Dominionists run for highest office in US

[Newby]

All bigots have their "reasons". HW Bush made a similarly bigoted statement about atheists.

Yep, just like you have yours when it comes to christians. Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.

Bullshit. I don't like dominionists, Scott Lively, Martin Ssempa, Bachmann, Perry. Specific groups, NOT ALL Christians.

The problem with you and your pals is you support, defend and identify with these groups when THEY are being criticised, NOT YOU.

That's how mainstream American Muslims feel too. They feel unfairly linked with terrorism.

You think I hate ALL Christians, because I call you out when you defend the evil freaks using the name of Christ.

I also call out anyone trying to convert me, or trying to say that Buddhism is not a valid religion.

You have yet to prove that Bachman or Perry are 'dominionists', who you say want to create a theocrasy in this country. So, you're attempting to make the case that Bachmann and Perry want a theocrasy, but you offer zero proof of any such thing.

 

[Newby]

Not a hater, "just" a bigot. You don't think gays should hold public office.

How about you, Newby and dave?

I don't think they should... Kinda like you don't think Bachmann should because of her religion. Right?

Your views are okay but mine are not? Bullshit!

You're right. I don't think Bachmann is the best choice for POTUS because of her intolerant views toward gay citizens, and her dominionist roots. Dominionism is a far greater concern to me than whether Bachmann thinks gays should marry or not.

You are entitled to your views. I am entitled to call them what they are, bigotry. If you think a person should not serve public office just because they are gay, you are more bigoted than I am.

I've had no problem with any previous President being a Christian.

What dominionist roots? She's been in Congress for 5 years now, so list what legislation she has supported or written that shows her 'dominionist' roots and that she has any intensions of not supporting separation of church and state?

 

[Newby]

Be mindful of the other perspective. Liberals see homosexuality as a group of people and any attack on homosexuality is an attack on these people. I understand and respect this position, but keep in mind that Christianity and Islam are ideologies open to criticism. Conservatives see homosexuality as an activity, and they don’t get upset when it is criticized, whether they agree with the criticism or not.

I disagree with Bachmann and would not vote for her, but I don’t think she is evil.

They see them as a voting block, and that's about it.

 

[daveman]

Newby and Dave each have a cute hypothesis, but all that needs done is to read the thread.


I asked a simple question, with zero implication of what the answer was 3 different times, Newby was afriad to answer it each time.


You tell me why you're scared to provide an answer on a 100% anonymous message board.

You tell me why leftists say that when you don't give them what they wrongly think they're entitled to, they claim you're afraid.

Oh, yeah -- it's because they're motivated by emotion, and they think everyone else is, too.

 

[daveman]

Be mindful of the other perspective. Liberals see homosexuality as a group of people and any attack on homosexuality is an attack on these people. I understand and respect this position, but keep in mind that Christianity and Islam are ideologies open to criticism. Conservatives see homosexuality as an activity, and they don’t get upset when it is criticized, whether they agree with the criticism or not.

I disagree with Bachmann and would not vote for her, but I don’t think she is evil.

They see them as a voting block, and that's about it.

Abd Gaea help them when they set foot off the liberal plantation. "How DARE those people hold any opinions but the ones we've decided they should have!"

 

[St.Blues]

Not a hater, "just" a bigot. You don't think gays should hold public office.

How about you, Newby and dave?

I don't think they should... Kinda like you don't think Bachmann should because of her religion. Right?

Your views are okay but mine are not? Bullshit!

You're right. I don't think Bachmann is the best choice for POTUS because of her intolerant views toward gay citizens, and her dominionist roots. Dominionism is a far greater concern to me than whether Bachmann thinks gays should marry or not.

You are entitled to your views. I am entitled to call them what they are, bigotry. If you think a person should not serve public office just because they are gay, you are more bigoted than I am.

I've had no problem with any previous President being a Christian.

Yet, I see you in other treads raining on many religious folks.. You're a ******* hypocrite.
No, Gays should not be in public office.. They are alien and do not understand the massive majority. You will sellout in a minute to get noticed or some sort of law that say gays are good no matter what the consequences.
That doesn't make for good policy.. Not to mention gays are the biggest fibbers on earth.. a hardcore example is Bwaney Fwank. The biggest most despicable liberal in America. I consider him a ******!

Blues

 

[Dr.Drock]

Newby and Dave each have a cute hypothesis, but all that needs done is to read the thread.


I asked a simple question, with zero implication of what the answer was 3 different times, Newby was afriad to answer it each time.


You tell me why you're scared to provide an answer on a 100% anonymous message board.

You tell me why leftists say that when you don't give them what they wrongly think they're entitled to, they claim you're afraid.

Oh, yeah -- it's because they're motivated by emotion, and they think everyone else is, too.

I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me, no doubt about it.


I'm not motivated by emotion, I asked a simple question, I've never seem him dodge one. I'd love to hear his reasoning for being scared to answer a basic question with zero potential consequences since this is an anonymous message board.


He told me to go through his posts, which I did, and found nothing. I wish he would've had the integrity to simply answer the question rather than lead me on a goose chase when he knew I wouldn't be able to find the answer.

 

[Marie888]

I haven't looked into what Bachmann said yet... but regardless, I'm not sure why it would bother some unbelievers if a believer in Christ thought a homosexual was "part of Satan" anyway. ???? Because wrong or right..as per some unbelievers... "Satan doesn't exist", right? What's there to fear, if "Satan doesn't exist"? It's an unbeliever's right to just write her off as crazy, as is usual for some unbelievers.

Or rather, if some unbelievers claim to know that Satan doesn't exist, what matter is it to them what any believer in Jesus Christ who goes for office, says or believes? Because like Newby was sayin, just don't vote for them if you don't like what they stand for.
I repeat - Just dont vote for them!

Or wait!!! I know!! Perhaps a person who goes for office shouldn't even be able to exercise their freedom of religion and speech!? Yes, that's it! Christian politicians can't have their faith nor share their beliefs, but everyone else can! Yes! Yes! Freedom of religion (or lack thereof) except for Christians!

Or wait, I know, I know!!!! Some of us Christians are bigots because our faith in Christ tells us that homosexuality is a sin, so we are just baaaaaaaad, horrible unaccepting and intolerant people!! NEWSFLASH!! It's part of our faith in believing God's Word - HE tells us that it's wrong!! What some homosexuals are missing is that believers in Christ believe we ALL sin and/or do things wrong. And hey, if you've never done anything wrong; lied, stole, cheated, etc... step right up, would love to hear your story!!

In Christianity, there's a HUGE difference between calling something that's a sin (or wrongdoing) "NOT" a sin.. rather than struggling with a sin and asking for forgiveness and repenting from it. For most Christians, saying that homosexuality is NOT a sin, would be against their faith. It would be akin to saying that lying is not a sin.

That doesn't mean Chrisitans are better than anyone at all - of course not! Nor should we think it! The opposite is true. We are all in the same boat, aren't we? Most Christians believe that we all haved sinneed (done wrong things) and Jesus Christ our Lord came to save us sinners and help us turn away from the things that hurt each other and ourselves. Hey, we obviously do that quite often.. just gotta look at the world or this forum.

All in all - just don't vote for a person whom you don't like or believe in their faith/views. I thank God we've all still have that right as US Citizens.

Don't worry though, as the Bible says, the unbelievers will also get their "way" for a bit. Keep at it, unbelievers.. it's gonna happen, don't worry. Many Christians will be persecuted and even beheaded for their faith alone... it's just as Jesus Christ said will happen...and because of the increase of sin, the love of many will grow cold - already happening.

 

[Newby]

Newby and Dave each have a cute hypothesis, but all that needs done is to read the thread.


I asked a simple question, with zero implication of what the answer was 3 different times, Newby was afriad to answer it each time.


You tell me why you're scared to provide an answer on a 100% anonymous message board.

You tell me why leftists say that when you don't give them what they wrongly think they're entitled to, they claim you're afraid.

Oh, yeah -- it's because they're motivated by emotion, and they think everyone else is, too.

I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me, no doubt about it.


I'm not motivated by emotion, I asked a simple question, I've never seem him dodge one. I'd love to hear his reasoning for being scared to answer a basic question with zero potential consequences since this is an anonymous message board.


He told me to go through his posts, which I did, and found nothing. I wish he would've had the integrity to simply answer the question rather than lead me on a goose chase when he knew I wouldn't be able to find the answer.

It's 'she', thank you very much. So, if you had absolutely nothing to go on with regards my feelings on gays, then why make the accusations to begin with? I'm still not sure why my views on them make any difference to you one way or the other anyway? I get very stubborn when someone accuses me of something when they have absolutely zero reason to make the accusation to begin with. I don't feel like I owe you anything. But, since you're being such a baby about the whole thing, I'm a conservative christian, having said that, I also have liberal views regarding gays. But, that's not to say that I don't think they have a political agenda either and take it too far at times as well, causing more problems for themselves. I respect integrity and honesty and not pushing your views down other's throats. I think if the gay community went about things a little differently, they would have more success. I have no problem with legal unions between gay couples, but even when offered that, they're not content unless it's called a marriage, which belies the supposed reasons behind wanting the legal union to begin with. I think that it should be up to every church to individually decide whether or not they want to bless gay unions, and they should be respected for their views either way. I don't think the gay lifestyle is a choice, I think for the most, they are born that way and have the same constitutional rights as any other citizen in the U.S. As far as religion, it's not up to anyone to judge another, we are all responsible for our own discretions in the end and it's not going to make any difference what anyone else did, only what you did. I will only answer for myself, not anyone else or their actions. Sin is sin, period. The only thing I probably wouldn't support is a gay minister or leader in the church. While we all sin, to be a leader you are supposed to be an example in turning away from sin, not embracing it, so I think it would be hypocritical to have a gay minister. There, are you happy now? Any other questions?

 

[daveman]

Newby and Dave each have a cute hypothesis, but all that needs done is to read the thread.


I asked a simple question, with zero implication of what the answer was 3 different times, Newby was afriad to answer it each time.


You tell me why you're scared to provide an answer on a 100% anonymous message board.

You tell me why leftists say that when you don't give them what they wrongly think they're entitled to, they claim you're afraid.

Oh, yeah -- it's because they're motivated by emotion, and they think everyone else is, too.

I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me, no doubt about it.

That's funny.

 

[Dr.Drock]

You tell me why leftists say that when you don't give them what they wrongly think they're entitled to, they claim you're afraid.

Oh, yeah -- it's because they're motivated by emotion, and they think everyone else is, too.

I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me, no doubt about it.


I'm not motivated by emotion, I asked a simple question, I've never seem him dodge one. I'd love to hear his reasoning for being scared to answer a basic question with zero potential consequences since this is an anonymous message board.


He told me to go through his posts, which I did, and found nothing. I wish he would've had the integrity to simply answer the question rather than lead me on a goose chase when he knew I wouldn't be able to find the answer.

It's 'she', thank you very much. So, if you had absolutely nothing to go on with regards my feelings on gays, then why make the accusations to begin with? I'm still not sure why my views on them make any difference to you one way or the other anyway? I get very stubborn when someone accuses me of something when they have absolutely zero reason to make the accusation to begin with. I don't feel like I owe you anything. But, since you're being such a baby about the whole thing, I'm a conservative christian, having said that, I also have liberal views regarding gays. But, that's not to say that I don't think they have a political agenda either and take it too far at times as well, causing more problems for themselves. I respect integrity and honesty and not pushing your views down other's throats. I think if the gay community went about things a little differently, they would have more success. I have no problem with legal unions between gay couples, but even when offered that, they're not content unless it's called a marriage, which belies the supposed reasons behind wanting the legal union to begin with. I think that it should be up to every church to individually decide whether or not they want to bless gay unions, and they should be respected for their views either way. I don't think the gay lifestyle is a choice, I think for the most, they are born that way and have the same constitutional rights as any other citizen in the U.S. As far as religion, it's not up to anyone to judge another, we are all responsible for our own discretions in the end and it's not going to make any difference what anyone else did, only what you did. I will only answer for myself, not anyone else or their actions. Sin is sin, period. The only thing I probably wouldn't support is a gay minister or leader in the church. While we all sin, to be a leader you are supposed to be an example in turning away from sin, not embracing it, so I think it would be hypocritical to have a gay minister. There, are you happy now? Any other questions?

So since you view being gay as a sin but don't judge, would your answers be you view homosexual life as less moral than heterosexual life but disagree with Bachmann in terms of it being part of Satan?

 

[Dr.Drock]

You tell me why leftists say that when you don't give them what they wrongly think they're entitled to, they claim you're afraid.

Oh, yeah -- it's because they're motivated by emotion, and they think everyone else is, too.

I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me, no doubt about it.

That's funny.

The party you vote for, republicans, is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too liberal for me.

 

[Newby]

I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me, no doubt about it.


I'm not motivated by emotion, I asked a simple question, I've never seem him dodge one. I'd love to hear his reasoning for being scared to answer a basic question with zero potential consequences since this is an anonymous message board.


He told me to go through his posts, which I did, and found nothing. I wish he would've had the integrity to simply answer the question rather than lead me on a goose chase when he knew I wouldn't be able to find the answer.

It's 'she', thank you very much. So, if you had absolutely nothing to go on with regards my feelings on gays, then why make the accusations to begin with? I'm still not sure why my views on them make any difference to you one way or the other anyway? I get very stubborn when someone accuses me of something when they have absolutely zero reason to make the accusation to begin with. I don't feel like I owe you anything. But, since you're being such a baby about the whole thing, I'm a conservative christian, having said that, I also have liberal views regarding gays. But, that's not to say that I don't think they have a political agenda either and take it too far at times as well, causing more problems for themselves. I respect integrity and honesty and not pushing your views down other's throats. I think if the gay community went about things a little differently, they would have more success. I have no problem with legal unions between gay couples, but even when offered that, they're not content unless it's called a marriage, which belies the supposed reasons behind wanting the legal union to begin with. I think that it should be up to every church to individually decide whether or not they want to bless gay unions, and they should be respected for their views either way. I don't think the gay lifestyle is a choice, I think for the most, they are born that way and have the same constitutional rights as any other citizen in the U.S. As far as religion, it's not up to anyone to judge another, we are all responsible for our own discretions in the end and it's not going to make any difference what anyone else did, only what you did. I will only answer for myself, not anyone else or their actions. Sin is sin, period. The only thing I probably wouldn't support is a gay minister or leader in the church. While we all sin, to be a leader you are supposed to be an example in turning away from sin, not embracing it, so I think it would be hypocritical to have a gay minister. There, are you happy now? Any other questions?

So since you view being gay as a sin but don't judge, would your answers be you view homosexual life as less moral than heterosexual life but disagree with Bachmann in terms of it being part of Satan?

Nope, as I said above, sin is sin, there is no one that's greater than another. We all sin. As far as it being 'part of Satan', I guess it's all in how you look at it, the Bible says that Satan is the great deceiver, and will attempt to tempt and lead you to do sinful things. So, in that regard, all sin is following Satan. So, I don't think you can pick and choose which ones are of Satan, and which ones are not. Therefore, that would make us all following Satan to a certain degree since we all sin.

 

[Sky Dancer]

It's 'she', thank you very much. So, if you had absolutely nothing to go on with regards my feelings on gays, then why make the accusations to begin with? I'm still not sure why my views on them make any difference to you one way or the other anyway? I get very stubborn when someone accuses me of something when they have absolutely zero reason to make the accusation to begin with. I don't feel like I owe you anything. But, since you're being such a baby about the whole thing, I'm a conservative christian, having said that, I also have liberal views regarding gays. But, that's not to say that I don't think they have a political agenda either and take it too far at times as well, causing more problems for themselves. I respect integrity and honesty and not pushing your views down other's throats. I think if the gay community went about things a little differently, they would have more success. I have no problem with legal unions between gay couples, but even when offered that, they're not content unless it's called a marriage, which belies the supposed reasons behind wanting the legal union to begin with. I think that it should be up to every church to individually decide whether or not they want to bless gay unions, and they should be respected for their views either way. I don't think the gay lifestyle is a choice, I think for the most, they are born that way and have the same constitutional rights as any other citizen in the U.S. As far as religion, it's not up to anyone to judge another, we are all responsible for our own discretions in the end and it's not going to make any difference what anyone else did, only what you did. I will only answer for myself, not anyone else or their actions. Sin is sin, period. The only thing I probably wouldn't support is a gay minister or leader in the church. While we all sin, to be a leader you are supposed to be an example in turning away from sin, not embracing it, so I think it would be hypocritical to have a gay minister. There, are you happy now? Any other questions?

So since you view being gay as a sin but don't judge, would your answers be you view homosexual life as less moral than heterosexual life but disagree with Bachmann in terms of it being part of Satan?

Nope, as I said above, sin is sin, there is no one that's greater than another. We all sin. As far as it being 'part of Satan', I guess it's all in how you look at it, the Bible says that Satan is the great deceiver, and will attempt to tempt and lead you to do sinful things. So, in that regard, all sin is following Satan. So, I don't think you can pick and choose which ones are of Satan, and which ones are not. Therefore, that would make us all following Satan to a certain degree since we all sin.

Thank you for clarifying that you think homosexuality is "satanic". There is nothing "satanic" in the love my wife and I have shared these last 26 years.

There was nothing "satanic" in my father.

 

[daveman]

I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me, no doubt about it.

That's funny.

The party you vote for, republicans, is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too liberal for me.

Really? Then why is that Paul quote in your signature? Keynes has been proven utterly wrong.

 

[BDBoop]

Thank you for clarifying that you think homosexuality is "satanic". There is nothing "satanic" in the love my wife and I have shared these last 26 years.

There was nothing "satanic" in my father.

What gets me is basing an entire life and relationship on what may or may not be happening in the bedroom. It's bullshit. No heterosexual relationship is "all about the nooky", and nor is the homosexual relationship.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I haven't looked into what Bachmann said yet... but regardless, I'm not sure why it would bother some unbelievers if a believer in Christ thought a homosexual was "part of Satan" anyway. ???? Because wrong or right..as per some unbelievers... "Satan doesn't exist", right? What's there to fear, if "Satan doesn't exist"? It's an unbeliever's right to just write her off as crazy, as is usual for some unbelievers.

Or rather, if some unbelievers claim to know that Satan doesn't exist, what matter is it to them what any believer in Jesus Christ who goes for office, says or believes? Because like Newby was sayin, just don't vote for them if you don't like what they stand for.
I repeat - Just dont vote for them!

Or wait!!! I know!! Perhaps a person who goes for office shouldn't even be able to exercise their freedom of religion and speech!? Yes, that's it! Christian politicians can't have their faith nor share their beliefs, but everyone else can! Yes! Yes! Freedom of religion (or lack thereof) except for Christians!

Or wait, I know, I know!!!! Some of us Christians are bigots because our faith in Christ tells us that homosexuality is a sin, so we are just baaaaaaaad, horrible unaccepting and intolerant people!! NEWSFLASH!! It's part of our faith in believing God's Word - HE tells us that it's wrong!! What some homosexuals are missing is that believers in Christ believe we ALL sin and/or do things wrong. And hey, if you've never done anything wrong; lied, stole, cheated, etc... step right up, would love to hear your story!!

In Christianity, there's a HUGE difference between calling something that's a sin (or wrongdoing) "NOT" a sin.. rather than struggling with a sin and asking for forgiveness and repenting from it. For most Christians, saying that homosexuality is NOT a sin, would be against their faith. It would be akin to saying that lying is not a sin.

That doesn't mean Chrisitans are better than anyone at all - of course not! Nor should we think it! The opposite is true. We are all in the same boat, aren't we? Most Christians believe that we all haved sinneed (done wrong things) and Jesus Christ our Lord came to save us sinners and help us turn away from the things that hurt each other and ourselves. Hey, we obviously do that quite often.. just gotta look at the world or this forum.

All in all - just don't vote for a person whom you don't like or believe in their faith/views. I thank God we've all still have that right as US Citizens.

Don't worry though, as the Bible says, the unbelievers will also get their "way" for a bit. Keep at it, unbelievers.. it's gonna happen, don't worry. Many Christians will be persecuted and even beheaded for their faith alone... it's just as Jesus Christ said will happen...and because of the increase of sin, the love of many will grow cold - already happening.

You divide the world into "believers" and "non-believers". You worry about being persecuted, yet it is people who call themselves "believers" who persecute gays, and have even put forth a "kill gays" legislation.

Your agenda is domination. You want the entire world to be of one faith, YOURS.

You aren't willing to look at the people who call themselves "believers" who want to do away with religious freedom in America, who think there should be no separation of church and state and who propose a theocracy.

I oppose everything you stand for.

 

[St.Blues]

Hey everybody, Sky is on a mission today.. She appears to be off a little but she is good at heart.
Go easy on her.. Today just isn't her day.

Blues

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No, Gays should not be in public office.. They are alien and do not understand the massive majority.

Again, are you advocating codifying the above or are you merely exhibiting your ignorance and hate? If the former, it’s un-Constitutional; if the latter, seek mental health counseling.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is what I don't understand. I'm concerned about religious extremism. Why decent ordinary religious people don't want to separate themselves from extremists, I don't know.

We all wonder why Muslim mosques don't do more to distance themselves from Islamic terrorism. Do they think they will NOT be painted with the same brush if they don't call out the extremists masquerading as Muslims.

There are groups out there who masquerade as Christians. The dominionists, the Martin Ssempa, Scott Lively and Fred Phelps types, and when I point them out and question their activities, mainstream moderate Christians go to their defense. That makes ZERO sense to me.

The extremist Buddhists in Sri Lanka are at war. There is nothing in the Buddha's teaching about holy war. Killing is NEVER justified. There are serious karmic consequences for it. I have NO problem calling out these extremists. Why is it some Christians here have such a hard time calling their own extremists out.

There are TONS of Christians I have NO problem with. Most Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, United Church of Christ and most LDS. I do call out the Pope for saying that ordaining women priests is as damaging to the RCC and a sin as pedophile priests. I will call out the RCC for decades of hiding pedophilia. I will call out the Magdalene homes. Catholics are my family, there is a cultural comfort for me with Catholics, even though I can't stand this Pope, or the child molestation or the imprisonment, slavery and torture of young women that went on in Ireland in the Magdalene homes for many years.

I no longer believe in God, yet I find common ground with some people who do believe in God. Divine Wind, Gadawg, editec, Immie, Care4all, and Echo to name just a few. They are so confident in their faith, they are living their faith, and they have no need to push it on anyone. I find that heartening and refreshing.

I have no huge problem with Christians who think homosexuality is a sin. That is their right. I take exception to kill gays legislation and hate mongers like Scott Lively, author of the Pink Swastika, who blames the Holocaust on gays.

Why moderate Christians think I am criticising THEM, I don't know. When they won't recognize extreme views, like dominionism, masquerading as Christianity, and they defend these folks, and they identify with them, then it does make me feel as though they agree with this philosophical view.

daveman is adamant that he supports separation of church and state and I believe him. He's mad at me because I want him to understand that dominionists are in national politics, including the POTUS race, now. Foxfyre denies it. Newby denies it. Allie Baba and Cecilie all deny it. daveman says it's no big deal. It is a dangerous trend and it has been building for 30 years.

I listed which groups are dominionist. If you don't know any of them, check them out. Inform yourself, and decide if you really think there is no such thing as separation of church and state and you have NO problem with the US becoming a "christian" theocracy. I put christian in quotes because I want to separate the dominionists out from mainstream christians.

I would not call Bachmann, Palin, Pawlenty or Perry, "mainstream christians".

I hope this helps.

sky

Perry is not a religious extremist. He has been governor of Texas for a few years, and never tried to do any of the things you are accusing him of planning. Bachmann may, or may not, be off the wall in her religious views, but if whe is she has not given any real signs of it yet. If she is, it will come out eventually. Even if she is not, she probably will not get the Republican nomination, and I don't think she is actually shooting for it. I think she is just running to build credibility as a power broker, and possibly angling for a VP slot.

Most of the people you accuse of being extremists are more than willing to insist that the government does not have the right to tell anyone what to believe, they just believe that a person should be able to express their personal religious beliefs even if they are in public office, or at a government sponsored event. That is what David Barton means when he talks about the wall between church and state being a myth, and, quite frankly, I think he is right. There is no reason I can think of that anyone, no matter who they work for, or where they are, should not be able to express their religion when asked about it.

But the fact is that some atheists, who would have just as much problem with you talking about Buddha as they would me talking about Jesus, got all offended when they had to listen to their city council opening their meetings with a prayer, even if they went out of their way to have many different religious viewpoints expressed during that prayer.

Then we have delusional idiots like you who want to lump everyone who says anything you disagree with into some massive conspiracy that rivals the Illuminati in scope and has plans to control the entire world. Conspiracies of that scope do not exist.