For your consideration...

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bullypulpit, Mar 7, 2005.

  1. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    <center><h1><font color=maroon>They're both wrong</font></h1></center>

    In reaching for political power, the "religious right" has abandoned their roots. All of the great progressive movements in America have had their roots in religion. From the abolition of slavery to women's suffrage,to the end of child labor, to the civil rights movment of the 50's and 60's...All were rooted in the concepts of justice preached by Jesus in the New Testament. The people who were at the fore-front of these movements lived their religion. For them it was a thing come alive to set us all free, regardless of our beliefs.

    Contrast this with the mean-spirited, narrow, dogmatic and selective vision of the "religious right" which seeks political power to impose its vision from the top down rather than the bottom up, and that contrast is stark. Rather than an inclusive view which welcomes all, theirs is exclusive..."Believe as we do or we want no part of you!" Rather than seeking solutions with aim of the good of all, they seek to blame others for America's short-comings while providing no genuine solutions beyond the imposition of their dogma upon all. Theirs is nothing short of hubris laced with the language of persecution. Their grasp for power is bad politics and even worse theology.

    The left is not blameless either. They have sought to turn religion into a private expression of one's values. They fail to understand that while religion is personal, it is never private. Whatever philosophical view we hold to, either implicitly or explicitly, affects how we experience and react to the world around us. It is their failure to acknowledge it that prevents them from establishing an effective dialogue with the many religious moderates in this country who resent the religious right's hijacking of Christianity to further their political agenda. And until they do this, we will continue to see the increasing polarization in this nation, centered on a few non-issues, rather than focusing on the broader, deeper problems that face us.

    We stand at a cross-roads in America today. We can take the easy path and slide into the fascist state that we seem to be headed towards. Or we can roll up our sleeves, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, agnostic, or what have you...Do the hard work and build a new America from the ground up, rooted in the common values of our beliefs and made a living thing to set us all free.
     
  2. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +533
    Up the Christian theocracy! Concentration camps for all unbelievers! Accept the loving grace and salvation of Jesus Christ or we'll kill you!
     
  3. Deornwulf
    Offline

    Deornwulf Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Messages:
    153
    Thanks Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +28
    Actually, I think Bully has it right. There are elements of the Christian Right who seek to turn America into a theocracy. But they are the worst examples of Christians. I really like Bully's statement that while religion is personal, it is never private.
     
  4. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +533


    Well, not to nit-pick, Deornwulf, but a Christian theocracy is actually a contradiction in terms. Since man's free will is the bedrock principle of Christianity - the whole point of the exercise - a theocrat would be a poor Christian; a Christian, a poor theocrat. "Accept salvation or I'll kill you" is not acceptable Christian teaching.

    I like the particular statement of Bully's that you cited too, though.
     
  5. Avatar4321
    Online

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,542
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,157
    I cant seem to figure out how anyone is imposing religious values from the top down when its the majority of the PEOPLE who are rejecting liberals. Its not religious wackos who have usurped the power of the country and are oppressing their values on the majority. This is a majority rallying through grass roots efforts to throw off the shackles of the unreligious left oppressing us with taxes, restricting free speech (IE political correctness and campaign finance reform), and enslaving us with handouts. There is nothing top down from this.
     
  6. no1tovote4
    Offline

    no1tovote4 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,294
    Thanks Received:
    616
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +616
    Fascist? I don't think we are headed for fascism, that is an extreme exaggeration of what is actually happening and is in direct contrast to the actual events.

    To take a small piece of history attempt to make a correlation without the actual context and pretext and then say "fascism" is being unnecessarily alarmist in an attempt to make people emotionally reactionary to rather than logically considering of your point. It takes away from your point that most may agree with in a way that most will simply dismiss a good point because of the whole attempt at emotional response.

    Of course this may be your goal, it creates an "enemy" that believes differently to a good point that almost everybody would agree if presented in a less alarmist and reactionary argument. And makes it easy to dehumanize and say "See? They don't care about *insert argument here* they say it doesn't matter...". It appears to me that this is an attempt to create enmity where common ground actually exists rather than an attempt at actual Statesmanship. This would be something a politician would do in an attempt to make himself seem reasonable while being able to point to the opposition and say they were nazis attempting to steal all freedoms away rather than something a politician would say that was actually a Statesman and searching for the common ground to better society.
     
  7. Avatar4321
    Online

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,542
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,157
    Especially considering fascism is a deriviant of socialism. Which is something we are moving away from.
     
  8. SmarterThanYou
    Online

    SmarterThanYou Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    not according to This

    [​IMG]

    or this
    The word fascism has come to mean any system of government resembling Mussolini's, that

    exalts nation and sometimes race above the individual,
    uses violence and modern techniques of propaganda and censorship to forcibly suppress political opposition,
    engages in severe economic and social regimentation.
    engages in corporatism,
    implements or is a totalitarian regime.
     
  9. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +533



    Ah, but now we enter that strange realm between the socialist dream and the socialist reality. The lovers' words of Stalin, Mao, and, yes, Hitler, invariably translate into the actions of cruel totalitarianism. History hasn't seen it fail to happen yet.
     
  10. Avatar4321
    Online

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,542
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,157
    Silly me. I figured I'd just take Hitler's word for it when he said he was a socialist and that the National Socialist German party (IE Nazi) might have socialist leanings.

    Hitler was a socialist


    By the way that chart is an insult to all intelligent people. You really think Margret Thatcher was a Fascist? sheesh.
     

Share This Page