The Lefts' Attack on Religion Exposed

[Mariner]

Yes, I did see that story about the Italian, though I didn't get all the details. Of course he should have a right to his opinion, no matter how socially unacceptable in his culture, as long as he does not break any laws.

As for running in fear from a Christmas tree... I wonder how you'd feel if you enountered a Hindu temple on public property? It's not a matter of fear, it's a matter of giving one religion preferential treatment, which sends confusing messages to people of different faiths, esp. the children, e.g. me, years ago, when I couldn't figure out why town hall was celebrating Christmas but not Diwali.

Mariner.

 

[Avatar4321]

As for running in fear from a Christmas tree... I wonder how you'd feel if you enountered a Hindu temple on public property? It's not a matter of fear, it's a matter of giving one religion preferential treatment, which sends confusing messages to people of different faiths, esp. the children, e.g. me, years ago, when I couldn't figure out why town hall was celebrating Christmas but not Diwali.

Mariner.

You only have one problem We are cosntitutionally protected to celebrate our beliefs on public property like everyone else. Hence the free exercise clause of the Constitution. The first amendment gives us the right to exercise our religious beliefs in public.

What the First amendment does limit is the power Congress has to create a national Church. Something that has nothing to do with what happens on local township property.

Regardless Congress could still promote Christianity and Christian values without having established a state Church. If you want to argue otherwise please inform the rest of us which Church is the Church Congress is trying to force on us.

 

[freeandfun1]

Of course he should have a right to his opinion, no matter how socially unacceptable in his culture, as long as he does not break any laws.

helluva statement. It is okay for Christianity to be made socially unacceptable, but not homosexuality?

The days truly are becoming as the "days of Noah". What is good has become bad and what is bad has become good. Where in the hell is this world headed?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Yes, I did see that story about the Italian, though I didn't get all the details. Of course he should have a right to his opinion, no matter how socially unacceptable in his culture, as long as he does not break any laws.

As for running in fear from a Christmas tree... I wonder how you'd feel if you enountered a Hindu temple on public property? It's not a matter of fear, it's a matter of giving one religion preferential treatment, which sends confusing messages to people of different faiths, esp. the children, e.g. me, years ago, when I couldn't figure out why town hall was celebrating Christmas but not Diwali.

Mariner.

The story was not really about his right to his opinion, but how he was punished, excluded from government due to his religious beliefs. Is that right?
These are the liberals you follow mindlessly.

Also, there are no churches on public property here. so your analogy is inapplicable at the outset.
What about the giant statues of hanuman the monkey headed boy on public property. I've seen them. They are scary, but not in a "religious theocracy" sort of way

How about about a big statue of hanuman right in the middle of the street.

 

[TheEnemyWithin]

What kind of faction would have as it's platform gay marriage, abortion rights, overt sexual behavior disguised as free speech etc. Is their whole agenda in their crotch? I guess it is---about 2 inches behind their genitalia.

:rotflmao:

Sorry Duck, but you didn't expose that first. The oh-so-inclusive, tolerant Left has been on us for thousands of years. Especially the :arabia: 's.

 

[Mariner]

Hindu temples can be tiny, and could be erected easily in the space of a Christmas tree.

I like the idea of a giant statue of Hanuman. Where did you see one? But I hope it was on private, not public, property.

Don't accuse me of mindlessly following liberal thought, especially after I just agreed with you about the Italian! I've given plenty of examples on this board of places where I disagree with liberal ideas. In general, I have said repeatedly that I think conservatism and liberalism need each other for balance. Either can run amok.

Mariner

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Hindu temples can be tiny, and could be erected easily in the space of a Christmas tree.

I like the idea of a giant statue of Hanuman. Where did you see one? But I hope it was on private, not public, property.

Don't accuse me of mindlessly following liberal thought, especially after I just agreed with you about the Italian! I've given plenty of examples on this board of places where I disagree with liberal ideas. In general, I have said repeatedly that I think conservatism and liberalism need each other for balance. Either can run amok.

Mariner

You agreed with me? It was so subte. I thought you said he had a right to his opinion. But if you recall, his right to his opinion was not at issue. I need you to condemn the EU for ostracizing him due to his religious beliefs. Only then will we be in agreement, my friend.

 

[Mariner]

Well, I came pretty close to agreeing with you--I've still never read the full details on the Italian's situation. If he was facing social opprobium for an opinion that doesn't hurt anyone, but is his alone, then I think he has a right to that opinion. I'm not going to condemn his culture globally for its values--after all, every culture has such values, including ours where, for example, an atheist who attempted to run for office would be ostracized. Let's fix our own problems before we condemn others'.

EnemyWithin--the Democratic platform says nothing about gay marriage. Only the Republican platform does. So don't conclude Democrats are obsessed with sex. I'm curious if all the sexual conservatives here would like to return to the day, not so very long ago, when swimsuits were ankle-length and colleges were same-sex? Isn't liberalizing sexual mores a little bit good? (Though of course it can go too far.)

