Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Uncivil discourse, or how we alienate of people of faith

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:03 AM
Original message
Uncivil discourse, or how we alienate of people of faith
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:12 AM by Padraig18
Although too late to do us any good this year, much notice has been paid to the importance of the 'morals' or 'values' factor in terms of influencing voter behavior in the general election just past. While there is some dispute as to what degree this issue influenced voter behavior, there is no dispute that it did influence it to a moderate or greater degree. I personally believe that it is a good thing that this matter has come to the forefront, because it gives us an opportunity to successfully address it and effect positive changes in our own institutional behavior towards matters and people of faith.

Speaking as a person of faith--- a Roman Catholic, specifically--- I would venture to state that not only has our party failed to deal with matters of faith and their importance to voters, but it has, in fact, forgotten how to even hold a civil dialogue with these same voters. Dismissiveness, or even outright gratuitous insults aimed toward people of faith has become the norm in some quarters of our party, and it is to our party's detriment that this is tolerated. How often have I witnessed in these very forums absolutely vicious, ad hominem attacks upon practicing Catholics and the institution of the Roman Catholic Church itself, the sole purpose of which seems to be the 'bear-baiting' and mean-spirited derision of those who love the Church? 'Quite often' is the answer.

Rather than seeking to find common ground with Roman Catholics (e.g.) on such issues as the environment, universal health care, the elimination of hunger and maldistribution of wealth, opposition to the death penalty, social justice, equal pay for equal work, opposition to the use of military force in any but a purely defensive or 'just' war, it seems as though the most vocal among us deliberately seek out those issues upon which we may (or may not) disagree, and apply the whip to them with a glee that would put the Marquis de Sade to shame! Absolutely NO respect is accorded to those who may, as a matter of conscience and personal conviction, believe that human life does begin at conception--- none whatsoever. Those who believe that abstinence is the ONLY 100% effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and the spread of HIV and venereal diseases are openly ridiculed for their beliefs. While certainly not all Roman Catholics accept the Church's stand on these matters, nonetheless a majority (or large plurality) of us will quite understandably come to the defense of our Church in the face of such assaults, as would most any family member when they perceive that another family member is unjustly attacked by an outsider.

Let some loudmouth, asshat pastor, bishop or cardinal make some off-the-cuff statement on a particular subject, even though he is speaking as an idividual and not as spokesman for the Church itself, and there will be 15 free-for-all threads here bashing both individual Catholics and the Church within a matter of minutes. Oddly, though, let the Church do something like the Diocese of Springfield IL did this week--- see passed into law an $11 fee on all real-estate transactions, the purpose of which is to fund rent-subsidies for low-income individuals and families--- and any thread posted on the subject will drop like a stone. Does anyone fail to see how absolutely unjust and counterproductive such knee-jerk, institutional hostility toward people of faith is?

In closing, let me state quite plainly that our problem in reaching out to people of faith is not one which arises from a lack of shared values; if anything, we share FAR MORE values with most mainstream religious denominations than do our opponents. The problem we have is a monster of our own making--- our utter lack of civility, common decency and respect toward those who hold opinions different from our own. Until we can learn how to open and maintain a respectful dialogue with people of faith, we will continue to alienate them in ever-increasing numbers, to the detriment of both our party and our nation.

Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tandalayo_Scheisskopf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
1. There is another side to this coin, Paddy.
I have gotten it, too. When I and people I know and hold great affection for, are attacked unmercifully, either in print or in our faces, byt the religiously insane. I am not a saint or Zen Roshi. I am afraid that it is hard to hold back on giving back in like measure.

I have no intention of allowing myself to be forced into living in a world that they have commanded to exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. I don't believe you shouldn't defend them.
I'm pleased that you do recognize that every coin has two sides.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Bollocks.
When I'm talking to one of those "values" people, I always ask which values they think are important. It always comes down to sex, only, and only for other people.

You'd better believe I call them on it, and I can supply the quotes to back it up.

These people need to be reacquainted with Jesus. All they've gotten out of church for years is Paul, the Old Testament, and RNC talking points. It's time to reeducate them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hey Zeus Donating Member (110 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. amen on paul...
i have taken to calling them paulians. really bugs them. he is quoted more than christ. if i didn't know better, i would think he was the messiah and christ a wayward disciple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
45. don't blame Paul for the people who misinterpret him
he also said this:

9Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. 10Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves. 11Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13Share with God's people who are in need. Practice hospitality.
14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.<3> Do not be conceited.
17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"<4> says the Lord. 20On the contrary:
"If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."<5> 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RevCheesehead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #45
150. THANK YOU! Paul is misunderstood and misquoted.
And if you really want to get into historical/redaction critical thought, you'd be amazed at what the scholars believe is "authentic" Paul vs. "in a style imitated to sound like Paul."

People gotta get out of the King James. Buy a good copy of the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). Read the critical notes, the footnotes, the questionable translations of words. Look for surprising things in the text like brackets [] - which indicate that there is dispute as to whether the text was part of the original, or added later on. Look for accurate translations of words (i.e., "sexual immorality" rather than "homosexuality.") - you begin to get a different picture of Paul.

And for heaven's sake, read the whole thing, and not just bits and pieces.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. "Bollocks"-- perfect example of what I'm talking about!
You instantly dismiss what I have said in one statement aimed solely at 'pelvic issues'.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
62. well, i guess
you can be civil with them while they hold you in contempt for being a humane person.

i wonder why jews didn't try to get along with hitler and try to hold a civil discourse with the nazi party?

or the gypsies?

or the homosexuals?

or the labor unionists?

or the communists?

you see, you cannot TOLERATE the INTOLERABLE nor can you reason with the unreasonable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #62
101. Who, specifically, 'holds you in contempt'?
Boilerplate statements don't cut it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #101
115. ummm . . .
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:35 PM by datasuspect
okay.

i can show you the door, but i cannot make you walk through it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #115
117. Apparently you can't cite an example, either.
It seemed a simple enough request.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #117
119. i'm too busy arguing
elsewhere to cite the obvious.

maybe you can be my example?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #119
125. If it's so obvious, then why...
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:48 PM by Padraig18
... not type 2 or 3 words and just say it?

Ball back to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #125
139. Datasuspect
was PWNed. (sorry computer gaming term. It means you did very well)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #139
164. actually
you both win.

you're both right.

how could i have been so wrong. i've never before considered that democrats, progressives, and liberals are immoral, rude, and uncivil. i wonder how the right has put up with us for THIS long.

it's obvious that homosexuals are vile, horrible people.

i should be ashamed for thinking that gwbush is NOT a great, merciful, and moral man.

and now that the scales have fallen from my eyes, it is so very crytal clear that poor deserve their lot because they are lazy.

i extend my open hand and olive branch to all evangelicals and right wingers and promise to behave and remain steadfastly polite so that they vote for the next democratic candidate.

may god forgive me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #117
195. OK, I don't mind being "obvious"
chick.com

godhatesfags.com

Bob Jones

Ann Coulter

Pat Robertson

etc

etc

etc...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #62
149. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #149
152. Badda boom, badda bing!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #149
165. boy
you guys are coming out of the woodwork.

can you contextualize your argument for me, if you have one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #165
166. The initial post contextualizes mine.
As for 'coming out of the woodwork', I've been here for a LONG time...

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #166
167. was i replying to you?
anyway, congrats on being here for a very long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #167
178. Unless I missed something here...
It's an open board, and this happens to be MY thread, so I'll reply if I fucking well want to.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #178
180. well good for you
feel better now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #180
183. Didn't feel bad before.
So the answer is 'no'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #183
184. testy?
oh my.

well, here's to your continued "not feeling bad."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #184
185. Thank you.
Now run along and play, like a good boy...

;eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #185
187. you're quite a card
and acting like a jerk.

by the way, how's that working out for you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #187
190. Am I now?
Specifically, how is it that I'm acting like a jerk, while you are the paragon of all virtue?

Et tu, Brute?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #190
191. okay
you win, you're not a jerk, you're right, i am buying what you are selling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #166
168. anyway
don't give up the fight.

i'm sure one day somebody, somebody will have opinion supremacy on the internet. i'm just one more casualty of your verbal mastery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #165
172. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #172
173. yeah
can i jump on your bandwagon?

pretty please?

spare me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
29. don't give up on Paul.... he is also on our side
if you read farther than his edict on Pederasty (not homosexulity) you will see that he tells us we are all sinners and have to right to condemn others because we hypocritically decide their sins are worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #29
54. Paul is a whipping boy merely because he did most of the work
If John had written most of the epistles, I'm sure people would bitch about him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
3. How Can I Be Civil To Someone That Holds Me In Contempt
For being a "Heathen" in their eyes?

