuality has a Biblical sanction, without breaking with the church. In that regard, the religious right has a point, the scriptural texts are unambiguous in their condemnations of certain things, and if you accept those things and attempt to advocate for their adoption, then you are acting counter to the precepts of Christianity. One can argue for or against the practical results of these things, as I try to do, without citing Biblical authority, but if you accept Biblical authority, then the practical results are secondary to that authority. Now, can someone understand and sympathize with what one sees as a sinner, and not seek to impose their will on them? Certainly. One can be an ideal Christian or Jew without exercising power over others. The Biblical rules are only for believers, and those who do not believe are subject to the consequences of their own consciences.

    OTOH, progressivism, feminism and the various other doctrines of the left are just variations on the road to socialism, and the acquisition of power in order to force people into their control. The ideal progressive, feminist or leftist seeks power over others, whether it is to advance the idea of progress towards an ideal future, the elimination of gender and sexual roles and identities or the various other coercive ideas that justify the power lust. That's the difference between the left and the right. I can have a rollicking debate with a conservative on a host of issues without having to unfriend them on Facebook, but get into a discussion with a liberal and you're a racist, sexist, misogynist, fascist, specieist, denier of Global Warming with a side of deep-seated homophobia. That's the difference.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    16,492
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailey View Post
    being a white male those at DU think i am from the "privileged" class. I sure wish I could cash in on that.
    Because we all know there aren't any privileged blacks.
    The Obama Administration: Deny. Deflect. Blame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    But Christianity is a religion with 2,000 years of history and precedent, and there is a doctrinal idea of what a good Christian is, just as there is a doctrinal idea of a good Jew (I fall short, but I blame the bacon). The ideal Christian or Jew seeks a relationship with God. One can argue whether or not a given political position constitutes a good idea, but you cannot say that abortion is consistent with Catholic theology, or that homosexuality has a Biblical sanction, without breaking with the church. In that regard, the religious right has a point, the scriptural texts are unambiguous in their condemnations of certain things, and if you accept those things and attempt to advocate for their adoption, then you are acting counter to the precepts of Christianity. One can argue for or against the practical results of these things, as I try to do, without citing Biblical authority, but if you accept Biblical authority, then the practical results are secondary to that authority. Now, can someone understand and sympathize with what one sees as a sinner, and not seek to impose their will on them? Certainly. One can be an ideal Christian or Jew without exercising power over others. The Biblical rules are only for believers, and those who do not believe are subject to the consequences of their own consciences.

    OTOH, progressivism, feminism and the various other doctrines of the left are just variations on the road to socialism, and the acquisition of power in order to force people into their control. The ideal progressive, feminist or leftist seeks power over others, whether it is to advance the idea of progress towards an ideal future, the elimination of gender and sexual roles and identities or the various other coercive ideas that justify the power lust. That's the difference between the left and the right. I can have a rollicking debate with a conservative on a host of issues without having to unfriend them on Facebook, but get into a discussion with a liberal and you're a racist, sexist, misogynist, fascist, specieist, denier of Global Warming with a side of deep-seated homophobia. That's the difference.
    Translation: I think I'll make crappy excuses for conservative present day pharasees where there are none. The Religious Right is nothing more than pushing legalism. They also take up weird causes such as being anti-environment, which the bible says nothing about. However, I would think God wouldn't want us to trash the planet, but whatever. While they get all self-righteous about homosexuality, they don't have one word to say about helping the poor or about keeping immigrant families together that are often torn apart. They usually don't speak up against gambling casinos or the lottery as gambling is a sin. Some would argue it's okay in moderation, but the church I grew up in condemns it all with a good reason. It's bad for society. The religious right is not on a crussade to stop drunk driving. Truth is drunk drivers are given too lenient of sentences. It's so easy for them to end up back on the road (legally or illegally). While not paying your child support is illegal, it's not uncommon to go MONTHS without paying for child support. So, we have deadbeat parents easily getting away with what they do, and the religious right says nothing. I also don't see the religious right speaking up against divorce (in the bible, go read it for yourselves). The religious right is nothing more than a group of white, middle class people (mostly men) speaking up against the rights of gays and women. Oh, and like Fred Phelps, they're also pretty good at blaming tragedies on liberal ideas. They just don't protest funerals. I actually got snarky a while back and asked if the Republican Party can get people to heaven. I said it because they act like they're the messiah. Really, the Republicans who are soooo self-righteous toward liberals are nothing more than legalistic pharasees. Sorry to be offensive. I know Jews look at the pharasees differently.

    While it's important to do what God says, the relationship part is also very important. Conservative Christians have taken it upon themselves to speak for God by saying that they have a relationship with Jesus and that liberals don't. That's beyond arrogant and disgusting.

    Oh, and I just want to point out that we're on a board dedicated to being hurtful toward your neighbor. Jesus said to love your neighbor as you love yourself. He didn't say "Unless you disagree with them." He didn't say to make fun of them when they're suicidal. He didn't say to be a bully.

    People on this board have condemned me as a supposed communist all because of their great fear that we'll be like Russia one day, got all hateful. Another thread had somebody telling me I was going to Hell. People can say what they want about my preachiness, but I have NEVER condemned anybody on this board to Hell. I know it's not my right unlike some of the conservatives here.

