The Crusades: Why are we still fighting them?

[Foxfyre]

Try the book American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/books/review/19brink.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2

I've read the book, Sky. Not because I wanted to especially, but it was one suggested for a book discussion group I led two or three years ago so I had to review it. I think it's available on Amazon now for like $1.50 per copy? Not exactly a best seller, huh.

Actually the book is not badly written, but it is little more than a glorified editorial opinion piece written by a man who for the last couple of decades has despised and loathed the Republican Party, anything conservative, and anything Christian.

Not what I would call a reliable source on the subject.

Sky, this country was founded by Christians based on their Christian values, morals, and the sociopolitical convictions arising out of those. The Founders held worship services right in the halls of Congress. For most of this nation's history, Christianity has been the overwhelmingly dominant religion and has heavily influenced our laws, work schedules, education curriculum, culture, art, music, recognized holidays, and benevolent work here and abroad. The presence of Christian churches in any neighborhood increases property values far more significantly than do synagogues, mosques, or Buddhist temples. Previous generations were far more militant and active in demanding Christian principles in the schools and other institutions than anything we've seen the last 50 years.

Despite all that no theocracy has ever developed and what pockets of theocracy previously existed have vanished. We remain the most open, accepting, tolerant society in the world.

For the life of me, I don't understand how somebody who embraces a religion of rationality and enlightenment can be so gullibe as to believe the hateful, prejudiced, anti-Christian rantings and accusations of the militantly anti-Christian..

Thanks alot. I came out of a long Buddhist retreat around the time of the Terry Schiavo affair. I was appalled by the ill will around that story. I started to read about the Dominionist movement at that time because a MSN source directed me there.

I may be gullible, but I am not hateful, prejudiced or militantly anti-christian. Some of the article I read seemed well researched to me.

And I put up with eight years of GW Bush's brand of evangelicism.

What evangelicism? What did he do that any other president hasn't done? What religious groups did he favor? What religions did he discriminate against? What did he EVER do to recognize or praise any religious group as much as Barack Obama has praised Islam for instance?

What regulations did he impose or what laws did he demand be passed regarding anything religious? He did promote using the infrastructure already in place in faith based organizations to route some public assistance so the taxpayer could be saved millions and millions of dollars not having to reinvent those wheels. The guidelines that went with those were very specific though that those organizations could not do anything 'religious' with that money. Actually very few took the government up on the offer not wanting the heavy strings attached. (Barack Obama has continued that faith based program by the way.)

He didn't evoke the name of God or mention religious things any more than any previous president. Not as much as Bill Clinton did even. He openly admitted that he was a man of prayer, and that he sought to obey God. He certainly wasn't taking marching orders from any denomination or any othe religious group. I think the Left picked up and criticized anything related to religion with him because they despised everything about him and could see no good in him. They gave Bill Clinton a pass on the same kinds of statements, however, because he was one of THEM plus as a leftist, he didn't really mean it I guess.

You probably do believe that you are not "hateful, prejudiced or militantly anti-christian". Your comments and the sources you seek out don't support your opinion of yourself there though.

I freely admit being anti-Islam. But I am not prejudiced because my negative opinion is based on what Islam itself says that it is. And because I oppose the theocratic ambitions that they admit, and the subjugation of rights I hold as unalienable, and the brutality they justify in enforcing adhereance to their religious beliefs, I have no reason to embrace Islam as 'just another religion' on Earth. It isn't.

I don't think either of us intend to be hateful toward anybody or any group.

 

[THE LIGHT]

GW Bush is a Christian and was elected by the religious right.

Would that be the same George Bush that said Muslims and Christians serve the same god?

 

[Sky Dancer]

I've read the book, Sky. Not because I wanted to especially, but it was one suggested for a book discussion group I led two or three years ago so I had to review it. I think it's available on Amazon now for like $1.50 per copy? Not exactly a best seller, huh.

Actually the book is not badly written, but it is little more than a glorified editorial opinion piece written by a man who for the last couple of decades has despised and loathed the Republican Party, anything conservative, and anything Christian.

Not what I would call a reliable source on the subject.

Sky, this country was founded by Christians based on their Christian values, morals, and the sociopolitical convictions arising out of those. The Founders held worship services right in the halls of Congress. For most of this nation's history, Christianity has been the overwhelmingly dominant religion and has heavily influenced our laws, work schedules, education curriculum, culture, art, music, recognized holidays, and benevolent work here and abroad. The presence of Christian churches in any neighborhood increases property values far more significantly than do synagogues, mosques, or Buddhist temples. Previous generations were far more militant and active in demanding Christian principles in the schools and other institutions than anything we've seen the last 50 years.

