Why the Left despises Religion

[nakedemperor]

This is textbook intolerance.

Yes.

 

[nakedemperor]

also..."I don't DWolf" should read "I told DWolf". Sowwy.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The constitution guarantees freedom of religion. Doesn't that guaranteed the freedom to choose no religion?

Yes. And you can choose no religion. but you cannot choose a society where there is no religious expression whatsoever. That's not your choice to make.

In which case, people should have to swear allegiance to "god" in the pledge of allegiance, nor should people be forced to pray when they don't believe in prayer, per se. I could care less if the 10 commandments are in a court house; if you don't want it there, don't look at it. It doesn't affect you. But when a teacher asks a student (for example) to acknowledge a god's existence, that's impinging upon his/her choice of "no thank you" when he exercised his right to choose a religion.

I agree there should be no forced prayer in schools. But that issue has been settled. Now we're fighting leftists revisionists who want to rewrite history and remove all references to god from our history. What do you think of the libs in california who will not allow a teacher to pass out excerpts from the declaration of independance?

You libs are out of control and apparently out of the capacity for sound thinking.

 

[nakedemperor]

Yes. And you can choose no religion. but you cannot choose a society where there is no religious expression whatsoever. That's not your choice to make.



I agree there should be no forced prayer in schools. But that issue has been settled. Now we're fighting leftists revisionists who want to rewrite history and remove all references to god from our history. What do you think of the libs in california who will not allow a teacher to pass out excerpts from the declaration of independance?

You libs are out of control and apparently out of the capacity for sound thinking.

The libs who prevent a teacher from passing out the DOI...ARE NOT ME. "You libs" ARE NOT ME. I'm being pragmatic, "THOSE" liberals, who are not the majority of liberals, IMHO, are NOT ME. Stop conflating the two.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The libs who prevent a teacher from passing out the DOI...ARE NOT ME. "You libs" ARE NOT ME. I'm being pragmatic, "THOSE" liberals, who are not the majority of liberals, IMHO, are NOT ME. Stop conflating the two.

I asked you what you thought of it. Let's find out if this is you. Do you support disallowing a teacher from presenting any selection from the declaration of independance? yes or no.

 

[Deornwulf]

You mean other than when we kidnapped Africans and forced our religion upon them? Would pre-abolition not count as "never" in your book?

And in case you've been reading with your eyes closed, I don't DWolf that attacking religion because you don't understand it is "ignorance".

Um, Ethopians were Christians way before America was even discovered. We did not force our religion on Africans, they already had it. In fact, Africa is the cradle of Christianity. People seem to forget that the Europeans of the old world never had an exclusive on Christianity and were actually among the last ones to come to the dance.

 

[nakedemperor]

Um, Ethopians were Christians way before America was even discovered. We did not force our religion on Africans, they already had it. In fact, Africa is the cradle of Christianity. People seem to forget that the Europeans of the old world never had an exclusive on Christianity and were actually among the last ones to come to the dance.

Semantics. I'm talking about Africans from the Ivory Coast and other regions who'd presumably never SEEN a Christian before they were kidnapped and shipped off to America by 'gentlemen' who disgraced the religion they forced upon their slaves.

 

[nakedemperor]

I asked you what you thought of it. Let's find out if this is you. Do you support disallowing a teacher from presenting any selection from the declaration of independance? yes or no.

I'd have thought that the statement "the libs who disallow a teacher from passing out the declaration of independance are not me" would have answered your question, but I'll dumb it down a bit: No.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I'd have thought that the statement "the libs who disallow a teacher from passing out the declaration of independance are not me" would have answered your question, but I'll dumb it down a bit: No.

I know you're not the actual person at the school who did this. It's not a question of identity but of opinion. Thanks for playing.

And it's the lunatics of your party who have done this. Your party is willing to distort history to achieve their atheist state. You should fight them.

 

[TheEnemyWithin]

The reaction of the Left to the upswing in religious values has a very simple reaction. The Left despises religion and God because it puts into place an authority higher than them. The Leftist movement was founded on the premise of destroying the Establishment so their attacks on Organized Religion are a continuation of their battle against Authority Figures.

One could say the it is a refusal on the part of the Left to mature and become adults. The Anti-Establishment view is very egocentric. Using Kohlberg's Moral Stages of Development, those on the Left are stuck at stage 2, the key to this interpretation being the Left's preponderance to resort to moral relativism in their reasoning behind actions.

Aaauuugh!! He got it right!!! You listen to too much talk radio, Wulf. How very intolerant of you...

 

[deaddude]

Many liberals (including myself) don’t see religion itself as an evil. They see prejudice as an evil, and fear that prejudice can stem from religion.

 

[TheEnemyWithin]

Fricken ACLU--claim they are "protect" us from government intrusion but sticking their own damn agendas into everything. Arrogant bastards! How stupid do they really think we are??