Seems your argument cuts both ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #3
46. I have never in all my years of church going heard anyone called
a heathen. Why do the non religious kling to ancient insults?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #46
67. In College, I Roomed With A Staunch Southern Baptist
When he was away at Veterinarian school, I would receive strangers at our dorm door.

They would always ask for my roommate.

I asked my roommate about this one day and he turned beet red.

He said he was very sorry for the disturbance and had asked his friends to stop coming by.

When I asked him why they continued he looked at me very seriously and said "they just wanted to see what a Heathen looked like."

True story! This happened at Texas A&M University circa 1980.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DenverDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
5. Believe what you wish, just don't expect it to be made the law of the land
The catholic church on Colorado Boulevard posted on its outdoor sign "If you believe in killing babies, vote for Kerry".

Don't ask me to accept that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. ONE pastor.
Did the POPE say that?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DenverDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #9
26. A lot more than one priest were on this page.
Do you deny that anti-abortion rights was THE issue for catholics?

This trumped the horrifically immoral war?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #26
42. Yes, I deny it.
Our party got 54% of the 'Catholic vote'. Checkmate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #42
61. Did we?
Bush’s strong performance among Catholics, it turns out, was crucial to his victory. Bush won Catholics 52%-47% this time, while Al Gore carried them 50%-46% in 2000. If Kerry had done as well as Gore, he would have had about a million more votes nationwide. According to Gallup Polls, only one Democrat since 1952 (Walter Mondale in 1984) lost the Catholic vote by this large a margin.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/155/story_15598_1.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #61
66. ' scuse me.
Ok, we got 47%. So, we should write them off, too? Is that your point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #66
68. Touchy
No, that wasn't my point. We got 47% was my point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #68
74. Yes, we did.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:59 AM by Padraig18
How do we hold onto them, and increase the number? Clue #1: ridiculing their beliefs isn't the correct answer to the question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #74
82. Thanks for the clue
If you search my 3 years of posts, you won't find a single one ridiculing or denigrating believers or their faith.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #82
84. No, you just painted the entire Church on the basis of a FEW pastors.
And just to reiterate, what those few asshats said is NOT the postion of the Roman Catholic Church.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #84
87. I did?
Padraig18, I don't think you've noticed that you're talking to someone else :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #87
93. You're right.
I was following what was said, and not who said it. Where's that blushing emoticon, when you need it? *blush*

Mea culpa.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
171. really?
who gives a shit what the pope says.

you ask this as if his opinion is legitimate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #171
179. Only a billion people.
His opinion is as legitimate as yours...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #179
181. or yours
that what scares me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #181
193. Oh yes, be very afraid of me.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #193
200. i am afraid
and very unsettled.

please don't hurt me with the internet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wat_Tyler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
6. 'our utter lack of civility, common decency and respect?'
So, you don't want us to stereotype or broad-brush Catholics, but you'll happily do it to us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Look at this thread and tell me I'm wrong. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wat_Tyler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. You are, because I don't do that to Catholics.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:13 AM by Wat_Tyler
Many of us don't. Let's not stereotype anyone. Democrats, Catholics, anyone.

Anyway, I'll step out of this thread to avoid the massive flamewar just around the corner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. I carefully qualify my statement
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:15 AM by Padraig18
Please read it again. I say explicitly that this is SOME Democrats; our party's only fault lies in tolerating such vicious attacks without speaking out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wat_Tyler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. OK. That's a different matter then.
Thanks for clarifying that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. No problem.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
85. Ok. You're Wrong
You asked for someone to tell you that. There can be no compromising on this issue. We cannot let false morals and ethics, draped in religiosity move us any closer to an invasive, theocratic system. It's not up for negotiation. It MUST be halted.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #85
114. Nowhere do I advocate that.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:32 PM by Padraig18
I don't see how you get that out of my post, frankly.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #114
128. It's A Matter Of Continuing To Withdraw The Line We Draw
We draw the line, they cross it. They feel empowered. They step over the new line. They feel empowered, and so on.

Ameliorating the lunatic fringe has empowered the less radical to take the same tack. Alienation is the currency of the battleground at this point.

We have "toleranced" ourselves right into this situation. The line is drawn in the sand and i will NOT abrogate my right to tell these people they will no longer cross it. If that's insulting or alienating to them, too bad. They've already gone too far. And now emboldened and empowered they've got reason to go back or compromise.

They must be MADE to go back. Your amelioration tactic is untenable.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #128
129. No, your lumping everyone into the same group is facile.
Your post shows a distinct lack of the ability to discren the difference between one group of people of faith and any other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #129
153. Then You Would Be Wrong
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 02:18 PM by ProfessorGAC
You are describing a distinction where there is no difference. The slippery slope is already beneath our feet.

You simply choose to ignore the problem.

Also, not once did i denigrate any person of faith. You on the other hand, resorted to insulting me. Think about it.

The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #153
155. No, it is you who are wrong.
I, on the contrary, see a great deal that you plainly do not. There are none so blind as those who are wilfully so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #155
160. Whatever You Say
Paddy, you are so much wiser than me. It's so obvious.

Mea Culpa. In you own blindness, do not fail to recognize the sarcasm.

You can forget the insult you directed toward me. Especially necessary since you just did it again. I'll forgive you. I'll consider the source. Rampant religiosity is such a becoming trait, after all.
The Professor

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #160
161. We're even.
I'll forgive you for deliberately distorting what I said in my initial post, and maybe the next time you post a rebuttal, it will actually rebut what I said, and not what you would have preferred that it say, so that your post would have made sense, in context.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #161
162. My Post Made Sense
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 02:43 PM by ProfessorGAC
You just choose to ignore the point i made, as you are busy establishing your superior credentials in matters of faith and understanding.

You would have us bow down before the "morals" crowd. I read it in its entirety. I disagree most vehemently that i, as a person, must change my point of view and that i must avoid calling negative shots as i see them.

You suggest i should not alienate these folks. I suggest that i should, can, and will alienate them intentionally. They are the problem, not the solution. I will not participate in ameliorating the problem. Only in eradicating it.

There is no bridging the gap in our POV's. You want to mollify. I want to expose them for the horrible, horrible, people they are. When the religious activists begin denigrating their own for the incredibly un-Chirst-like actions of those people of "faith", i will support them. Until then, i believe, and will continue to believe, that they need to be crushed. Playing nice has gotten us to this point. Your suggestion is simply more of the same.

They don't like it when i accuse them of being fake. Too bad! They are fakes. The ones who are really people of faith, and really understand the message embedded in their faith, are not the problem. But, coddling of the activists, which is the implication of your original post, is untenable.

Usually, we agree on things. Not this time.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #162
163. You're right--we usually agree.
This time we don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigMcLargehuge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
11. perhaps if most "people of faith" concentrated their political
efforts towards alleviating the mess our country, electing democratic legislator, and working to help the Democrats become a true opposition party rather than complaining about not being elevated above other Democrats because of their faith, using the Democratic Party as a ersatz tent revival, and feigning offense at any negative mention of their chosen spiritual belief system, THEN we might have landslided on Nov 2nd.

But as it stands now, lament, white knuckle, and complain that you didn't get the respect you feel you deserved BECAUSE of your faith, many of us are exceptionally sick and tired of having spirituality thrust upon us because it's a defining characteristic for you. Many of us, like me, don't care.

The Democratic Party is non-denominational. I don't vote in your churches, please don't pray in my party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. How did you get that out of what I wrote?
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:16 AM by Padraig18
Nice 'spin', but sorry to inform you, that's not what I said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigMcLargehuge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. I was reacting to this specifically
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:18 AM by BigMcLargehuge
emphasis mine -

"Speaking as a person of faith--- a Roman Catholic, specifically--- I would venture to state that not only has our party failed to deal with matters of faith and their importance to voters, but it has, in fact, forgotten how to even hold a civil dialogue with these same voters.

Dismissiveness, or even outright gratuitous insults aimed toward people of faith has become the norm in some quarters of our party, and it is to our party's detriment that this is tolerated.

How often have I witnessed in these very forums absolutely vicious, ad hominem attacks upon practicing Catholics and the institution of the Roman Catholic Church itself, the sole purpose of which seems to be the 'bear-baiting' and mean-spirited derision of those who love the Church? 'Quite often' is the answer."