Despite all that no theocracy has ever developed and what pockets of theocracy previously existed have vanished. We remain the most open, accepting, tolerant society in the world.

For the life of me, I don't understand how somebody who embraces a religion of rationality and enlightenment can be so gullibe as to believe the hateful, prejudiced, anti-Christian rantings and accusations of the militantly anti-Christian..

Thanks alot. I came out of a long Buddhist retreat around the time of the Terry Schiavo affair. I was appalled by the ill will around that story. I started to read about the Dominionist movement at that time because a MSN source directed me there.

I may be gullible, but I am not hateful, prejudiced or militantly anti-christian. Some of the article I read seemed well researched to me.

And I put up with eight years of GW Bush's brand of evangelicism.

What evangelicism? What did he do that any other president hasn't done? What religious groups did he favor? What religions did he discriminate against? What did he EVER do to recognize or praise any religious group as much as Barack Obama has praised Islam for instance?

What regulations did he impose or what laws did he demand be passed regarding anything religious? He did promote using the infrastructure already in place in faith based organizations to route some public assistance so the taxpayer could be saved millions and millions of dollars not having to reinvent those wheels. The guidelines that went with those were very specific though that those organizations could not do anything 'religious' with that money. Actually very few took the government up on the offer not wanting the heavy strings attached. (Barack Obama has continued that faith based program by the way.)

He didn't evoke the name of God or mention religious things any more than any previous president. Not as much as Bill Clinton did even. He openly admitted that he was a man of prayer, and that he sought to obey God. He certainly wasn't taking marching orders from any denomination or any othe religious group. I think the Left picked up and criticized anything related to religion with him because they despised everything about him and could see no good in him. They gave Bill Clinton a pass on the same kinds of statements, however, because he was one of THEM plus as a leftist, he didn't really mean it I guess.

You probably do believe that you are not "hateful, prejudiced or militantly anti-christian". Your comments and the sources you seek out don't support your opinion of yourself there though.I freely admit being anti-Islam. But I am not prejudiced because my negative opinion is based on what Islam itself says that it is. And because I oppose the theocratic ambitions that they admit, and the subjugation of rights I hold as unalienable, and the brutality they justify in enforcing adhereance to their religious beliefs, I have no reason to embrace Islam as 'just another religion' on Earth. It isn't.

I don't think either of us intend to be hateful toward anybody or any group.

Unbelievable.

 

[Sky Dancer]

GW Bush is a Christian and was elected by the religious right.

Would that be the same George Bush that said Muslims and Christians serve the same god?

Yes. Bush was your kind of guy.

 

[Sky Dancer]

yeah, here in the "Christian theocracy" she is allowed to do as she pleases
but let her go to one of the real theocracies(an Islamic repiublic) and see what happens to her to try and be what she is

You'd really like that wouldn't you?

You have so much freedom here and have the gall to attack it. Quit claiming things that are absolutely untrue. You claim Christians are more dangerous then Muslims. FLAT out lie. You have zero evidence to base that claim on. I repeat NAME A CHRISTIAN Country. Name a none Islamic democracy that restraint religion, freedom of expression, the right to openly be Gay, and a host of other rights you seem to not understand you have and would not in a Muslim Nation.

You make ignorant claims as to the danger of supposed Christians while defending KNOWN terror religions. And when we ask you to put up or shut up you resort to they " ya you would like that" routine.

Let me assure you you are safe in America and have no fear of a Fundamentalist take over of the Government. You would probably be put in prison or killed in an Islamic Country.

Anything to shut me up.

 

[THE LIGHT]

GW Bush is a Christian and was elected by the religious right.

Would that be the same George Bush that said Muslims and Christians serve the same god?

Yes. Bush was your kind of guy.

How so?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Would that be the same George Bush that said Muslims and Christians serve the same god?

Yes. Bush was your kind of guy.

How so?

I didn't vote for him. Did you?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Try the book American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/books/review/19brink.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2

I've read the book, Sky. Not because I wanted to especially, but it was one suggested for a book discussion group I led two or three years ago so I had to review it. I think it's available on Amazon now for like $1.50 per copy? Not exactly a best seller, huh.

Actually the book is not badly written, but it is little more than a glorified editorial opinion piece written by a man who for the last couple of decades has despised and loathed the Republican Party, anything conservative, and anything Christian.

Not what I would call a reliable source on the subject.