Terribly stupid, Duck. I wonder why we aren't hearing from CivilLiberty on this one??? :teeth:

 

[alien21010]

The problem is not with religion per se. Instead it is with those who would pervert their religion to supercede other established institutions, e.g. science, and the United States Constitution. I have no problem with people practicing their religion on their own time, in their house, and teaching their values to their kids.

That said, I do have a problem with people trying to force prayer in school, as was previously mentioned, trying to replace Evolution in textbooks with Creationism, and other instances.

The problem is not with your average Christian or person from any other religion. In fact, the vast majority of both sides of the political spectrum is religious. To classify all liberals as atheistic, is frankly ridiculous.



Prohibiting references to historical documents in which God is mentioned is absolutely ridiculous. The Bible is mentioned in schools, as are other religious texts, because they are historically significant. As such, the DOI and Constitution should not face a double standard. These are quite possibly, the two most important documents for every American, and should be read, uncensored.


To recap: No problem with religion. The only problem I have, is with "fundamentalists" whose only desire is to see a theocratical government.

 

[5stringJeff]

To recap: No problem with religion. The only problem I have, is with "fundamentalists" whose only desire is to see a theocratical government.

My only response to that (since I agree with a lot of it) is that I have yet to meet anyone who wants to establish an American thoecracy. Maybe Jerry Falwell wants one, but Jerry Falwell is not representative of evangelical Christians.

 

[Deornwulf]

Semantics. I'm talking about Africans from the Ivory Coast and other regions who'd presumably never SEEN a Christian before they were kidnapped and shipped off to America by 'gentlemen' who disgraced the religion they forced upon their slaves.

Ah, you speak of the tribal prisoners sold off by the King of the Ivory Coast to the Portuguese Slave Traders. The same country that became quite irrate when the Pope called for an end to the slave trade.

 

[Deornwulf]

The problem is not with religion per se. Instead it is with those who would pervert their religion to supercede other established institutions, e.g. science, and the United States Constitution. I have no problem with people practicing their religion on their own time, in their house, and teaching their values to their kids.

That said, I do have a problem with people trying to force prayer in school, as was previously mentioned, trying to replace Evolution in textbooks with Creationism, and other instances.

The problem is not with your average Christian or person from any other religion. In fact, the vast majority of both sides of the political spectrum is religious. To classify all liberals as atheistic, is frankly ridiculous.



Prohibiting references to historical documents in which God is mentioned is absolutely ridiculous. The Bible is mentioned in schools, as are other religious texts, because they are historically significant. As such, the DOI and Constitution should not face a double standard. These are quite possibly, the two most important documents for every American, and should be read, uncensored.


To recap: No problem with religion. The only problem I have, is with "fundamentalists" whose only desire is to see a theocratical government.

To some, science is akin to a religion, a religion of reason. And it is not always correct, think of how many "scientific principles" have been proven false over the past 100 years.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Many liberals (including myself) don’t see religion itself as an evil. They see prejudice as an evil, and fear that prejudice can stem from religion.

and you have become fanatical in this belief to the point of intolerance of religion.

 

[nakedemperor]

Ah, you speak of the tribal prisoners sold off by the King of the Ivory Coast to the Portuguese Slave Traders. The same country that became quite irrate when the Pope called for an end to the slave trade.

What on earth are you trying to say here?

 

[rei_t_ex]

The Left despises religion and God because it puts into place an authority higher than them.

That simply is not true. Census data indicates that only ~10% of the population will describe themselves as atheist or agnostic. And that is inclusive of atheists/agnostics such as myself who happen to be conservative in most of their views that do not relate to religion. Moreover, only a very small fraction of that 10% would actually go so far as to despise religion or God. So, at best, we have 1%-2% who would fit your description. This is hardly representative of "the Left." Indeed, if you think about it, there are very many liberals who are Jewish. And liberal Hollywood is majority Buddhist. And that makes no mention of the plethora of liberals who are Christian. Indeed, when I consider my liberal friends, I all but one follow a theistic religion. Which of course, places a higher authority above them.

One could say the it is a refusal on the part of the Left to mature and become adults. The Anti-Establishment view is very egocentric. Using Kohlberg's Moral Stages of Development, those on the Left are stuck at stage 2, the key to this interpretation being the Left's preponderance to resort to moral relativism in their reasoning behind actions.

Would you care to engage in a philosophic refutation of moral relativism? When I first encountered the concept (a concept which admittedly makes life that much less simple), I certainly tried. My failure to do so has resulted in my accepting the post-modern notions of relativism as largely correct.

 

[rei_t_ex]

To some, science is akin to a religion, a religion of reason. And it is not always correct, think of how many "scientific principles" have been proven false over the past 100 years.

The fact that scientific principles can be (and are) proven wrong, is the greatest advantage that science has. It is what makes the acceptance of scientific conclusions rationals, what makes the term "religion of reason" no sequitur and what separates science from (blind) faith.