I stand by my comments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. As I stand by mine.
We can agree to disagree, can we not? THAT is the overall point of the post, after all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigMcLargehuge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. I'd rather agree to work towards a common goal
and leave theology out of it. We don't have to agree on all things, no group ever does except maybe ants... but I don't know for sure, I don't speak ant.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #18
27. I have no respect for organizations of intollerant persons who wish me
dead.

Now go ahead and call me a "bigot" for condemning others who wish me harm.

Go ahead.

If you shove your religion and views down our throats, which is EXACTLY what you and your cohorts are doing, then don't be shocked if we push back with equal force!

We will NOT go silently into the boxcars this time around!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #27
39. What in the hell are you talking about?
I'm gay, ffs! Do you think that every RC is a robot, or automaton? Do you not realize that there are deep divisions within the Church itself? You are just as bad as those you condemn, when you paint with such a broad and misinformed brush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #27
50. oh come on... you have got to be kidding
is there some Kill the Jews/non christians movement in the RCC that I have not heard about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #50
89. Read. Educate yourselves.
Ever actually LISTEN to the crap that Jerry Fallwell, Pat Robertson, Dobbs, and those idiots from "God hates fags" spew?

And those are just a few examples.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #89
96. They're vocal twits.
We should not all be tarred with that brush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #89
99. so you are throwing all people of faith into one category?
I am not the one who needs an education.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #89
176. Yeah, those are just a few examples -- just like Zell Miller is an
example of the Democratic party...

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #27
175. I wish you dead? Damn, that's news to me....
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ArkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. Well, actually many of us do vote in 'their' churches. For
instance my last two polling places were:

1) Seventh Day Adventist Church

2) Church of Christ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #16
52. I vote at a Methodist church
though I do not attend it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
21. Any truly succesful government has manage to separate church and politics
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:22 AM by HEyHEY
That's the way it should be. The two have no business together. The sooner the USA learns this the better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. But no government has ever successfully separated ...
... voters from their personal belief systems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #25
34. Personal beliefs are personal though
They have nothing to do with organized religion, where in many cases, the church makes up the mind for the person by telling them what is right and wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #34
43. An example, please.
What Church has 'mad up the mind' of its faithful. Dates and times, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #43
258. How about the 2004 election?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RapidCreek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #25
127. No one is suggesting that a government should...or has
Tell me though, do you have and live by a truly personal belief system....one singularly and distinctly your own...or do you subscribe to and live by the belief system the Roman Catholic Church says you and all those who are confirmed Roman Catholics, must?


RC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #127
131. I live by my own.
I'm not an automaton, and neither are 99% of RC's. We accept certain basic tenets of faith, and some/most teachings of the Church, but virtually no one I know accepts 100% of the Church's teachings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:22 AM
Original message
I saw that attitude in the anti-intervention movement in the 1980s
Some of the secular activists, especially the Marxists, wouldn't work with the Catholics on issues involving Central America.

Yet priests and nuns and even an archbishop were getting slaughtered for their opposition to the brutal right-wing governments of El Salvador and Guatemala, and a Catholic priest was serving in the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. American Catholic religious were working in refugee camps for Salvadorans and Guatemalans in Mexico. This is not even counting the schools, medical clinics, orphanages, and food programs that were sometimes the only social service programs in many areas.

No institution had more workers "in the trenches" for peace and justice in that region, and it used to make me crazy to hear Marxists who had never lifted their butts out of the library going on and on about how it wasn't "politically correct" (in the original sense of the term) to work with the Catholics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
122. yes and that is why the current rightward
"abortion only" swing of the church is so disturbing to me as a person who was raised Catholic in the 60s. My uncle was a "radical" priest in Korea who protested govt policies there for years, and his values were much broader and more populist than the argument * was using to convince Catholics.

I do agree that there needs to be dialogue though, if only to help all Catholics see the big picture. How could anyone justify voting for * only on the abortion question, when his human rights policies suck so badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bacchant Donating Member (747 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
22. Where is the other half of the equation?
In these times many people of faith are not content to simply have a personal relationship with God. They are organizing in an attempt to change our laws, in order to transform our culture. They show little or no tolerance or respect for the beliefs, or non-beliefs, of others in our supposedly pluralistic society. Many blame liberalism for all the worlds woes and actively condemn and disparage anyone not of their ilk.

The Golden Rule applies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #22
30. "The Golden Rule applies."
Indeed itr does, but it also requires recognition that there are two sides to every argument. A simple 'my way, or the highway' attitude will be unproductive for BOTH sides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bacchant Donating Member (747 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. I never had issues with people of faith until they had issues with me. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unstuck In Time Donating Member (411 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #33
252. That pretty much sums it up for me, too. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
23. Is what you perceive to be religion-bashing on the left
enough to make you move to the right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #23
32. It isn't, for ME, but I'm not everyone. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #32
47. My suspicion is that anyone offended by "left-wing religion bashing"
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:41 AM by BurtWorm
isn't on the side of the left to begin with.

Somehow, the Republicans are able to keep their vicious Dominionists and spineless "moderates" in line, even though the "moderates" are constantly complaining about how little they trust the Dominionists--and for very good reason. I think the "moderates" are wrong to empower the Domionists, but I envy the Republicans' ability to maintain the loyalty of this persistently peed-on group for the fact that it has made them the majority party. The Democrats should have so much cooperation among their warring sub-factions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #47
49. My suspicion is that you're dead wrong.
"My suspicion is that anyone offended by "left-wing religion bashing isn't on the side of the left to begin with."

Care to elaborate on that, and demonstrate why it's not a personal attack?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #49
56. Sorry, Padraig, I phrased that all wrong. I meant offended enough to leave
I know you're offended by the bashing, but I certainly did not mean to imply that you are not on the left. Your original point, if I'm not mistaken, is that alleged religion-bashing on the left drives the religious away. My response is if they're driven away, they were never really lefties to begin with. That is clearly not the case with you. I apologize for my verbal clumsiness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #56
65. It's OK.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:54 AM by Padraig18
My whole point is that we will NEVER get these people into our party until we learn to have a civil dialogue with them, Burt. I know TONS of Catholics who would have voted straight-ticket 'D' Nov. 2, but for their vote for GWB. How is it that they could vote for Obama, e.g., who is just as liberal as JFK, but not for JFK. The answer is that he sat down and talked with these folks, and gave them a respectful audience, and sought to find common ground with them.

That's the point I'm trying to make here about people of faith, Burt.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #65
71. Are you sure they didn't fundamentally agree with Bush on some point
like, say, "the right to life," and that's why they didn't vote for Kerry? Can we really reach people who so agree with the right wing on this one issue that they'll vote against all others of their interests to satisfy it alone? I'm highly skeptical of that goal. I'd rather those people didn't vote at all because they're never going to vote for a worthy Democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #71
86. 47% of them DIDN'T support Bush, burt.
The church is the people, and we are not automatons. We do not march in lockstep, and many people voted for Bush on the basis of other issues besides or in addition to his stance on abortion. We're individuals, just like anyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #86
94. But we were just talking about those who voted for Bush.
I'm saying write those people off. They were going to vote for Bush anyway. The ones who did vote for Kerry obviously weren't so offended by this alleged bashing of religion among progressives that they would do the idiotic thing and support Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #94
98. I can't agree.
We've done a poor job of reaching out to catholics, while our opponents have made HUGE efforts to do so. A large percentage of those who voted for Bush aren't 'unreachable', Burt, except insofar as we've stopped trying to reach out to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #98
112. But how did they get so turned off that they wouldn't even vote
for a Catholic? I don't get that. Was it really something the Democrats did--or didn't do? Or was it something the Republicans have done?

When I was growing up, it was a truism that American Catholics disagreed with their church on virtually everything to do with sex and reproduction. Clearly as the number of practicing Catholics has fallen, the percentage of conservatives among them has increased. That's not just the case with the Catholic church either, I would guess. Probably all churches--and temples and mosques--are seeing their populations lean right as their attendance goes down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #112
116. It's a combination of those two, Burt.
On the one hand, our party quit talking to them, and on the other, the Republicans began actively seeking them out. It's unrealistic of us to expect that any group of voters would support us, if we take their support for granted. It's even more unrealistic to think they would do so when some of us are so openly hostile toward them and their church. That's why I used the family analogy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #116
121. And yet, it's the religious Protestant right arguing that Catholics
are damned to hell. Why don't Catholics have a problem with that? :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #121
124. Oh, we do.
Sadly, the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' also comes into play in politics, just like it does in warfare, Burt. Trust me, RCC's have HUGE problems with the Protestant Taliban theocracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #124
135. I know YOU do, Padraig. But what about the ones who are so
offended by certain Democrats' insensitivity to religious sensibilities that they'll vote for Bush? Why aren't they so offended by Protestant anti-Catholic sensitivities that they vote for Kerry? I think the answer is that it isn't something certain Democrats' do. It's what they believe the Republicans will do for them, even at the risk of empowering anti-Catholic bigots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #135
136. I'm sure that motivates some of them, and ignorance motivates others.
As a group, we're no more well-informed or less subject to having 'brain farts' than the populace as a whole.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #47
57. Actually Burt I am offended by it and the general ignorance of religion
displayed by those who do such bashing. I am very left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #57
59. See my response to Padraig's
I'm sorry for my poor phrasing. I meant "offended enough to be driven away by the alleged bashing."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #59
72. K
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #47
73. I find myself amazed at the lack of tolerance by some here...
... toward people of faith. And by the term "people of faith", I'm referring to the religious left as well as the dominionists and Southern Baptists and Pentacostals (who often deserve strident criticism).