Mariner.

 

[dilloduck]

Well, I came pretty close to agreeing with you--I've still never read the full details on the Italian's situation. If he was facing social opprobium for an opinion that doesn't hurt anyone, but is his alone, then I think he has a right to that opinion. I'm not going to condemn his culture globally for its values--after all, every culture has such values, including ours where, for example, an atheist who attempted to run for office would be ostracized. Let's fix our own problems before we condemn others'.

EnemyWithin--the Democratic platform says nothing about gay marriage. Only the Republican platform does. So don't conclude Democrats are obsessed with sex. I'm curious if all the sexual conservatives here would like to return to the day, not so very long ago, when swimsuits were ankle-length and colleges were same-sex? Isn't liberalizing sexual mores a little bit good? (Though of course it can go too far.)

Mariner.

Everyone who runs for president is ostracized. It's a tradition !!
Sexual "liberation" is merely a reactionary liberal ploy to attack the traditionalists desire for moderation. Now that I think about it, the whole liberal agenda is reactionary to whatever they feel to be "Christian".

 

[Mariner]

very funny about ostracism!

Saying liberals are reacting to Christianity is unfair, since Christianity itself is perhaps the single most powerful liberal force in history. What you really mean is that today's liberals challenge some beliefs of yesterday's liberals.

The definition of "moderate" keeps changing. Today's "traditionalist" is yesterday's dinosaur, and today's avant garde is tomorrow's classic rock.

Mariner.

 

[musicman]

very funny about ostracism!

Saying liberals are reacting to Christianity is unfair, since Christianity itself is perhaps the single most powerful liberal force in history. What you really mean is that today's liberals challenge some beliefs of yesterday's liberals.

The definition of "moderate" keeps changing. Today's "traditionalist" is yesterday's dinosaur, and today's avant garde is tomorrow's classic rock.

Mariner.

Yeah - that's why we tend to try to discuss those terms in the context of HERE AND NOW.

Please check out two threads posted by Pale Rider in the Politics section:

What "IS" a Liberal?

What Makes a Liberal? Part II

Conversation can be so much more productive and informative when we're not bogged down in this endless quibbling over definition.

 

[Mariner]

Musicman, to point out that most of the positions taken by so-called conservatives nowadays are in fact liberal positions when placed in historical perspective. It's a very important point, because you guys throw the "L-word" around as if it had 4 letters. If you appreciated the liberality of your own positions, you might be more open-minded to the viewpoint of today's liberals (like me). I'll look for those threads, though--thanks.

Mariner.

 

[musicman]

Musicman, to point out that most of the positions taken by so-called conservatives nowadays are in fact liberal positions when placed in historical perspective. It's a very important point, because you guys throw the "L-word" around as if it had 4 letters. If you appreciated the liberality of your own positions, you might be more open-minded to the viewpoint of today's liberals (like me). I'll look for those threads, though--thanks.

Mariner.

That's all I ask, Mariner. I don't even expect you to take the author's definitions of "liberal", "conservative", etc., as gospel. All I'm saying is that the traditional definitions of these terms don't really help us much - they simply don't apply. Then, we wind up getting ourselves bogged down in definition.

I even started a thread a few weeks back, asking board members to define these terms as THEY understood them. I think we should know, to the degree possible, what a person means when he refers to a liberal, a conservative, a reactionary, a radical, whatever. It would sure save time.

 

[Deornwulf]

Musicman, to point out that most of the positions taken by so-called conservatives nowadays are in fact liberal positions when placed in historical perspective. It's a very important point, because you guys throw the "L-word" around as if it had 4 letters. If you appreciated the liberality of your own positions, you might be more open-minded to the viewpoint of today's liberals (like me). I'll look for those threads, though--thanks.

Mariner.

The L-word does have four letters L-E-F-T

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Musicman, to point out that most of the positions taken by so-called conservatives nowadays are in fact liberal positions when placed in historical perspective. It's a very important point, because you guys throw the "L-word" around as if it had 4 letters. If you appreciated the liberality of your own positions, you might be more open-minded to the viewpoint of today's liberals (like me). I'll look for those threads, though--thanks.

Mariner.

It is quibbling mariner. The definitions have changed. The principles of classical liberalism are found in the conservative movement. The people we call Liberals today are wacked out socialist idiots.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I watched that and the tone, laughter, and smiles all indicated that it was humor, she was joking, it was ironic.

The general lack of cognitive development by many here precludes a grasp of irony.

 

[Bullypulpit]

It is quibbling mariner. The definitions have changed. The principles of classical liberalism are found in the conservative movement. The people we call Liberals today are wacked out socialist idiots.

And the the people we call Conservative today are whacked out fascist wannabe idiots. :teeth:

 

[rtwngAvngr]

And the the people we call Conservative today are whacked out fascist wannabe idiots. :teeth:

Does any nation who defends itself and has large corporations become fascist in your eyes?