Christians look to form new nation in U.S.

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Pale Rider
I for one am sick and tired of all the moral decay, that started with slick willie getting a blow job in the Oval Office. That was an accelerant.

I hope that this moral decay is stopped, and even backed up. Why does America's metamorphosis have to be morally corrupt and perverted in direction?

I think you've made a mistake. Moral decay, as you call it, has always been present to a greater or lesser extent. To blame it all on Goatboy Clinton is wishful thinking on your part.

When we have a moral and ethical system rooted in real consequences to real lives and in <i>this</i> world, then we'll see changes for the better. Until then though, don't hold your breath.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by -=d=-
Christian's 'cannot' believe there is any other way to God than thru Christ. For Christians to believe as you and others would have, their faith is worthless, because Christ would be a Liar.

:-/

Sucks. But Truth.

To assume the general garment of any religion is a fit for all people is a false assumption rooted in hubris, and a lust for power.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Not true at all. Many hard-line Buddhists in Sri Lanka have been busy exterminating the local Christian population for years. But Christian persecution rarely makes the news, so you don't hear about it.

Those "hard-line Buddhists" are no more Buddhist than members of the racist Christian Identity movement are Christian. Donnot mistake those who use the mantle of religious piety to further their personal agendas for the sincere followers of a religion.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by acludem
As far as I'm concerned, I'd be more than willing to trade South Carolina for the opportunity to not have to put up with fundamentalist Christians constantly trying to use the power of the federal government to force their personal moral agendas down the throats of the United States. If you want to leave, go right ahead and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

acludem

Im sure youd love that. Its the only way you are going to get power back because you cant defeat conservatism on the merit of your ideas. Although im sure you still cant figure out why people wouldnt want the income of the rich redistributed and want people to uphold the Constitution and not twist it to subvert it and all.

 

[007]

Originally posted by acludem
As far as I'm concerned, I'd be more than willing to trade South Carolina for the opportunity to not have to put up with fundamentalist Christians constantly trying to use the power of the federal government to force their personal moral agendas down the throats of the United States. If you want to leave, go right ahead and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

acludem

"IF" that ever happened, with the "majority" feeling the same as they do, what makes you think that a secession movement would stop at one state.

It could turn very quickly into don't let the door hit "you" in the ass.

 

[007]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Good...Send all these so called "born again" Christians to their own little theocracy and leave the rest of us alone. I'm quite certain that the border states would do a thriving business in alcohol, tobacco and other "sin" industries.

Hey, what's your beef here bully? You believe in God. Why are you slamming your people?

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by acludem
As far as I'm concerned, I'd be more than willing to trade South Carolina for the opportunity to not have to put up with fundamentalist Christians constantly trying to use the power of the federal government to force their personal moral agendas down the throats of the United States. If you want to leave, go right ahead and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

acludem

So it is okay for you and your ilk to use the power of the federal government to force YOUR personal moral (immoral) agendas down the throats of the United States, but it is not okay for Christians to TRY and do the same? Isn't that what democracy is all about? You make a sad representation of America. You are obviously as close minded, if not more, than most of those "terrible" Christians you refer to....

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by freeandfun1
So it is okay for you and your ilk to use the power of the federal government to force YOUR personal moral (immoral) agendas down the throats of the United States, but it is not okay for Christians to TRY and do the same? Isn't that what democracy is all about? You make a sad representation of America. You are obviously as close minded, if not more, than most of those "terrible" Christians you refer to....

funny, I thought democracy was all about being allowed your personal freedoms to practice what you want, not make others practice what you want.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
funny, I thought democracy was all about being allowed your personal freedoms to practice what you want, not make others practice what you want.

Democracy is about letting the masses decide what they want. Liberalism is "all about being allowed your personal freedoms to practice what you want, not make others practice what you want." In a true democracy, the masses would decide if there is a state sponsored religion, etc.

My point was clear.... each side, in America, is allowed to believe what they believe and each side is allowed to push their agendas. The way aclumen wants it is that he can push his ideals, but nobody that goes against him should be allowed to push theirs. That is not democracy or liberalism.