It's at times like when the subject of religion comes up that I'm reminded that intolerance is just as prevalent among certain segments on the left as it is among certain segments on the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #73
77. Bingo! It's the 'fart rule'
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:28 PM by Padraig18
You know how that goes, don't you? My farts smell like roses, but yours stink. Our party is FILLED with people who operate under the fart rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #73
88. I think it's pretty clear that most lefties, religious or not, are under
attack from the religious right. This is what makes for the apparent lack of tolerance among those of us with no religion for our comrades on the left who are religious. It may be that many of us are intolerant of all religious people. I don't include myself among the intolerant--I don't understand religion anymore, but I believe there are people of "good faith" (so to speak) among the religious. But I do feel that the religious right are a threat to democracy, and I probably make careless mistakes, as I did in this thread, with my language to suggest I can't make the distinction between dangerous religionists and people of good faith. I do make the distinction, even if my language doesn't always reflect it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #88
95. Burt you are fine
I don't always understand religion either. But it pulls me and I keep trying. I know I feel more in common with you than I do the off-brand religiously intollerant anti-choice woman who entered my ACT office two days before the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #95
109. Thank you, Cheswick
Lefty people of faith are, in my experience, never obnoxious about it. They never wear their religion on their sleeve. They don't see the world in black and white. As a rule, lefty people of faith (in my experience) are invaluable contributors to human progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hephaistos Donating Member (137 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #73
145. I will respect their religion when THEY start respecting it
When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.

He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.

For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.'

Then the righteous will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?

When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?

When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?'

And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.'

Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.'

Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?'

He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.'

And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."


Matthew 25

Why should I respect the followers of a religion when what they seem to care about most is what everybody else does with their genitals, but allow their leaders to flaunt and ignore the central teachings of their own prophet?

Do you want me to respect Jesus for what he preached and lived?

Even as an atheist, I already do!

Do I respect Christians when they feed the poor and help the helpless?

I already do! Most here already do!

However, that is not the manifestation of 'Christian values' we are confronted with every day. There should and will be no respect for rank hypocrisy. It is pointless to demand that respect, for it cannot be forthcoming from an honest person.

Stop identifying with the hypocrites, and you will not feel attacked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #47
182. Hi.
:hi:

I suppose you will have to take my word for it, but I am most definitely on the left...far left. And I am a Christian. And I object to being grouped in with Jerry Falwell and the like.
I am so disappointed that the RW has divided us so deeply, that people really believe - on both sides - that you cannot be "for Jesus" and "for progressive values".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
24. I admit to having a LARGE problem with the politics of the RCC
As long as people are being told to vote on choice rather than all the other life and justice issues you say the church stands for... I will continue to have a large problem with the RCC.
It is fine with me if someone believes life begins at conception. I believe that too. But my liver is also alive and if it threatens my life or well being I reserve the right to have it removed. Unfortunately there is a large and growing anti-choice movement in the Catholic church and it has a large influence on the way people vote.

There is also a rightwing anti choice movement in other wings of the Presbyterian church I belong too. I do not defend them. I do not say it is okay for them to vote their conscience on the issue of choice because their conscience is wrong and brainwashed which I think is also the case with many Catholics.

I do not attack people bases on religious beliefs. What do I care if someone believes in the rapture or that the cow wandering down the street might be Grandpa? I would never attack the Catholic belief of Transubstantiation or their showing of Christ on the cross rather than the empty cross of the resurection. I can not say any of these things is wrong and since it does not affect me, I leave it alone. But I will attack the church, any church on being anti choice and homosexuality and the role of women in the church because these are political issues to me which have a bearing on my life and the lives of other women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #24
35. Why attack, rather than attempt to reason, or persuade?
That's part of the problem. We have forgotten how to have a civil discourse on these matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #35
69. because people who think that way can not be reasoned with
and women can't wait for them to come around. There are certain things which must be fought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RBHam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
28. And just HOW do these fanatics "engage" in discourse...
They speak in tongues. They believe the world is coming to an end and can't wait for it. In fact, they are doing their best to hurry it along.

They are insane.

They should be in institutions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #28
36. Your opinion. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #28
75. Exhibit 1
thanks for playing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
31. I'll say what I always said.
I didn't hear anything about preserving the environment, opposing the death penalty, or unjust wars from the RCC this cycle. They supported Bush. They voted for Bush. Kerry is Catholic and he supported the war.

Let them sincerely believe that life starts at conception, and abstinance is the only viable birth control, literature should be heavily censored, and books burned, etc. they are free to live that way.

When they stand on my toes they are wrong. They want to enforce those restrictions on me. They don't mind their own busines.

I will repectfully and civilly tell them to fuck off with their bullshit.

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #31
37. The Church opposed that war from day one!
If you didn't hear, it's because you weren't listening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #37
41. They said it in Rome.
They supported Bush here.

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. No.
A FEW very vocal asshat bishops supported Bush. The VAST majority of bishops told their diocese' to view the whole of a candidate's record and life in choosing. You are, quite simply, wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #44
53. Not very loud, were they?
IIRC, they were there for civil rights and Vietnam. I heard them then. What I mostly heard here was the anti-Kerry stuff.

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #53
58. If you didn't hear, it's because you didn't listen.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:50 AM by Padraig18
Unlike poltical campaigns, the Church teaches 24/7/365. They said and continue to speak out about it. Have you forgotten Bush's visit to the Vatican, and the Pope's criticism of the war, and many of his domestic- and foreign-policy stands? Apparently so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #58
64. Nope I didn't forget.
they just didn't turn up the volume about the war over here. What I heard here was the anti-Kerry stuff, which seemed to drown out whatever else they did. Catholics did vote for Bush, y'know.

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #64
70. A FEW 'turned up the volume'.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 11:58 AM by Padraig18
And 47% of Catholics voted for Kerry. Do we write them off, too, like we seem wont to do with anyone who isn't willing to march in perfect lockstep with every single issue we hold dear?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #70
92. Well my original statement...
allows for people to believe whatever they want.

But I get disturbed when they want to impose their beliefs on me. I treat everyone civilly. But I want them out of my bed room and libraries. They don't get that.

I even support their right to be perverts.

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #53
81. I heard that too IMM and I heard the other
I too was very frustrated that the anti Kerry forces were so much louder. But maybe they were the only ones reliably covered by the "liberal" media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #81
100. the RCC church here...
didn't exactly mobilize against the war.

Yup, the media sucks too.

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
38. Bush : "I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens"

"No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."
- G W Bush, Chicago, Illinois, on August 27, 1987
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ghwbush.htm

It's not like there aren't any religious fundamentalists in the US who don't agree with Bush on this.

How are we to have civil discourse with people who think atheists are not or should not be citizens of the US?

If there is a communication problem between them and us, it sure isn't only due to our attitude.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #38
40. That's a nutbag super-minority.
You won't find ANY mainstream denomination supporting such a stand, so why would anyone attempt to paint ALL people of faith with that brush?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #40
48. To be fair...
That anti atheist statement was made by the father, not W. I've even heard Bush make statements that could be moderate on that subject. I don't believe him though.

Interestingly, many state constitutions ban atheists from public office. These go against the US Constitution, and are not operative, but they remain, and no effort is being made to remove them.

I'll stand for the right to for anybody to believe in whatever they want. The church won't do that for me.

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #40
105. 51%.
51%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #105
118. 2%, at best. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #118
123. 51% endorsed the lunacy by voting for it.
Regardless of how they may live, they voted for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #123
126. By that thinking, 48% didn't.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:49 PM by Padraig18
Get that old broad brush out and paint everyone with it, yeah! Piss on critical thinking, demogarphics and the like--- just demonize 'em all!