Sky, this country was founded by Christians based on their Christian values, morals, and the sociopolitical convictions arising out of those. The Founders held worship services right in the halls of Congress. For most of this nation's history, Christianity has been the overwhelmingly dominant religion and has heavily influenced our laws, work schedules, education curriculum, culture, art, music, recognized holidays, and benevolent work here and abroad. The presence of Christian churches in any neighborhood increases property values far more significantly than do synagogues, mosques, or Buddhist temples. Previous generations were far more militant and active in demanding Christian principles in the schools and other institutions than anything we've seen the last 50 years.

Despite all that no theocracy has ever developed and what pockets of theocracy previously existed have vanished. We remain the most open, accepting, tolerant society in the world.

For the life of me, I don't understand how somebody who embraces a religion of rationality and enlightenment can be so gullibe as to believe the hateful, prejudiced, anti-Christian rantings and accusations of the militantly anti-Christian..

maybe this will help...

Liberal phobic structure is a fascinating innovation in the history of prejudice and cultural fascism. It is a dread of specific forms of sin-cognizant religious belief.

Both anti-Christian phobia and narcissism result from the humanist denial of sin, heaven, and hell. Liberals believe the narcissogenic idea that they create their own heaven or hell on earth. The denial of God-defined sin leads to self-deification and the anxious business of high-stakes, self-directed life-styling. Liberals live with their eyes glued to mass media to learn what is and isn't sin this season. People who believe that such behavior can lead to a nasty outcome beyond this life are detested. Although liberals accuse Christians of being homophobic, true Christians are hellphobic. Regardless of religious self-identification, people who are betting their immortal souls on a denial of sin and its effects beyond this life have to be crazy not to be phobic.

Every permanent theistic religion of the last seven thousand years -- Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam -- provides an understanding that spiritual wastefulness is sin. These religions seek to protect people from the consequences of sin beyond this life. Traditions that assume reincarnation, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, teach that sinfulness in one life leads to suffering in the next. Religions that do not incorporate reincarnation, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam, explain life as a fleeting preparation before divine judgment.

The pathognomic sign that the liberal reaction to sin-cognizant belief systems is a symptom of phobic complex is that it selectively rejects the teachings of its own traditions -- Judaism and especially Christianity. These cultural heritages pose a threat to the liberal wills to pleasure and power. Liberal phobia includes a complex delusional system that exempts some sin-cognizant religions. For example, liberals adore their own version of a morally permissive, designer Buddhism. Nor are they phobic toward Islam, which is based on fiercely sin-cognizant scripture. Liberals maintain mechanisms of denial regarding Islam that rise to the level of psychotic dissociation.

American Thinker: Liberal Narcissism and Anti-Christian Phobia

 

[daveman]

Liberals maintain mechanisms of denial regarding Islam that rise to the level of psychotic dissociation.

Indeed. Liberals condemn Christianity as fundamentalist, homophobic, and misogynistic...but give Islam a free pass, even though it's all three in far greater measure.

 

[Foxfyre]

Try the book American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/books/review/19brink.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2

I've read the book, Sky. Not because I wanted to especially, but it was one suggested for a book discussion group I led two or three years ago so I had to review it. I think it's available on Amazon now for like $1.50 per copy? Not exactly a best seller, huh.

Actually the book is not badly written, but it is little more than a glorified editorial opinion piece written by a man who for the last couple of decades has despised and loathed the Republican Party, anything conservative, and anything Christian.

Not what I would call a reliable source on the subject.

Sky, this country was founded by Christians based on their Christian values, morals, and the sociopolitical convictions arising out of those. The Founders held worship services right in the halls of Congress. For most of this nation's history, Christianity has been the overwhelmingly dominant religion and has heavily influenced our laws, work schedules, education curriculum, culture, art, music, recognized holidays, and benevolent work here and abroad. The presence of Christian churches in any neighborhood increases property values far more significantly than do synagogues, mosques, or Buddhist temples. Previous generations were far more militant and active in demanding Christian principles in the schools and other institutions than anything we've seen the last 50 years.

Despite all that no theocracy has ever developed and what pockets of theocracy previously existed have vanished. We remain the most open, accepting, tolerant society in the world.

For the life of me, I don't understand how somebody who embraces a religion of rationality and enlightenment can be so gullibe as to believe the hateful, prejudiced, anti-Christian rantings and accusations of the militantly anti-Christian..

Liberal narcissism and anti-Christian phobia...

Liberal phobic structure is a fascinating innovation in the history of prejudice and cultural fascism. It is a dread of specific forms of sin-cognizant religious belief.