 

[acludem]

I guess if my agenda is that all people be allowed to practice whatever religion they want so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, then yes I'm guilty of pushing the radical idea of freedom in a free society on everyone. Boy, I'm such a bastard

acludem

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by acludem
I guess if my agenda is that all people be allowed to practice whatever religion they want so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, then yes I'm guilty of pushing the radical idea of freedom in a free society on everyone. Boy, I'm such a bastard

acludem

I don't know why I am replying, as most likely, you will just once again twist the topic to try and make it look as if you are taking the high ground when it was you that threw the first dirt. You are replying in a manner that totally ignores your initial post, to which I was refering. You know, the one that basically says Christians are trying to force their agendas while ignoring THAT everybody has agendas which they push. Now are you alluding that your first post was indicating that Christians are pushing agendas that hurt people?

You are not consistent in your arguments.

 

[acludem]

Come again? I was responding to another post that accused me of pushing my agenda down the throat of the people - but my agenda is to allow everyone the equal opportunity to debate and practice their own agenda. Yes, I firmly believe that fundamentalism of any kind seeks to force a certain, narrow religious agenda down the throats of the masses - this is exactly what the Taliban did and this is what the likes of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell would be able to do in their ideal world.

acludem

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by dilloduck

Jesus chose to live amongst the " sinners" .

Jesus also lived with his mom at home until he was 31 years of age. Very suspicious in the world of Israel when all men were commanded to marry and propate themselves or be sinners.

Could it be true??? Jesus had a lot of men friends who hung around together...

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by ajwps
Jesus also lived with his mom at home until he was 31 years of age. Very suspicious in the world of Israel when all men were commanded to marry and propate themselves or be sinners.

Could it be true??? Jesus had a lot of men friends who hung around together...

First, where exactly is there any evidence that Jesus lived with his mother until he was 31? Seriously, ive yet to find that scripture verse. And if he was, what exactly is your point? Men take care of their mothers all of the time.

Second, where exactly do you get the idea that Jesus wasnt married? simply because the Bible is silent either way? i bet you would be surprised to know that there is more evidence that he was married just from the culture he lived in and from experiences found in the Bible. In fact i believe it was a rather common belief in the Church that Jesus was married and even had children until Charlamagne's time. In fact one of his arguments for being the Holy Roman Emporer was that he was a descendant of Christ. After that, the Church pushed the teaching that Christ was single and celibate because they didnt want another person to claim he was a descendant of Christ and try to conquor the world (and that was about the time the Priests began to be celibate anyway so it fit more of the Catholic position). But i find it funny you would make an argument based on something the scriptures are silent over. Personally i dont think it matters either way. But to try to claim disbelief in Christ because he was or wasnt married, something that the scriptures are silent over is silly. If you want to know whether Jesus is the Christ, find out the way Peter did.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Avatar4321

First, where exactly is there any evidence that Jesus lived with his mother until he was 31? Seriously, ive yet to find that scripture verse. And if he was, what exactly is your point? Men take care of their mothers all of the time. Second, where exactly do you get the idea that Jesus wasnt married? simply because the Bible is silent either way? i bet you would be surprised to know that there is more evidence that he was married just from the culture he lived in and from experiences found in the Bible. In fact i believe it was a rather common belief in the Church that Jesus was married and even had children until Charlamagne's time. In fact one of his arguments for being the Holy Roman Emporer was that he was a descendant of Christ. After that, the Church pushed the teaching that Christ was single and celibate because they didnt want another person to claim he was a descendant of Christ and try to conquor the world (and that was about the time the Priests began to be celibate anyway so it fit more of the Catholic position). But i find it funny you would make an argument based on something the scriptures are silent over. Personally i dont think it matters either way. But to try to claim disbelief in Christ because he was or wasnt married, something that the scriptures are silent over is silly. If you want to know whether Jesus is the Christ, find out the way Peter did.