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hephaistos Donating Member (137 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #126
159. So stating that 51% voted for the evil agenda
is demonizing all Christians? Where does this even start to make sense?

:wtf:

'Christian' leaders deny we should be recognized as citizens. Oh well, no problem with you, apparently, it was only a small minority. Imagine the shitstorm if a low-level Dem official had said the inverse about Christians. There'd be WaPo editorials up the WaZoo, and Tweety wouldn't talk about anything else for weeks. Indignation and condemnation everywhere. So no, Christians are not victims in our society.

Rejoice that the people who (apparently) agree with you that it's their primary business to pass laws determining what I do in *my* bedroom with *my* body are now in a position to pursue your shared objective, and that this is a more pressing issue than pollution, hunger, torture, poverty, and senseless war.

Get them to pass those laws that are so important to you. Just don't ask me to like or respect these priorities.

Those dismembered kids 'all blowed up' to a heavy metal soundtrack don't bother so much if we can concentrate on the real problem: People of Faith feel their private beliefs disrespected on DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #38
83. Most religious people don't think that way
it is not fair to hold all people responsible for the ignorance of a few.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
51. Religion should NEVER have found its way into politics...
...and your thinking on the subject does nothing to support the separation of church and state.

Despite what the NeoCons want us to believe, the Founding Fathers had seen first-hand what the influence of religion could do to political discourse, and they wisely chose to create boundaries between the two.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. Religion has NEVER been 'separate from politics'.
It is, at best, naive to assume that voters shed their personal-belief system when they step into the voting booth to mark their ballot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
60. Still trying to hold back the ocean's tides, Padraig?
;-)

I've pretty much given up on this issue on DU. While most DUers understand the fact that there are a lot of people of various faiths on the left, there will always be the loud and vocal contingent that seeks to belittle and denounce religion/spirituality at every opportunity.

They could best be described as "Bizarro Fundies". There's no talking to them on this, no discussion, it's a simple matter of their belief system being "right" and anyone else doesn't conform with their system having theirs tarred as "wrong".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #60
79. Still trying.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #79
143. Keep it up
Your doing a great job IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #143
169. Thanks!
If nothing else, maybe next time some folks will actually think before they lump all people of faith together, and then dismiss them.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElectroPrincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #60
80. The Journalists just "don't get it" in addition to many of
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:05 PM by ElectroPrincess
our fellow DU'ers. I heard one journalist quip on CSPAN that the liberal Christians are weak and have no power. That's untrue. Our beliefs are powerful and we do our best to live our lives as Jesus would have us behave.

Don't you see, by it's very nature, liberal Christians do NOT force other people to them but humbly invite those who are ready. We don't organize in "tight" authoritarian units because that is contrary to our interpretation of how we should live a Christian life.

I do not support abortion but, the truly moral stance is to work with young girls and women to help them make choices that benefit themselves and humanity. Also it's important to raise our sons to respect women and not view them as "objects" for conquest.

However, it's IMHO not moral to force others to live as you choose to do so. It's only Christian if you can help others in a non-intimidating way to WANT to do what is moral.

Hope I'm getting my point across. There are many of us liberal Christians but we are not the obnoxious and outspoken ones, nor do we ever care to act in such a way.

A dilemma - yes - but please know that a liberal side of Christianity is alive and well ... please refrain from blaming all of America's Christians for *.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #80
91. Exactly.
On the issue of abortion, we need to separate the 'pro-life' from the 'pro-birth' folks. My church, e.g., is pro-life: we seek to create and fund alternatives to abortion, to educate and provide alternatives. Sadly, far too many pro-choice folks fail to see that there is any difference.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #80
140. That's because to them, humility = weakness
Conservative Christians are louder and seen as more "powerful" because their religion breaks things down into easy, either-or choices in which the "truth" is never in doubt. It starts right from their stance on being "born again" -- either you're saved, and going to heaven, or you're not, and going to hell. There is no focus on deeds, on how you actually live. Rather, it's an identification that is made by who is excluded.

Liberal Christians (and liberals of other faith as well) seem to believe that religious faith doesn't answer nearly as many questions as those it propels you to ASK. It doesn't call upon you to be loud, obnoxious, and absolutist -- but rather to be humble, compassionate and understanding.

In our society, traits such as compassion, understanding and humility are perceived as being "feminine", and therefore, weak. Traits such as decisiveness and absolutism are seen as "masculine", and therefore, strong.

Being a Unitarian who still maintains liberal Christianity as the basis of my faith, I live much more by the former values. Some in society may see that as somehow "weak". From what I was taught of the Christian faith, however, such traits are the foundation of a much greater strength. As much as I might want to become loud and obnoxious to shout down the Dominionists, it simply goes against my deepest convictions to act in the same way that they do. I will work to reveal their hypocrisy and denounce their false morality, but not with the same tools that they employ, simply because I would then become what I abhor most in the act of fighting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
63. Yes, mustn't alienate the poor, put-upon majority.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:12 PM by UdoKier
They have their churches on every corner, the funnel untold wasted billions into their coffers while people starve, but we should pussyfoot around them, and suck it us when they knock down every barrier between church and state, try to foist their religious mumbo-jumbo on MY kids at school by putting stickers on books denouncing SCIENCE.

My gay friends ask for nothing more than equality and they are SMACKED DOWN, and my Jewish, Catholic, Atheist and Buddhist friends are told to assimilate or they will BURN in the lake of fire.

Where is the common ground, when it is these people who have declared war on anyone who won't submit and observe their religious icons?

This is NOT a judeo-christian country. It is a FREE country. At least it's supposed to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #63
97. exhibit #2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tsiyu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #63
106. Thank you, UdoKier
is that the sound of a nail hit on head?

Panicky Dems everywhere are trying to appeal to the "religious" because they can't think of anything else to change.

I believe everyone should have their own belief system, independent of State AND Church. I believe the church has a place promoting and encouraging mercy, compassion, justice and conservation. But mercy, compassion, justice and conservation are not values or moral paths most churches choose to focus on.

Most churches issuing moral condemnations and prounouncements generally concentrate on what is happening to non-white, non-hetero- male genitalia.

What are the gays doing with their genitalia? What are women doing with their genitalia? What's happening in the uturus? Is she having her period or did she abort? Do they love each other "that way" even though they are the same sex? BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD!!!!!!!You're going to HELLLLLLLLLLLL..............................!!!!!!!!!!


Meanwhile, every day I drive past fifty empty churches. Fifty solid, some gigunda, heated, clean, dry places to be. 99% of the time they are ROCK SOLID EMPTY!

On Sunday morning, they ignore Jesus' words about helping the poor ( like the homeless Vets down the road who sleep outside on the coldest winter nights) so they can get to the juicy stuff about non male, non white genitalia!

What have they done for this nation lately, the churches? I condemn those who involve themselves in politics rather than the issues God charged them to attend to. I condemn those religious.

From what I have seen of their greed and gluttony, their vitriole and enmity, their judgemental tongues and their Jesus of Warmongering, I really could care less if I offend them or not. I condemn them the same way Jesus Christ himself would condemn them for building shrines to God that are mere shells of excess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
76. I mean this respectfully, but why should religious people
support politicos and parties that work against their best interests just because some atheist dissed them. As a Hispanic woman I have met with more bigoted remarks in a lifetime than you can imagine and many of them are from my own camp, but that doesn't influence who I vote for.

And speaking of Catholics, I recently went to a funeral at a Catholic Church. The parochial school children had erected a graveyard in a flower bed, with little crosses. The graveyard was dedicated to all the children killed by being aborted. I had to use every bit of self-control to not stomp every single one of them into the dirt. A found this very offensive as a women, yet this would not influence whether or not I would vote for a Catholic if he were the right candidate.

As a Hispanic, since I don't have a Spanish surname, nor speak English with an accent I can't number the times someone has confided in me what they thought of "those people", yet I will not vote for a Hispanic who isn't right for the job.

Sometimes bigoted and tactless remarks go with the territory. You really have to look at the big picture.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
78. The problem is that they discuss from a perspective of evangelism.
I have never had an openminded discussion with a church person.

I think this is because they feel that it is their duty to evangelize the world, which is to say that everyone else is wrong and only they are right.

This attitude seems to carry over into every opinion they hold. Most church heads cannot even tell the difference between "Gods will" and thier own instinctual desires.

Normally, I only observe "greed with a halo" as the primary motive for their viewpoints.

I do not make concessions with the insane
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #78
90. You are putting all religious people into one group
you can't possibly think that is correct. 98 percent of the discussion I have in this world have nothing to do with religion unless someone else brings up the topic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #90
256. I narrowed the group to Evangelicals.
They believe it is their duty to persuade others to adhere to their beliefs weather it is to chant a magic prayer that saves the soul, or to believe in the latest propaganda, fresh from Limbaugh or Jesus radio, in spite of evidence to the contrary.

An army of religious zealots has been trained and is active for the republican party. If you have not encountered dozens upon dozens of these folks during the campaign, then it is likely that you did not work a phone bank or go door to door.

Did you talk to any conservative religious types about the swift boat vet ads?

Do tell me how well that conversation went.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
102. I do agree on the importance of civility and communication (but)
I have tried to calmly and respectfully communicate many times with 'fundamentalists'. I continue to do so if the occasion arises. I was brought up in a family that taught me good Christian values: compassion, tolerance, forgiveness, awareness of the needy etc.
Because of this I will engage in conversation with 'fundies' at times.
But I have to say, because I have had so many experiences of these folks having no desire or will to really communicate at all, I'm quite frankly fed up with the whole business.

I think you might get a deeper grasp on this situation if you study how the Native Americans were treated by "Christian" missionaries.
There is a very poignant (I wish I had a link) story I once read.
The story was recounted by a white who witnessed it.

A missionary sat down with a group of Indians and recounted the story of Jesus. Loving stories, these natives sat in rapt attention.
When the missionary was done, one of the Indians said something to the effect of, "That is a wonderful story! Thank you! Now we will tell you about what we were taught about the Great Spirit"

They told him some of their story but were interrupted. The missionary then told them their story was superstition and 'of the devil' and that only Christianity could safe their heathen souls.

-I'm sure this same exact scenario played out countless times.

-my point is that we are often dealing with the same mindset today.
Many of these "Christians" do not want to work together with people they want to convert them or condemn them.

suggested reading: "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee" by Dee Brown

peace, G_j
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unstuck In Time Donating Member (411 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
103. Perhaps what we need, as a starting point, is an agreed-upon vocabulary
I admit, I have a lot of anger toward people who use religion as a weapon, or an instrument of control. My own verbal/written shorthand for them is "religionists," though I'm not sure how snazzy that would sound to a focus group.

"Fundamentalists" seems pretty descriptive to me, but maybe something with real punch is in order, such as "American Taliban."

As for the other side of the divide, people of faith, although I don't share their belief in the supernatural, I find it useful to describe them as "religious people of good will."

We do need to make distinctions, but we also have to acknowledge that we are under attack, by people who would use religion to destroy us. There can be no accommodation for hate, and we should feel free to respond in the strongest possible terms -- so long as our terms are clear.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #103
110. VERY good idea.
We do need to separate the sheeps and goats, as it were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
104. Sugar coating a bitter pill. The church's "morals" are immoral.
The Roman Catholic Church's defense of "morality" regarding sex condemns women to virtual slavery. The focus in most of these debates are on American women, but what about those in 3rd world countries who are condemned to lives of lives of poverty and servitude because of the Church's medieval refusal to allow birth-control and abortion? Not to mention it's Taliban-like view of women in general?

Or, it's hypocritical stance on homosexuality that gives a wink and nod to the priests, bishops, and nuns who molest children, while condemning homosexuals?

The Roman Catholic Church is a rich and powerful institution rife with corruption that continues to milk the parishioners for money while paying lip-service to the poor and powerless. It wields political influence mostly in 3rd world countries and the United States.

Dissent from within is quashed by the edicts of the vatican.

I was born a Catholic but left the church early. My wife went through the whole system and was attached to the church until very recently. At 65, she finally cut all ties to it because of it's utter hypocrisy and dogmatic, rather than, real Christianity.

It, like all other rich and powerful institutions, wielding life and death power over the poor and powerless deserves to be attacked.

"Civil Discourse"? When it starts participating in civil discourse, rather than issuing edicts, and persecuting dissent, than it will get some.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
107. A number of people
who are either less well-informed or merely the lack intellectual capacity for insight view "religion" as being in opposition to "science," and are reactive to the religious right.

Religion is not in opposition to science. The two are strongest when they overlap.

The nazi's were monsters not because of their religious beliefs. They were evil because of their politics and their science. Yet even the most dull-witted would be able to see that the nazi scientific abuses should not be considered grounds for banning science from DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #107
111. Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
108. I have no problem with any religion...
...until they jump in bed with my government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
113. Well Padraig, while I won't and don't go out of my way to denigrate them
It seems that many many people of faith go out of their way to denigrate me. Being pagan, I've been reviled, rebuked, and spat upon, both literally and figuretivly by fine upstanding church-goers, both Protestant and Catholic. I find that, living in the Bible Belt, that if I dare to be as open as any Christian around here about my faith, I could very well taking my life in my hands. I've had fine RC members of my family mentioning that it would be a good thing to bring back the stake for pagans. And yet I'm supposed to take it? Sorry, I don't buy that friend.

Nor do I buy the notion that we should pussyfoot around the concept of religion in politics. Our founding fathers wisely included the concept of seperation of church and state in the highest documents in the land for a good reason. Once you merge the two, you are left with an oppressive theocracy that will kill people for no good reason. And yet there are many people today, supposedly good Christians, who are working on doing just that, in order to bring about their end times scenario. And relgions like the RCC are helping them merrily along. Sorry friend, I'm not going to stand idly by while our country is turned into a theocratic, fascist state. And quite frankly, I've personally gotten to the point where I'm not going to care whether I'm stepping on some relifions' toes or not, they've been stepping on mine and more for a portion of my life. Somehow I cannot bring myself to feel sorry for a group of people who are in the majority in this country.

I don't insult religions or religious beliefs gratuitously, I'm too polite for that. But that will not stop me from attacking the excesses of religion in our government at every turn, for that is the gravest threat we are facing today. I agree that there are some over the top people here and elsewhere, but I understand where their over zealousness comes from, the frustration that they're feeling. We who are not Christians have been persecuted for ages, and though for a short while it seemed that America was actually turning into a place of religious tolerance, that is no more as our country is pulled ever further right by the Christian Conservatives.

Tell you what, I'll make you a deal. I will condemn the excesses of those who are anti-religious if you will stop the conservative christians from making this into a theocratic state. Until then, my feeling is that we need every ablebodied person fighting this impending madness, lest our country slips into theocratic fascism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #113
120. I'll take you up on your deal.
I am trying to stop them--- that's why I am so deeply, passionately and personally committed to the Democratic Party. There are many ways to stop the theocracy, and one way is by taking away votes from them, but we cannot do this if we refuse to even have a civil dialogue with people of faith. Many people in my parish supported GWB, but then voted straight "D" from US Senate on down. That tells me that these folks should not be written off, because they are still 'reachable'.

That's basically the point of my post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #120
130. Cool, then I will work with you and your friends of faith
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 12:54 PM by MadHound
For like I said, we need every ablebodied person fighting this madness that we can.

Oh, just because you might find this amusing, I'm also RC, and Southern Baptist. Baptized in both faiths. Guess that could make me either a Southern Catholic, or a Roman Baptist. Explains why I left organized religion when I was twelve. And yes, I had a strange family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #130
133. *grin*
I can see how that might have been confusing! Let us battle on to victory, my brother!

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #113
204. I hear you!
Not to hijack this thread, but my pagan friend, please get a donation "Star" and come to the NEWLY created (as of today 11-16-04) Pagan spirituality room! WE are waiting for you!

Brightest Blessings!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Wolf_Moderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
132. I agree completely.
With this intolerance of people of faith (I am one of those people BTW, evangelical Christian) is only represented by a small radical wing of the Party, this happens infinitely more than it should. We must be careful not to marginalize those of genuine faith, who have genuine moral concerns. Not only will we lose elctions, but they'll never respect us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #132
134. Thank you!
We must force ourselves to make the critical distinction between people of faith whose 'motives' are 'pure', and those whose motives are far more sinister. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crispini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
137. Good post, but
I'm a little unclear on your point. Who is this "we" that has a problem with reaching out to people of faith? Is it DU? Individual posters at DU? The mainstream Democratic party? You write, "Dismissiveness, or even outright gratuitous insults aimed toward people of faith has become the norm in some quarters of our party." -- which quarters, specifically... I'm just curious?

'Cause, I'm-a just saying, there will ALWAYS be tons of intolerant nutjobs (of all flavors) on the internets. Trying to get DU or any other message board to play and share nicely together on this (or any other subject) ain't gonna happen.

Now, I completely agree with the substance of your posts, and if I might humbly make a suggestion, you could take this idea a couple of ways -- 1) find specific instances of the behavior you're against, and take it up with the specific person who did it, and 2) ...

damn, I forgot what 2) was. Nevermind. Anyway, you get my point. And keep working to get your ideas out there, I think that's the main thing. Have you read Lakoff? He's great, he'll give you lots of good ideas for how to frame things.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #137
141. Thank you!
When I wrote "Dismissiveness, or even outright gratuitous insults aimed toward people of faith has become the norm in some quarters of our party." , I was referring specifically to that not insignificant segment of our party which is not merely content with a legal separation of Church and State, but which is openly hostile to religion and people of faith in general; our party's problem is not with these folks per se, but that it fails to condemn THEIR intolerance in like measure that it condemns the fundamentalist-RW's nutcases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chispa Donating Member (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
138. Uncivil discourse....
I'm new to DU, old to the democratic party, and just retired after almost 40 years in the roofing business. Would also fall under the 'evangelical' description. As a Democrat, I'm a (very) rare bird in my church and have had many, many discussions with republicans at church about my concerns about the manhandling our country has suffered over the last 4 years (& upcoming 4) by the Bush administration. And on the positive side, why I am a member of the party that 1) serves ALL members of society (rather than benefiting the select few); 2) actively seeks to protect our environment; and 3) seeks to effectively defend our country while not imposing our unilateral will on the rest of the world. Our party's platform, indeed, is by FAR the clearest application of christian ethics in society. I've pointed out repeatedly, too, that there is a very dangerous drift in the church that equates christianity with 'republicanism'. In most cases i get a blank, vacant stare when i bring this up, but occasionally am able to engage others in a productive way.

Anyway, as somebody with pretty broad exposure in church areas, I'm not at all offended by anyone speaking their mind on literally anything that matters to them. Believe me, I've heard FAR more open criticism of my own political stance by churchgoers than anything which could be interpreted as 'offending' from my fellow Democrats. It's as simple as that. "Discourse" is critically important in an open society and I would say there is no 'correction' or change in course needed on any level. Moreover, it is simply not my place to be telling ANYONE what they should or should not be saying.

Finally, my thanks to DU for the great welcome I've received in my (almost) 1 week here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #138
142. Welcome to DU!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hephaistos Donating Member (137 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #138
239. Welcome
Good to have you here, and thanks for adding your perspective! I am glad we have somebody like you on the 'inside', keeping the dialog alive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RBHam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
144. They have declared WAR on us.
Brad Carson, who lost his Senate campaign in Oklahoma, writes a very interesting and reflective piece for The New Republic:

"As a defeated Senate candidate in the most red of red states, many people have asked me for insights into the Democratic Party's failure to connect with culturally conservative voters. Much has already been written on this topic, and scholars will add more. But I do know this: The culture war is real, and it is a conflict not merely about some particular policy or legislative item, but about modernity itself. Banning gay marriage or abortion would not be sufficient to heal the cultural gulf that exists in this nation. The culture war is about matters more fundamental still..."





PAT ROBERTSON: Well after Tuesday's attacks, many Americans are struggling with grief, fear and unanswered questions. How should Christians respond to this crisis? Well joining us now with some answers is a dear friend of ours, the Pastor of the Thomas Road Baptist Church and Liberty University, the head and founder of that, Dr. Jerry Falwell. Jerry, it's a delight to have you with us today.
JERRY FALWELL: Thanks, Pat.

PAT ROBERTSON: Listen. What are you telling the church? You called your church together. What was your response at Thomas Road to this tragedy?

JERRY FALWELL: Well, as the world knows, the tragedy hit on Tuesday morning, and at 2:00 in the afternoon, we gathered 7,000 Liberty University students, faculty, local people together, and we used the verse that I heard you use a moment ago, Chronicles II, 7:14, that God wanted us to humble ourselves and seek his face. And there's not much we can do in the Church but what we're supposed to do, and that is pray. Pray for the President that God will give him wisdom, keep bad advisors from him, bring good ones to him, praying for the families of the victims, praying for America. And, you know this thing is not a great deal different than what I remember and you Pat. We're about the same age. December 7, 1941, when we entered the war against Japan, Germany, Italy. Hitler's goal was to destroy the Jews among other things, and conquer the world. And, these Islamic fundamentalists, these radical terrorists, these Middle Eastern monsters are committed to destroying the Jewish nation, driving her into the Mediterranean, conquering the world. And, we are the great Satan. We are the ultimate goal. I talked this morning with Tom Rose publisher of the Jerusalem Post, and orthodox Jew, and he said, "Now America knows in a horrible way what Israel's been facing for 53 years at the hand of Arafat and other terrorists and radicals and barbarians.

PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, I know that you shared several 40 day fasts for revival in America. We here at CBN had a couple of 40 day fasts during the Lenten season, and Bill Bright, I don't know, eight or nine. Do you think that this is going to be the trigger of revival, a real revival in the Church where we truly turn back to God with all our heart?

JERRY FALWELL: It could be. I've never sensed a togetherness, a burden, a broken heart as I do in the Church today, and just 48 hours, I gave away a booklet I wrote 10 years ago. I gave it away last night on the Biblical position on fasting and prayer because I do believe that that is what we've got to do now-- fast and pray. And I agree totally with you that the Lord has protected us so wonderfully these 225 years. And since 1812, this is the first time that we've been attacked on our soil, first time, and by far the worst results. And I fear, as Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense said yesterday, that this is only the beginning. And with biological warfare available to these monsters; the Husseins, the Bin Ladens, the Arafats, what we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact, if in fact God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.

PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven't even begun to see what they can do to the major population.

JERRY FALWELL: The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, yes.

JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen'.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government. And so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do. And, the top people, of course, is the court system.

JERRY FALWELL: Amen. Pat, did you notice yesterday? The ACLU, and all the Christ-haters, the People For the American Way, NOW, etc. were totally disregarded by the Democrats and the Republicans in both houses of Congress as they went out on the steps and called out on to God in prayer and sang 'God Bless America' and said 'let the ACLU be hanged'. In other words, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and spiritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time- calling upon God.

PAT ROBERTSON: Amen. I wanted to ask you the reaction. I know that you had a major prayer meeting last night, and I know your people assembled, just a large gathering at your church. What was the mood of the people? What did they say and what did you sense with your congregation?

JERRY FALWELL: A brokenness that I have not seen. I've been there pastor 45 years, 30 years Chancellor at Liberty. We had 7,000 gather yesterday in the Vines Center and filled the Church last night. I sensed a brokenness, tears. People were sobbing at the alter. And, they have no shame about it. It was the kind of brokenness that no one could conjure, only God could bring upon us. And, that is to me the most optimistic thing that I see today as I look across America. And every city, I called a friend in Springfield yesterday. He said at least a hundred churches, Springfield, MO, at least a hundred churches have special prayer meetings for America today and tonight. And, that's happening by the thousands all over America. This could be, if we will fast and pray, this could be God's call to revival.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I believe it. And I think the people, the Bible says render your hearts and not your garments, and people begin to render their hearts and they weep before the Lord, and they really get serious with God, God will hear and answer. We'll see revival. I am thrilled to hear that about your church because it's happening all over.

JERRY FALWELL: It's everywhere.

PAT ROBERTSON: Yes.

JERRY FALWELL: In the most unlikely of places. The general manager at the ABC affiliate in our area called me this morning and said "we're going to ask for all the churches, all the people of faith to join us at the D-Day Memorial over in Bedford at 2:00, Sunday. And, Randy Smith is his name, the general manager, and he is calling central Virginia to healing through prayer and I suspect there will be thousands there.

PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, this is so encouraging, and I thank God for your stand. We just love you and praise God for you. Liberty is a great institution and I congratulate you for that wonderful student body, and your church. And, thank-you my dear friend for being with us.

JERRY FALWELL: God bless you brother. Let's stand together.

PAT ROBERTSON: Amen


http://home.mweb.co.za/it/iti04330/insanity.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #144
146. "They"
Were you even conscious that you used 'they', which is all-inclusive, to describe every person of faith, rather than the followers of a
these couple of demented twits?

