Evangelical Disconnect



wolfix said:
Our naysayers are shouting also........ But we do have a radical christians portion of America too......

Our politically left minded people assume you are a "shout from the mountain top" born again fundamentalist christian if you vote Republican.
Most conservatives in America do not base their lives on religious beliefs. Conservatives are basically people who run their lives based on economic principles. They recognize that throwing money at failure is a waste of time. They tend to be accountable for their own actions and ask the same of others.
Big difference between conservatives and fundamentalists......


They really do not understand the workings of America when they pronounce such things. America is a country based on capitolism. Not on religion. Most capitolists are republican simply because they do not want government involvment in their lives. And it used to be the Republican Party wanted smaller government. And hopefully it returns to that........
I do not want a country based on social programs making inefficient individuals out of people.

I'm slightly puzzled, Wolf.

You say that most conservatives vote on the basis of the economic principles and not on their beliefs.
I'm to understand that Bush & Co sought and obtained the christian vote in the US.
So the conservative vote would appear to be based on religious belief, would it not?
 
limerickman said:
I'm slightly puzzled, Wolf.

You say that most conservatives vote on the basis of the economic principles and not on their beliefs.
I'm to understand that Bush & Co sought and obtained the christian vote in the US.
So the conservative vote would appear to be based on religious belief, would it not?
Yes, he did seek the christian vote. They contain a very large base of voters. But they also seeked the conservative voter that is not based on religious belief....... Where the confusion comes in is that many consider all conservatives highly relious people. We use the term "conservative" too broadly in this country. It is used to define the "Christian Right" way too often.......

There are many conservatives who do not base their votes on their religious beliefs. That is the core of the Republican Party. But they do need the Christian right to win the elections.

Ther Christian vote is powerful today. We even see the Democrats kissing them today in attempt o swing the votes of the right thinking Christians. ..........
But we have a interesting thing that may occur soon ....... Guliani vs H Clinton. . What we have is a Catholic vs a lady from the center of the Bible Belt. And this country has shied fronm Catholic leaders, and Hillary is not liked by her old neighbors in Little Rock...
It will be fun if this is what developes......

The Christian fundies in this country are very well organized and they have focus.
 
Why does "achieving the lifestyle they want" always mean that we all have to live by their values? This may not look like a problem from inside the churches, but on the outside, it's huge. So huge, that I am compelled to speak out against it. Relentlessly. bk
 
limerickman said:
I'm slightly puzzled, Wolf.

You say that most conservatives vote on the basis of the economic principles and not on their beliefs.
I'm to understand that Bush & Co sought and obtained the christian vote in the US.
So the conservative vote would appear to be based on religious belief, would it not?
1/3 of his base is/ was "Christian" I will try to give an example that illustrates why Christians have become vocal in politics. I Portland Maine the shcool board decided it was a good idea to dispense bith controll pills to the middle school (thats 11-13 yr olds)in an effort to reduce teen pregnancy. This is being done at the request of the "child" without parental consent.( a true story) This is an example of something that would bring conservatives and or Christian out to defend their values. Because it underminds the job of the parent and shoves liberal values down everyones throat. Christian politics generally do lean to the right but from my experience most would prefer to live and raise their children without Ptown values being imposed on them and their children
 
bkaapcke said:
Why does "achieving the lifestyle they want" always mean that we all have to live by their values? This may not look like a problem from inside the churches, but on the outside, it's huge. So huge, that I am compelled to speak out against it. Relentlessly. bk


"I must ask" he said.Knowing deep down inside it was a big mistake to do so.

What values have been forced upon you? I know that there are laws and some may be considered to be based on moral values. I feel more pressure from retailers and cheesey commercials than religious venues.
 
Billsworld said:
1/3 of his base is/ was "Christian" I will try to give an example that illustrates why Christians have become vocal in politics. I Portland Maine the shcool board decided it was a good idea to dispense bith controll pills to the middle school (thats 11-13 yr olds)in an effort to reduce teen pregnancy. This is being done at the request of the "child" without parental consent.( a true story) This is an example of something that would bring conservatives and or Christian out to defend their values. Because it underminds the job of the parent and shoves liberal values down everyones throat.
No, it is a product of the reality that young kids are having sex and bot the kids and society are better off if they don't get pregnant. The christian fools want to ignore the problem.
 
wolfix said:
Yes, he did seek the christian vote. They contain a very large base of voters. But they also seeked the conservative voter that is not based on religious belief.......
I don't see it that way. U.S. politics is extremely polarized. Each party mostly courts the extreme edges of their half of the spectrum, knowing that those who are off the edges will vote for whichever candidate is nominated in their half of the spectrum. Thus the system has three groups who are important: the extreme right, the extreme left, and a small independent group of swing voters in the center.

A repub presidential candidate has to bow down to the religious extremists. If they don't pass muster, they have no chance of getting nominated. After the nomination is in hand, they can cater to the not so religious voters.
 
limerickman said:
Bro/Wolf : you've both got me stumped.
What does "achieve a lifetsyle that they want", mean??

I've never heard of this.
It usually boils down to religious loons who are personally offended that others don't want to live like religious loons, or are different than them. It most often exhibits itself in the christian right's hatred of gays. It used to be that they would use the same venom on blacks, jews, Catholics, Irish, Italians, Polish, etc. As each group became more mainstream it became socially unacceptable to hate them. Now they are left with gays, muslims, and an imaginary group of damned liberals who are plotting to take away their Bibles.

The amount of effort that the holy rollers expend fighting the gays is truly amazing. You would think they would concentrate on something that does not take place in the privacy of other people's homes--you know, something that would actually make a difference in their own lives.
 
I'm at a loss as to how religion/ethics of the candidates can be a factor in his/her electability.
By that I mean, whether Guiliani has had 20 divorces or not, doesn't make him a good or bad politician.
America - since Reagan - seems to be fixated with the personal views of candidates instead of being interested in his/her policies plans.

I'm not suggested that a candidate must renounce his/her religious belief.
What I am suggesting is that the electorate should focus on his/her policies, when deciding on a particular candidates
Politics and religion must remain separate - otherwise it will lead to trouble, in my opinion.
 
Bro Deal said:
No, it is a product of the reality that young kids are having sex and bot the kids and society are better off if they don't get pregnant. The christian fools want to ignore the problem.
I am fine with giving birth controll to 11 year olds as long as you let me take my tax dollars that the local state and federal govt seizes from me at gunpoint and let me send my kid to a different school. A school where they are not sitting next to your kid. Christians generally would prefer to take responsability for guiding their own children and not have them faced with the school system telling their kids about birth controll and homosexual activity in grade school.( thats 5yrs old through 12yrs old for any non U.S. people reading) It is in fact the left that is forcing their values on everyone else and then call all those opposed to them a homophob , racist or whatever word fits the situation. Lets face facts, the values in the U.S. have moved radicly to the left and have been doing so for some period of time. The left "Bro", seems to get angry when Christian stand their ground. People should look closely at who the men were that wrote and signed the constitution and the freedoms that it gave you and BK to **** all over Christianity. They were Christians.....Hard core Bible thumping, evengelical types. Dont you find it odd that the religion that you **** on is the only one that could form a government that allowed for those freedoms. The One the left embraces is dead...OOps I forgot about China...Lots of freedom there
 
Bro Deal really hit it on the head. Religious loons gettig upset because many of us have not chosedn to live like religious loons. To me, it's this simple; to the extent christian morals are stricter than civil law, living by them is voluntary. If you don't like abortions, don't have one. If you disagree with birth control, don't use it. If you don't like same sex marriage, marry someone of the opposite sex. Instruct your wives and daughters to do the same. If they listen, fine. If they don't, too bad.

And answer me this; If homosexuality is a choice, then so is heterosexuality. Albeit the more popular one. Why does one confer extra rights and the other doesn't? See if you can answer within the context of "Equal Protection of the Laws". We wouldn't want you throwing the constitution out the window. bk
 
limerickman said:
I'm at a loss as to how religion/ethics of the candidates can be a factor in his/her electability.
By that I mean, whether Guiliani has had 20 divorces or not, doesn't make him a good or bad politician.
America - since Reagan - seems to be fixated with the personal views of candidates instead of being interested in his/her policies plans.
To those who want to live in a theocracy, they are one and the same.

I agree that it is a very bad thing. It is the ultimate result of people who value style over substance. In the case of politics it has boiled down to electing a person based upon his media image with no regard as to his competence. It was bad enough with an amoral scumbag like Clinton. Dubya, a moron who is a religious zealot, is even worse.
 
Billsworld said:
I am fine with giving birth controll to 11 year olds as long as you let me take my tax dollars that the local state and federal govt seizes from me at gunpoint and let me send my kid to a different school. A school where they are not sitting next to your kid.
Oh, you poor soul. The government took some money in the form of taxes and spent it in ways you don't like. Your quibble about tax money spent on birth control is minor compared to the tax money spent to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. Welcome to the real world, where the choices a democratic society makes are not always agreeable.

Billsworld said:
It is in fact the left that is forcing their values on everyone else and then call all those opposed to them a homophob , racist or whatever word fits the situation.
Translation: "God damn those libs; I can't discriminate against the ****ers anymore. The country has gone to hell."

You gotta love how the religious loons define being oppressed as having their ability to oppress others restricted.

Billsworld said:
People should look closely at who the men were that wrote and signed the constitution and the freedoms that it gave you and BK to **** all over Christianity.
Do you mean all the major ones who were Unitarians or do you mean the ones who came to this country to avoid the oppression that the religious right of today wants to foist on America?
 
Bro Deal said:
Do you mean all the major ones who were Unitarians or do you mean the ones who came to this country to avoid the oppression that the religious right of today wants to foist on America?
This is a list of all the signers of the Constitution, Declaration, Articles of Confederation, or were the first representatives or senators. I sse only 2 Unitarians. Which major ones were unitarians? Perhaps you meant Deists?

Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers# of
Founding
Fathers% of
Founding
FathersEpiscopalian/Anglican8854.7%Presbyterian3018.6%Congregationalist2716.8%Quaker74.3%Dutch Reformed/German Reformed63.7%Lutheran53.1%Catholic31.9%Huguenot31.9%Unitarian31.9%Methodist21.2%Calvinist10.6%

The table pasted like shite. Here is the link.
http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html
 
Colorado Ryder said:
Which major ones were unitarians? Perhaps you meant Deists?
Unitarians and Deists.

Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Thomas Paine
George Washington
James Madison
Ben Franklin

Which ones were "Hard core Bible thumping, evengelical types," as Bill puts it?
 
Bro Deal said:
Oh, you poor soul. The government took some money in the form of taxes and spent it in ways you don't like. Your quibble about tax money spent on birth control is minor compared to the tax money spent to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. Welcome to the real world, where the choices a democratic society makes are not always agreeable.

Translation: "God damn those libs; I can't discriminate against the ****ers anymore. The country has gone to hell."

You gotta love how the religious loons define being oppressed as having their ability to oppress others restricted.

Do you mean all the major ones who were Unitarians or do you mean the ones who came to this country to avoid the oppression that the religious right of today wants to foist on America?
You got it wrong again. I celebrate your ability to live your life and raise your family as you see fit. The values of the left and right shouldnt be taught by anything funded by the govt. The Govt. shouldnt have a radio station, it shouldnt fund and or decide what is art, and it shouldnt decide what is normal sex or take it upon themselves to teach it.. Unfortunately The left is choosing to define and indoctrinate children at an early age to believe the values they embrace. If you find Christian values offensive that is fine. At the moment they are not taught in public schools. On the other hand homosexual values and very advanced heteroexual subjectsare being on forced on kids in public schools. Your Marxist agnostic religion is being forced on everyone. If you take a moment to look at who is really forcing their beliefs on soceity it isnt hard to see who that is. Hey BTW thanks for the implication of me being a racist. Very consistant with the left...you even used the "N" word for shock value:eek:
 
Bro Deal said:
To those who want to live in a theocracy, they are one and the same.

I agree that it is a very bad thing. It is the ultimate result of people who value style over substance. In the case of politics it has boiled down to electing a person based upon his media image with no regard as to his competence. It was bad enough with an amoral scumbag like Clinton. Dubya, a moron who is a religious zealot, is even worse.

I would dispute your making an equivalence between the amorality of Clinton and the amorality of Bush.

What Clinton may or may not have done in his private life ...is just that, private.

What Bush has done in his public life and the loss of thousands of lives through his amoral policies is beneath contempt.

A politician has to be judged on his public persona.
If we start judging politicians on thier private/personal personas - then that is a slippery road.
 
Bro Deal said:
Unitarians and Deists.

Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Thomas Paine
George Washington
James Madison
Ben Franklin

Which ones were "Hard core Bible thumping, evengelical types," as Bill puts it?
You need to do some better reasearch. Both Franklin ad Jefferson were in favor of the national seal being Moses leading the Isrealites into the promised land. Dont think for a minute that they share any of the values that you do.
 
Bro Deal said:
Oh, you poor soul. The government took some money in the form of taxes and spent it in ways you don't like. Your quibble about tax money spent on birth control is minor compared to the tax money spent to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. Welcome to the real world, where the choices a democratic society makes are not always agreeable.

Translation: "God damn those libs; I can't discriminate against the ****ers anymore. The country has gone to hell."

You gotta love how the religious loons define being oppressed as having their ability to oppress others restricted.

Do you mean all the major ones who were Unitarians or do you mean the ones who came to this country to avoid the oppression that the religious right of today wants to foist on America?


It's ironic.

All those who say "the goverment shouldn't be interferring in XYZ......".
I've been closely following the credit crunch debacle and comments in the wake of this debacle.

All those "free marketeers", all those people who say "let capitalism separate the wheat from the chaff"......are now looking to the State to bail out those very institutions who operate on the capitalistic, reduce goverment interference.
 
limerickman said:
It's ironic.

All those who say "the goverment shouldn't be interferring in XYZ......".
I've been closely following the credit crunch debacle and comments in the wake of this debacle.

All those "free marketeers", all those people who say "let capitalism separate the wheat from the chaff"......are now looking to the State to bail out those very institutions who operate on the capitalistic, reduce goverment interference.
NOT.. I will be happy to buy the forclosed houses and make some$$. I am going to an auction in the morning. Its the left that is pleading with the morgage companies to rewrite the subprime morgages. I think it is a fine idea, but they are under no legal or moral obligation to do so. Too bad for all Funds that are heavy into them.:( .. I am also fine with free markets and the freedom for Bro deal to put his 12 year old on birth controll. Just do it on his time with his money.