    I know a good chunk of you all are good people, but a big vocal chunk of you all are nothing but disgusting hypocrites.


    Darn, I feel better now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    16,492
    Lanie, you're off your cookie. I'm sorry to say but you are. Please give me examples of where the religious right believe in anti-environmentalism. This is nothing but a typical liberal talking point. "Conservatives want dirty air, dirty water, etc." It's idiocy. But I'll wait for your examples backing up anything you just said.

    While it's important to do what God says, the relationship part is also very important. Conservative Christians have taken it upon themselves to speak for God by saying that they have a relationship with Jesus and that liberals don't. That's beyond arrogant and disgusting.
    Most liberals don't. If you're a secularist, which is what the progressive movement is all about, religion is something that's clung to by neanderthals. This is how they explain things like abortion, promiscuity, moral relativism, hedonism, drug use, homosexuality, etc. as normal behavior. Oh, one more thing, it's progressive thinking that gives us TV shows like 16 and Pregnant.
    Last edited by NJCardFan; 03-01-2013 at 09:56 PM.
    The Obama Administration: Deny. Deflect. Blame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    CU Royalty JB's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    8,144
    Lanie, why do birds suddenly appear everytime I am near?
    Be Not Afraid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    Lanie, you're off your cookie. I'm sorry to say but you are. Please give me examples of where the religious right believe in anti-environmentalism. This is nothing but a typical liberal talking point. "Conservatives want dirty air, dirty water, etc." It's idiocy. But I'll wait for your examples backing up anything you just said.
    Nobody ever says "I want dirty air." However, they do tend to speak against environmentalist law ideas.

    http://www.focusonthefamily.com/topi...ing_Debate.pdf

    I can't seem to copy and paste. However, it suggests that people who take up for the cause of global warming and placing it ahead of the so called attacks on the family and Christianity. It's mind boggling and full of it. What does speaking out against global warming got to do with the family? Nothing. Attacking Christianity? Nothing. The stretch is so far it's unreal.

    More of the same crap. Not sure why these people feel their cause is threatened by the global warming cause.

    http://articles.cnn.com/2007-03-14/p..._s=PM:POLITICS

    "We have observed that Cizik and others are using the global warming controversy to shift the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time, notably the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children," said the letter, which was signed by prominent religious conservatives such as James Dobson, Don Wildmon, Paul Weyrich and Gary Bauer.

    While we're at it, let's say that foxes are a threat to mice even if the two are not related. It's just weird.


    Most liberals don't. If you're a secularist, which is what the progressive movement is all about, religion is something that's clung to by neanderthals. This is how they explain things like abortion, promiscuity, moral relativism, hedonism, drug use, homosexuality, etc. as normal behavior. Oh, one more thing, it's progressive thinking that gives us TV shows like 16 and Pregnant.
    Define liberal. Is it somebody who is a DUer or anybody who votes Democrat? People on boards tend to act like Democrat equals liberal. I don't agree with that, but if it is true, then I have to say that theists outnumber atheists in the Democrat party big time. They're voting Democrat for a number of different reasons, and don't necessarily agree with everything in the platform.

    Next, even most of the true liberals so to speak have a line. You think we see drug use as normal? Really? I think you need to show some links that show that most liberals are on board with drug use.

    There is a strong secular movement in the Democrat Party, but they're still the minority. They're never going to get "In God we trust" taken off of the money. They're never going to get the theist majority to agree with them on certain issues.

    That said, the secular have a point sometimes. Do you really want religion being the rule of the day? That may SOUND appealing, but it's not. I just went an entire day without eating meat. How would you like me to force that on you by law? My church says you (generic you) can't get remarried without an annulment by the church or having always been single because marriage is indissoluble. How about we pass an amendment against divorce because my church doesn't believe in it? People try to pass that as just a Catholic thing, but it's not. It's a BIBLE thing. You are not supposed to divorce your spouse and yet here people are doing so and getting remarried. Then, they point their finger at the homosexuals? That's just hypocritical.

    The church I used to go to was Wesleyan. They were against the lottery and liquor by the drink. They fought to keep it from coming to their town or state until they both came. What do you think about that? Do you think it was right for the Wesleyan to try to keep you from buying a lottery ticket? How about a beer?

    A pastor at a church I visited in May said to vote for the "marriage amendment." He said he wasn't saying that because he was a homophobe, but because he thought sin should be illegal. If the amendment was about adultery, he'd support that as well. (I think I will give the pastor brownie points for his consistency). Sounds good, doesn't it? Shouldn't we try to satisfy God by making adultery illegal? Go ahead and do it. I can tell you now though that most people will end up in jail including your fellow conservatives (most of which are Christian). Why? Because pre-marital sex counts as adultery.

    So see, you don't want religion being the law of the land. It sounds like a good idea, but it's not. It's a really bad idea. I could see making abortion illegal because it's the killing of people. Your right to swing your fist stops at another person's face. The same logic can't be made for homosexual marriages, gambling. Now, I think I could make a legitimate case for making alcohol illegal, but we know that didn't work in the past. The point is it needs to be proven to be bad for society before it's made illegal. You can't just make something illegal because you don't like it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,165
    Delete post
    We're from Philadelphia, We Fight- Chip Kelly
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •