moral and / or christian conservatism

[Tony7xxx]

Here is my opinion. Please note: It will anger most, but I'm atheist, angry, a loud mouth Italian and have very little patience for BS.

I think anyone who talks about being a Christian in most cases doesn't know the first thing about being a loving, accepting human being.

I think Jesus was a charismatic 'user' of uneducated men and women (and he was probably bisexual) and that if ANYONE today would purport to being the son of God, people would kill him or put him away.

I think that most right-wingers are afarid of anything different from what they believe because they are essentially scared sheep without a brain of their own and are afraid to make decisions they might personally be held responsible for -- like living their own lives.

I think that people who sit around and pray and think that's going to change the world are lazy cowards.

I think that religion has and always will divide this planet. It will eventually end all life.

I think that right-wing Christians should be forced to finacially support all abandoned children they were against aborting and that they should not be allowed to divorce by law. We'll see how long their beliefs hold up.

I think homicide can be justified when you see people like Fred Phelps in action.

I think gays and lesbians should defend themselves in two ways: with guns and by supporting a movement to call for lower taxing for us second class citizens.

I think if I knew I was going to die tomorrow, I'd take matters into my own hands.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by Tony7xxx@Sep 20 2004, 02:56 AM
if ANYONE today would purport to being the son of God, people would kill him or put him away.

What Jesus's quotes in the New Testament say about that matter are very different from what people think he said about it.
Jesus never once claimed that he was the Son of God ... he taught that we are all sons of God. That is a different claim than what you are suggesting. When referring to Himself, he called himself 'The Son of Man'.

I think homicide can be justified when you see people like Fred Phelps in action.

If you change the direct object ( i.e. Fred Phelps), that sounds like something Fred Phelps would say. <_<

 

[13788]

monstro: Y&#39;know, I don&#39;t go and talk about my big cock on Conservative Christian message boards (although if you know of any...) but since this topic is here, I&#39;d just like to say that I consider it to be impossible to tolerate intolerance because ultimately that&#39;s not tolerance, that&#39;s complicity.

I try to deal with people by their actions, not the labels slapped on them as a matter of political expediency, or by the slogans they shout, or by the talk shows they listen to. Nevertheless, I think this is an elegant double-bind Suiage has constructed: the way he&#39;s framed his post leaves us with this non-choice of either agreeing that he and other Christian Conservatives have been treated intolerantly, and, so, by implication, that such things as homophobia are viable viewpoints that "deserve" our respect--or, alternately, we are caught in a web of semantics, so that if we decide to argue against these apparently honest and polite (but really quite mendacious) posts of his, then we run the risk of seeming angry, volatile, and unreasonable, validating any feelings of persecution Suiage (or others) may have.

But I think there may be a third, as of yet unmentioned, option. Namely, that you reap what you sow, as somebody or other once said. I think that same dude also may have said something about loving one another, but I don&#39;t know, I&#39;d have to go look it up.

 

[ponybilt]

A few things spring to mind:

First, DMW is extremely eloquent, knowledgable, and diplomatic in his response on this subject.

Second, there was a point earlier about Xianity not being the only path to spirituality, along with another comment regardling the ten commandments. Connect the dots: all of these tend to be fairly universal truths about how we interact with others and are not the exclusive domain of the Christians. Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism and others all have the same or similar concepts.

Finally, the statement that "Less government allows all of us to be more free" is essentially a loaded statement. I could give a hundred arguments to support it and another hundred to defeat it. Unfortunately, there are so many people who&#39;ve picked up the rhetoric that "government is bad" they don&#39;t understand why the argument *really* originated in the first place -- it was a strategy that resulted in part due to Rpublicans recognizing that government employees are overwhelmingly Democrats -- reduce the headcount and you supposedly have fewer Democrats.

 

[stx1979]

Originally posted by DoubleMeatWhopper+Sep 20 2004, 03:13 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DoubleMeatWhopper &#064; Sep 20 2004, 03:13 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Tony7xxx@Sep 20 2004, 02:56 AM
if ANYONE today would purport to being the son of God, people would kill him or put him away.

What Jesus&#39;s quotes in the New Testament say about that matter are very different from what people think he said about it.
Jesus never once claimed that he was the Son of God ... he taught that we are all sons of God. That is a different claim than what you are suggesting. When referring to Himself, he called himself &#39;The Son of Man&#39;.

[/b][/quote]

True, but the funny thing is they did kill him.


Conservative Christianity (not just the televangelists or the Bible-thumpers on the street corner) embraces absolutism. It is an absolute that gay marriage is wrong. Whether this is tied to morality or tradition is hard to say. For me, it&#39;s hard to accept homosexuality on moral grounds. But I have many gay and lesbian friends who I view as moral people, despite their relationships. But the topic of gay marriage seems wrong on the grounds of tradition. Nowhere in history have we had the upsurgance for equal rights in marriage that we have today. But we&#39;ve simply never entertained the thought before.

Yes, the family has gone awry. But there have been family problems throughout all time. The desire and/or ability to have and maintain a loving,caring nuclear family may not exist in all heterosexual marriages, but the concept is still there and there are many who live it (100% of marriages - 50% of marriages ending in divorce = 50% that don&#39;t).

I for one agree to disagree, and I&#39;m a politically moderate, socially conservative heterosexual Christian.

One more thing, back to an earlier question... why are conservatives viewed as intolerant and just plain wrong? Have you ever listend to the liberals that hang out - way out - in left field?

 

[13788]

suaige: just an interesting fact I learned in "how children deal with divorce class" this was a 1998 fact. 50% of marriages are successful the first time 85% the 2nd. that makes 92 percent of 1st or 2nd marriages successful. Really gives things a lot more hope when looked at that way. I am hoping to be one of those 85%.

the closing sentence of the preceeding post was really much of the emphasis of what I actually asked. Kind of hit my feelings on the head. though I did intentionally open it up. Enjoying the posts. keep up the discussion.

P.S. I do actually agree with at least something almost every one has said, more some than others, but its good.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Why is "liberal" even a dirty word.

"I LOVE VAGINAS&#33; I AM A LIBERAL&#33;&#33;&#33;" WTF does that mean?

Okay, I&#39;m not comfortable with gay sexuality, in the same way I&#39;m not into S&M in the conventional sense, in other words, people do it, but it&#39;s not for me. I see being gay in a similar way to some fetishes, you just "are". But the word "fetish" is just a word, after all. In fact even the word "liberal" and "conservative" are just nouns that we use to blanket people into groups based on the supposed majority of their beliefs.

About Christianity, I think that the US IS a Xtian country, like it or not, if your President is allowed to use the "G-man" more often than Bin Laden does, than there&#39;s no point denying it, you guys are in the majority to some extent at least.

But I will say that although there are some aspects I&#39;ll disagree with Suaige with, he&#39;s a decent guy, and I&#39;ve learnt myself, that sometimes eating humble pie is a better way that letting conflict spread, I&#39;ve been compared to Simon Cowell at times&#33;

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by DoubleMeatWhopper@Sep 19 2004, 07:13 PM

I think homicide can be justified when you see people like Fred Phelps in action.

If you change the direct object ( i.e. Fred Phelps), that sounds like something Fred Phelps would say. <_<

[post=256706]Quoted post[/post]​

Actually, "Fred Phelps" is the object of the preposition "like" in that sentence. "People" is the direct object.

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by ORCABOMBER@Sep 19 2004, 11:34 PM
About Christianity, I think that the US IS a Xtian country, like it or not, if your President is allowed to use the "G-man" more often than Bin Laden does, than there&#39;s no point denying it, you guys are in the majority to some extent at least.

[post=256734]Quoted post[/post]​

And there are those of us who know that the country was founded by mass murderers, so Bush being more fanatical than bin Laden shouldn&#39;t come as a surprise. But don&#39;t think of it as fanaticism. Think of it as resolve. All the resolve of George Armstrong Custer,

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by jonb+Sep 20 2004, 09:20 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jonb &#064; Sep 20 2004, 09:20 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-DoubleMeatWhopper@Sep 19 2004, 07:13 PM

I think homicide can be justified when you see people like Fred Phelps in action.

If you change the direct object ( i.e. Fred Phelps), that sounds like something Fred Phelps would say. <_<

[post=256706]Quoted post[/post]​

Actually, "Fred Phelps" is the object of the preposition "like" in that sentence. "People" is the direct object.

[post=256810]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]

You&#39;re right, of course. I mis-typed and realised it about 15 minutes after I posted. I hoped no one would catch the slip. I guess I should have known better. :wacko:

 

[cityboy]

It would seem to me that if one is willing to believe all of Leviticus and the statement about homosexuality being destestable one must also be willing to believe and act upon the follow-up death sentence. It is after all in the same verse. But while many it seems are willing act upon the first sentence of 20:13 and to vociferously condemn gays, few are willing to act upon the second sentence and carry out the death penalty as commanded of "the people of the community". One cannot pick and choose the commands of the Lord...come and kill me otherwise as God commands you too will be cut off. Ah, but no. Could it be that something "new" has happened?

Yes, few would be willing...but some would not:

Partial quote:
Evangelist Jimmy Swaggart Threatens To Kill Gays
by Jan Prout
365Gay.com Newscenter
Toronto Bureau
Posted: September 20, 2004 12:02 am ET

According to a transcript of the program, Swaggart said: "I&#39;m trying to find the correct name for it ... this utter absolute, asinine, idiotic stupidity of men marrying men. ... I&#39;ve never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I&#39;m gonna be blunt and plain; if one ever looks at me like that, I&#39;m gonna kill him and tell God he died."

The remarks were met with applause from his congregation.

And the congregation applauded? Threats to kill and the congregation applauds? I&#39;ll bet they feel very righteous and holy. Is this Iraq, Iran or Afaganistan? No, it is Louisiana.

You know, with all due respect, I&#39;m scared of the Christian "Right". While there are many compassionate Christians there is a significant and growing segment that follow the ultra right wing, and I will use the word, "hatred", philosophy. They would applaud the mass slaughter of gays in the name their "god" and think themselves righteous for doing it. Just bringing up biblical death sentences demeans and dehumanizes people. Stop and think people&#33; What are your real motivations? Gays are not sub-human in some way.

I respect the right to believe and even to preach in churches that homosexuality is wrong (though I do not agree) and to refuse to marry same sex couples. What I do not respect is when that belief attempts to exert itself beyond the scope of the church and to write itself into law. This is what I hear frequently, "You don&#39;t respect my belief". Not true, I do. I do not respect your attempt to control my life or push your belief into the law of land. Keep your belief in your church where it belongs.

 

[13788]

joe22xxx: I&#39;ve spoken about "some" Christian views in the past on this group so I&#39;ll keep this to a short response.

I feel some Christians are absolutist in their views. "If you don&#39;t accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior, you&#39;re going to hell." This is such scarey stuff. The last time the Christians were in charge, they burned people at the stake. I don&#39;t trust them at all, including Mr. G.W. Bush.

To be honest, I&#39;m afraid of some Christians. They&#39;re certainly not like their name-sake, Jesus Christ. They&#39;re dogmatic, closed-minded and bigotted.

I know this may seem like Christian-bashing, but I feel the Christians have been bashing others who don&#39;t agree with them for centuries. It&#39;s time we defend ourselves against them.

And BYW, sin is something the Judeo-Christian traditions came up with to keep people in line. There is no such thing&#33; I am free from your negative religion.

 

[ponybilt]

Interesting points from Cityboy and Joe.

These are good examples of what makes the ultra right wing Christians indistinguishable from the right wing fanatical Islamists.

One kills people in the name of democracy, the other freedom
One blows up countries, the other blows up buildings
One wages a guerilla war, the other a military war
One has Laura Bush on Vicodin, the other has 12-year-olds on heroin
One shows their true colors, the other has a few bad apples
One has dogma, the other determination
One converts, the other recruits
One will stone a woman for adultery, the other will murder a man for being gay
ad infinitum

Nice. And both have their extreme religious convictions to tell them what they do is good. This makes me sad and frightened.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Perhaps it&#39;s easier to look extremeists on BOTH sides in a large room and let them finish each other off?

I think I just got the answer to world peace&#33;

 

[13788]

suaige: some excellent and thought provoking responses that have me standing self repremanded sp? as I was not able to answer right away. was going to today, but its 430 am have been quite busy and I am really tired.

P.S. and completely off the subject. I just added in my new additions to my Andes wrapper collection, I now have 11,980. If you didn&#39;t before you probably all now think I&#39;m psycho. I am going to buy a box tomorrow to up it over 12,000

 

[Pecker]

Originally posted by ORCABOMBER@Sep 21 2004, 04:06 AM
Perhaps it&#39;s easier to look extremeists on BOTH sides in a large room and let them finish each other off?

I think I just got the answer to world peace&#33;

[post=256849]Quoted post[/post]​

Yuck, Orca, then you&#39;d have nothing remaining but centrists.

How boring.

 

[13788]

suaige: It looks like this thread is slowing down, cool got some very good responses that made me think and understand others perspectives a better.

First I reply to Jon WHAT IS A LIBERAL as that got me going first.
A pm I had said a conservative seeks to preserve that which they find good liberal seeks for improvement. I think that is good in many occasions.
My first thought was the antithesis of what I believe – too simplistic. Too many facets. So I divided it.
Religious – I believe in religious absolutes and that there are good in many religions, there are many similarities in Christianity, Islam & Buddhism. Those who live according to these types of beliefs –which include love and compassion for others- are good people. Whether or not they are associated with any of them.. Christ is the only path of salvation, but that you are not automatically condemned to hell otherwise people will be judged by how they live according to their knowledge. Not so back and white. There is HUGE difference between being religious & righteous. Liberal – um, new age, people who worship rocks and the like and say they are religious or those who promote hatred, abuse, immorality etc in the name of religion. I don’t agree with extremism in ANYTHING.
Moral –I believe in sex only in a lawful marriage –i.e. not including living together. The farther someone varies from this the more liberal they are.
Social – I believe there are certain moral absolutes that don’t vary with time or circumstances, and this whole PC thing of having to accept EVERTHING because we have to accept EVERYONE is a bunch of bunk and people who promote such in my opinion are liberal.
I am pro-life and believe abortion is murder – not a form of birth control. I feel promotion of abortion is liberal. Consideration of mom’s life is necessary & if both will die, a sacrifice of one may be necessary and acceptable.
I don’t know if I consider this liberal, but I am opposed to the welfare state form of gov’t and more gov’t control. I think too much dependence on others destroys a person’s self reliance and self respect. I consider this left wing, which is often called liberal, but to me they aren’t exactly the same.

A couple of other points – I am going to sight 1 scripture each only for reference & clarify my point of view, not to bash, and for brevity.
Marriage doctrine or tradition. Marriage was created by God (Gen 2:24), not man, as the basis of society. And a successful traditional family is mostly likely to raise, healthy well adjusted children who well be the greatest benefit to society. And ANY breakdown of this – there are many – threatens the long term best interest of our society. So defense of marriage is defense of the well being of our society and therefore expands beyond the confines of an established church. Much needs to be done to improve the quality of marriage in general. Ya Brittany Spears 55 hrs. yup mockery.
Homo/hetro sexuality
Genes and sexual prefrence. As best as I know, my counselor who specialized in abuse and homosex. told me the best of research at the time showed that genes can influence up to 50% of our identity. We are by no means bound by heredity to be hetro/homo then we are to like the color green, but me may very well be predisposed to like one over the I believe nurture has a large part to do with this. It is influential in transitory homosex.. Once I resolved my abuse issued, I also resolved my sexual preference concerns. According to this I am opposed the promotion of special status by sex. pref. I think this is liberal. And I support its inclusion in nondiscrimination laws as far as hiring and such. Don’t think they should be treated as less, but not given special privileges like affirmative action. (marriage being the obvious exemption.)
Promoting my opinion
I was going to look this up but am out of time. There was a post about a 16 yr old asking about sex, 3 responses saying yeah nay were given, the 2 saying yeah were first, then a comment at 16 you should be concerned about your studies not sex. He received a response saying he should not push his opinions on others. But, he was no more pushy than the others and they were not reprimanded. Is it not just as fair for us to express warnings about what we feel is an unwise and potentially harmful idea as it is for others to express their promotion of it? This is what I feel has become very one sided.

Many have made excellent points and you don’t have to agree with me as stated. If you don’t agree that Christians are discriminated against just say so and make your argument. I feeling I am the least likely to be objective.

 

[13788]

suaige: the question was from orcabomber not jonb. sorry

 

[13788]

joe22xxx: "Many have made excellent points and you don’t have to agree with me as stated. If you don’t agree that Christians are discriminated against just say so and make your argument. I feeling I am the least likely to be objective."





I guess I&#39;m just being honest when I say that it&#39;s about time that christians get some backlash for all the crap they&#39;ve been giving the human race for centuries. If that&#39;s discrimination, then I&#39;m all for it. I think that christians should have a lot less power in this country, and I&#39;d be willing to try my damnedest to try to control them.

For me this is a matter of trust. And I don&#39;t trust right-wing christians at all.

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by DoubleMeatWhopper@Sep 20 2004, 03:25 PM
You&#39;re right, of course. I mis-typed and realised it about 15 minutes after I posted. I hoped no one would catch the slip. I guess I should have known better. :wacko:

[post=256822]Quoted post[/post]​

You can still teach Engrish, though. Of course, all those linguistic terms get confusing anyway.