Actually there was serious research about the life and times of Jesus Christ while on earth. This non-fiction book explains quite a great deal about the mysteries surrounding Jesus and his family.

The name of that book is "Holy Blood Holy Grail."

http://www.bookfinder.us/review4/0440136482.html

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Pale Rider
Hey, what's your beef here bully? You believe in God. Why are you slamming your people?

Sorry home-boy, I don't beleive in a supreme being. And the only ones I'm slamming are those who speak the word without learning its meaning, as in the religious right wing-nuts.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
funny, I thought democracy was all about being allowed your personal freedoms to practice what you want, not make others practice what you want.

Actually, Dubbyuh has often made sounds about "state's rights", particularly as governor of Texas. But as president, everything he stated regarding the issue of stats rights has fallen by the wayside.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Actually, Dubbyuh has often made sounds about "state's rights", particularly as governor of Texas. But as president, everything he stated regarding the issue of stats rights has fallen by the wayside.

Prove it.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Prove it.

In the presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Dubbyuh said he was opposed to a national health care system because " I don't want the federal government making decisions for consumers...I trust people; I don't trust the federal government."

Yet in November 2001, Dubbyuh showed just how much he really trusted people. It was then that Attorney General Ashcroft began the attampts by the Administration to undermine a law in Oregon that passed not once, but twice, and with a larger majority the second time.
The citizens of Oregon had spoken...they favored physician assisted suicide for terminally ill patients. But using obscure laws meant to prevent the illegal distribution of prescrition medications, Herr Ashcroft set about the task of usurping the will of Oregon's voters.

If this is not a case of federal governemnt "Big Brotherism", I don't know what is, and few decisions are more personal than those of patients approaching the end of life, and how they choose to face those final days. Yet here, in the midst of a hunt for the perpetrators of 9/11, the DOJ is set to usurp the will of the people...Setting the federal governemnt up to male decisions for consumers.

All throughout his ill-gotten political career, Dubbyuh has spoken in favor of states rights out of one side of his mouth, and attempted to deny those rights unless he agrees with them. Hypocrite.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit

In the presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Dubbyuh said he was opposed to a national health care system because " I don't want the federal government making decisions for consumers...I trust people; I don't trust the federal government." Yet in November 2001, Dubbyuh showed just how much he really trusted people. It was then that Attorney General Ashcroft began the attampts by the Administration to undermine a law in Oregon that passed not once, but twice, and with a larger majority the second time. The citizens of Oregon had spoken...they favored physician assisted suicide for terminally ill patients. But using obscure laws meant to prevent the illegal distribution of prescrition medications, Herr Ashcroft set about the task of usurping the will of Oregon's voters. If this is not a case of federal governemnt "Big Brotherism", I don't know what is, and few decisions are more personal than those of patients approaching the end of life, and how they choose to face those final days. Yet here, in the midst of a hunt for the perpetrators of 9/11, the DOJ is set to usurp the will of the people...Setting the federal governemnt up to male decisions for consumers. All throughout his ill-gotten political career, Dubbyuh has spoken in favor of states rights out of one side of his mouth, and attempted to deny those rights unless he agrees with them. Hypocrite.

I take it that you are not a George Bush fan.....

What is the difference between a Nationalized Health Insurance program in which only the politicians get execellent health care and everybody else gets what those same politicians decide is affordable or good for them or permitting doctors to legally kill terminal people instead of the current unspoken approval of government, and with the family's consent allow their doctor to over medicate dying patients? (same effect)

There was an American on vacation in Mexico who when coming back to his home forgot his wallet. The border guard would not let him pass back to the US because he had no ID.

The American said to the guard, "I have proof that I am an American." The guard asked him to produce the proof.

The man dropped his pants and underwear, bent over and there for all to see was a tatoo of George Bush on his right buttock and Dick Cheney tatooed on his left buttock.

The guard said, okay you are American, go back to your home in Massachusetts. The man said, "how did you know that I was from Massachusetts?"

The border guard said, "I recognized the picture of John Kerry right in the middle of your butt."