Both anti-Christian phobia and narcissism result from the humanist denial of sin, heaven, and hell. Liberals believe the narcissogenic idea that they create their own heaven or hell on earth. The denial of God-defined sin leads to self-deification and the anxious business of high-stakes, self-directed life-styling. Liberals live with their eyes glued to mass media to learn what is and isn't sin this season. People who believe that such behavior can lead to a nasty outcome beyond this life are detested. Although liberals accuse Christians of being homophobic, true Christians are hellphobic. Regardless of religious self-identification, people who are betting their immortal souls on a denial of sin and its effects beyond this life have to be crazy not to be phobic.

Every permanent theistic religion of the last seven thousand years -- Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam -- provides an understanding that spiritual wastefulness is sin. These religions seek to protect people from the consequences of sin beyond this life. Traditions that assume reincarnation, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, teach that sinfulness in one life leads to suffering in the next. Religions that do not incorporate reincarnation, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam, explain life as a fleeting preparation before divine judgment.

The pathognomic sign that the liberal reaction to sin-cognizant belief systems is a symptom of phobic complex is that it selectively rejects the teachings of its own traditions -- Judaism and especially Christianity. These cultural heritages pose a threat to the liberal wills to pleasure and power. Liberal phobia includes a complex delusional system that exempts some sin-cognizant religions. For example, liberals adore their own version of a morally permissive, designer Buddhism. Nor are they phobic toward Islam, which is based on fiercely sin-cognizant scripture. Liberals maintain mechanisms of denial regarding Islam that rise to the level of psychotic dissociation.

American Thinker: Liberal Narcissism and Anti-Christian Phobia

Interesting SE. I hadn't seen that perspective written out there quite so explicitly before.

Sky will have to decide if the description fits her. I won't judge her or anybody on anything not revealed in their expressed comments.

Based on those comments though, like many anti-Bush and anti-Christian liberals , if such a discussion as this one continues long enough, Buddhist or not, she is not too enlightened for the true colors of prejudice, loathing, contempt, and judgmentalism, not to mention a whole lot of really wrong notions, to start showing up re both President Bush and Christianity.

 

[DiveCon]

You'd really like that wouldn't you?

You have so much freedom here and have the gall to attack it. Quit claiming things that are absolutely untrue. You claim Christians are more dangerous then Muslims. FLAT out lie. You have zero evidence to base that claim on. I repeat NAME A CHRISTIAN Country. Name a none Islamic democracy that restraint religion, freedom of expression, the right to openly be Gay, and a host of other rights you seem to not understand you have and would not in a Muslim Nation.

You make ignorant claims as to the danger of supposed Christians while defending KNOWN terror religions. And when we ask you to put up or shut up you resort to they " ya you would like that" routine.

Let me assure you you are safe in America and have no fear of a Fundamentalist take over of the Government. You would probably be put in prison or killed in an Islamic Country.

Anything to shut me up.

wow, you just continue to show a lack of understanding

 

[Sky Dancer]

Liberals maintain mechanisms of denial regarding Islam that rise to the level of psychotic dissociation.

Indeed. Liberals condemn Christianity as fundamentalist, homophobic, and misogynistic...but give Islam a free pass, even though it's all three in far greater measure.

Unlike you, I change my views with new information. I've changed my view of Islam based on Kalam's own words and the writings of several other posters. I still maintain that I know peaceful Muslims in America. Not every Muslims is a terrorist or terrorist supporter.

I haven't changed my opinion about right wing Christian fundamentalists though. Some of them are working to establish a theocracy.

 

[DiveCon]

Liberal narcissism and anti-Christian phobia...

Interesting SE. I hadn't seen that perspective written out there quite so explicitly before.

Sky will have to decide if the description fits her. I won't judge her or anybody on anything not revealed in their expressed comments.

Based on those comments though, like many anti-Bush and anti-Christian liberals , if such a discussion as this one continues long enough, Buddhist or not, she is not too enlightened for the true colors of prejudice, loathing, contempt, and judgmentalism, not to mention a whole lot of really wrong notions, to start showing up re both President Bush and Christianity.

You call this a friendly post?

its more friendly than you have been

 

[DiveCon]

Liberals maintain mechanisms of denial regarding Islam that rise to the level of psychotic dissociation.

Indeed. Liberals condemn Christianity as fundamentalist, homophobic, and misogynistic...but give Islam a free pass, even though it's all three in far greater measure.

Unlike you, I change my views with new information. I've changed my view of Islam based on Kalam's own words and the writings of several other posters. I still maintain that I know peaceful Muslims in America. Not every Muslims is a terrorist or terrorist supporter.

I haven't changed my opinion about right wing Christian fundamentalists though. Some of them are working to establish a theocracy.

and how many christians have you met that showed half as much hostility towards you as you have shown towards them in this thread?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Interesting SE. I hadn't seen that perspective written out there quite so explicitly before.

Sky will have to decide if the description fits her. I won't judge her or anybody on anything not revealed in their expressed comments.

Based on those comments though, like many anti-Bush and anti-Christian liberals , if such a discussion as this one continues long enough, Buddhist or not, she is not too enlightened for the true colors of prejudice, loathing, contempt, and judgmentalism, not to mention a whole lot of really wrong notions, to start showing up re both President Bush and Christianity.

You call this a friendly post?

its more friendly than you have been

When you are able to accept that there are extremists in your Christian ranks we'll be making progress. There are Christian dominionists, reconstructionists in America and they seek a theocracy. I pray they don't succeed. The constitution is a secualr document and its is to a secular society that we owe our religious freedom.

 

[daveman]

Liberals maintain mechanisms of denial regarding Islam that rise to the level of psychotic dissociation.

Indeed. Liberals condemn Christianity as fundamentalist, homophobic, and misogynistic...but give Islam a free pass, even though it's all three in far greater measure.

Unlike you, I change my views with new information.

And how do you know I don't? I thought Buddhists weren't supposed to be judgmental.

I've changed my view of Islam based on Kalam's own words and the writings of several other posters. I still maintain that I know peaceful Muslims in America. Not every Muslims is a terrorist or terrorist supporter.

Never said they were, did I? I've known some great folks who happened to be Muslim. One, Mr. Abdullah, who served his nation of Oman in her military and then worked for the United States at the embassy in Muscat, asked me once, "Mr. David -- why can't people just get along?" Heck of a guy.

I haven't changed my opinion about right wing Christian fundamentalists though. Some of them are working to establish a theocracy.

And Communists are working to establish an American Soviet, and white supremacists are working to establish a White Only America, and the new Black Panthers are working to establish a Black Only America. Really, now...how much chance of success do you think any of them have?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Indeed. Liberals condemn Christianity as fundamentalist, homophobic, and misogynistic...but give Islam a free pass, even though it's all three in far greater measure.

Unlike you, I change my views with new information. I've changed my view of Islam based on Kalam's own words and the writings of several other posters. I still maintain that I know peaceful Muslims in America. Not every Muslims is a terrorist or terrorist supporter.

I haven't changed my opinion about right wing Christian fundamentalists though. Some of them are working to establish a theocracy.

and how many christians have you met that showed half as much hostility towards you as you have shown towards them in this thread?

I've read some articles. You folks say they aren't credible. I'm taking that under advisement.

How is that hostile to you personally?

 

[daveman]

When you are able to accept that there are extremists in your Christian ranks we'll be making progress.

Who's denied there are?

There are Christian dominionists, reconstructionists in America and they seek a theocracy. I pray they don't succeed. The constitution is a secualr document and its is to a secular society that we owe our religious freedom.

Indeed. That's why the United States will never become a theocracy.

God gave us free will. Coerced worship is meaningless.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Interesting SE. I hadn't seen that perspective written out there quite so explicitly before.

Sky will have to decide if the description fits her. I won't judge her or anybody on anything not revealed in their expressed comments.

Based on those comments though, like many anti-Bush and anti-Christian liberals , if such a discussion as this one continues long enough, Buddhist or not, she is not too enlightened for the true colors of prejudice, loathing, contempt, and judgmentalism, not to mention a whole lot of really wrong notions, to start showing up re both President Bush and Christianity.

You call this a friendly post?

its more friendly than you have been

You call RGS posts to me friendly?

 

[DiveCon]

You call this a friendly post?

its more friendly than you have been

When you are able to accept that there are extremists in your Christian ranks we'll be making progress. There are Christian dominionists, reconstructionists in America and they seek a theocracy. I pray they don't succeed. The constitution is a secualr document and its is to a secular society that we owe our religious freedom.

do you not understand even what you type?
extremists are extreme
they are a very small minority and would be opposed by people like ME
which i have told you on NUMEROUS occasions
i no more want a theocracy here than you do
i wouldn't want anyone telling ANYONE how or what they can believe
and that is how MOST Christians believe
it has to be a freewill choice
don't you even understand that it was Christians that were persecuted in the Spanish inquisition for not following the RCC
it was a matter of not wanting religion forced on anyone that was part of the FOUNDING of this country
and why many of the early settlers risked everything to leave where they were to come here