There lies the rub.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
147. Heres my take
on it. You cant "preach" tolerance and practice intolerance. Its a logical fallacy that drives people away from your original point. IMO this can be applied to both some religious people and some liberals as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #147
148. I agree.
Let me use myself as an example. I'm gay and happily partnered for 2+ years. My s/o and I are both active in our parish. I know there are many in my parish who believe my lifestyle is 'sinful', but I know of no one in my parish who would support making it illegal, or criminal. That's a useful distinction, IMO, and one we democrats can build on. There are others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neshanic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #147
189. So us "Liberals" are guilty of making the faithfull uncomfortable.
Seeing some of the more assinine last posts, truly is an experience in the visit to bizzaro world.

Get it throught your heads people. Born Again Fundamentalist Christians are not your friends. They are Christians who have an extreme fundamentalist and brutal view of the world.

Don't come here crying because the word "Christian" is in that mix. It is up to us as "Christians" to call them out and expose them for what they are; a sick and twisted perversion of the Bible and it's teachings and their program of culling/judging people like sheep on their terms that they have used for political gain. Taking the Bible and using it as an ideological club to beat anybody who dares question them and their Fascist/jingoistic fever is been pefected to an art form in 2004.

It is hard to see liberal Christians as ourselves cornered and babbling when the Born Again Fundamentalist sqauds come calling. It is in our belief to accept and try to reason. They have no such standard. Theirs is the only truth, the only way, and their leaders tell us that they alone speak to God.

Either put up or shut up for your "Christian" belief and it's perversion by the powerfull, because if you shut up, they win, and true Christianity will be lost for a long time to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #189
221. Well my religion
and politics taught tolerance. Perhaps yours didnt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samtob Donating Member (253 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
151. Another point....
those of the Christian faith (whatever denomination) are taught from the beginning that they are to expect persecution, and to face it head on. Belittling the "RW fundies" will do nothing more than super charge their resolve.

We will not convince anyone of them to listen if we continue to resort to name calling and condemnation.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #151
156. Point well made. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
154. I guess your talking to me, check out the bumpersticker I just ordered
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 02:18 PM by snooper2
:)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #154
158. LOL!
No, actually. I find it funny, as was intended. Some of us CAN laugh at ourselves.

*grin*

;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #154
177. No, that's just funny.
I am a man of faith.... but I love this bumper sticker:

He died in AD 33
GET OVER IT!!!

LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
157. We appear intolerant because religious people want to make
decisions that effect our lives based on faith. How it is that 9/11, a day when 19 relgious nut cases flew planes into buildings killing thousands, should make me more tolerant of religion?

If I tell someone who is religious I don't believe in god they act like I have personally insulted them.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. If you don't believe in gay marriage, tell your church not to sanction them. Don't go to war in the middle east because the end times are coming.

If there are people of faith who do not like the intolerance of the religious right, they should speak out against just like I am.

Faith is a purely private matter. It should stay that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #157
170. Let's say (theoretically) that my faith involves human sacrifice.
You'll remain quiet when I come for your spouse or child as my next sacrifice? It would be, after all, a private matter....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #170
197. That's a logical fallicy...
if you bring harm to another human being through your own religious beliefs, then it becomes the public, not a private matter. Your faith is private all the way up till the point you harm another human being, similar to all other rights, your right to throw a fist ends at my face, then it is a crime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #197
203. I'm gald you caught that...
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 05:55 PM by Padraig18
I was hoping you would. Whether you agree with them or not, some people of faith see an abortion as an attack--- a 'public act', if you will. See your logical fallacy now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
174. All I am asking for is the protection of my liberal brothers and sisters..
As a liberal and progressive minded person, I should find in this community solace and support when my faith is so distorted, abused, misused or perverted by others. In the same way this community can (sometimes) rally around specific members who are harassed or abused for their sexuality, or for standing of the the rights of their children not to be indoctrinated by right wing ideology at school, or supporting a person who lost his job because of his political convictions -- so too I desire this liberal community to be a place in which I feel safe, defended, and stood-up-for in the fact of so much nastiness and ugliness in organized religion in American politics.

I feel like a believer in exile, I want to take my faith back from those who have made it feel like a dirty word from me. And all I really want from this community is compassion and mercy on those of us who are heartbroken over the state of religion in America, who have been ostracized or attacked by other "religious" folk because of our convictions, etc. When you do not have the common decency to be specific in your language - to speak of religious fanatics when you mean fanatics and not "Christians" when you don't mean all Christians - you create an atmosphere in which I don't feel value and I don't feel moral support from the community. And that's really all I ask.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #174
188. All I ask
is that we're able to discuss harmful religious zealotry gone amok without being labeled Christian bashers. And I think your painting this community as hostile to Christians because of the remarks of a few is off the mark completely. There are a lot of things that people say here that piss me off, offend the things I believe in. Assholery abounds no matter where you go, on-line or off. If you're looking for a place where no one will ever say anything that offends you or your beliefs, then you'll be looking for a long time. It's okay to call people on them when they make these statements. I will never defend them. But, it's not okay to label us all because of the actions of a few. That is what you're doing. As if all atheists and agnostics are hostile toward anyone that doesn't agree with them. That seems to be the implication. You should know better that this isn't the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #188
192. Don't know exactly how you get that out of what I've said.
It is definitely not ok to label the entire community as Christian bashing because of the actions of some. I couldn't claim that it was and maintain any kind of credibility.

I actually like the fact that religion is critically discussed, because frankly I agree with about 90% of the observations and analysis made by my atheist and agnostic brothers and sisters.

You said "that is what you are doing" and accused me of labeling the entire community. Where in my post did I do this? I simply stated all I ask. And its very simple. That we treat each other like we are members of a community. I would want to protect you when the religious fanatics start coming after atheists. I'd want to protect you when they started spewing slander about all atheists. I'd want to stand by your side as a friend and ally and resist the forces of injustice that we will face.

I don't have too much interest in trying to argue over your worldview, I simply accept it. And I would want to build strong bonds across faiths and between those of faith and those of no faith - bonds that cannot be easily broken. One of the ways we do that is for everyone to keep working on saying what we mean and meaning what we say.

I shouldn't say, "atheists are fucking stupid assholes" when really, what I mean is that Joe, the atheist who acted like a moron the other day, is a fucking stupid asshole." Other people shouldn't say, "Christians are ignorant, fascist, murdering, hypocritical, weak minded bastards" when they really mean that Jerry Falwell is an ignorant, fascist, murdering, hypocritical, weak minded bastard."

That way we continue to make a deliberate and healthy distinction between the people we love and respect in this community (I love you man! :P) and the people we resist, oppose and reject in other parts of America.

Hope that's clear. And if I've not made that clear enough in the past, I'll do my best to rectify that in the future.

Sel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #192
199. Your wording
"- you create an atmosphere in which I don't feel value and I don't feel moral support from the community." It seems to imply that this community supports those comments and the attitude behind them. Throughout your post, your tone suggested to me that you find this community is not a safe place for Christians to be open about their beliefs. It is very easy to get the wrong impression on a message board, though, so if I misread you, I apologize

I understand that it hurts when people make comments about anyone's beliefs. I'm not defending them, and I'm not trying to make lite your feelings when that happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #199
214. That's not the full sentence.
The full sentence reads:

"When you do not have the common decency to be specific in your language - to speak of religious fanatics when you mean fanatics and not "Christians" when you don't mean all Christians - you create an atmosphere in which I don't feel value and I don't feel moral support from the community. And that's really all I ask."

My imperfect use of the word "you" could be interpreted to mean "you" the entire community or "you" the specific reader. I intend the latter.

My impression is that these are particularly difficult times to be a liberal Christian, and that in such times this could definitely be a place of comfort and strength - not in talking religious beliefs per se, but in uniting together behind our common values and aims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #214
251. Because the thread is about DU
I thought you meant "You" as in the entire community. I didn't intend for my partial quote to misrepresent what you were saying. I only meant it as an example, and if you say you meant the latter, I believe you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #251
254. I apologize for not being clear enough.
I will say that I definitely do have a little worry about the future. I feel like on the whole, it will be more difficult and alienating to be a liberal/progressive Christian in the next four years than at almost any other time in American history. I'm anticipating (though I hope for the best and certainly don't look forward to it) an increase in the amount of anger and negative emotion about religion expressed here. Let me be clear on this next point: that is perfectly understandable. I am angry too, and just want my faith back.

At the same time however, I feel like all of us at DU have a responsibility. The faithful here have a responsibility to be sensitive to the needs of the community, not develop a persecution complex, and give people some extra latitude when they need to vent about what we are going to see in the next four years. Likewise, the non-religious also need to be sensitive to the needs of the community, not develop a perscutorial attitude towards all how claim a persona faith, and give some extra sensitivity to making DU a place where liberal and progressive persons of faith feel safe and welcome. There should be nothing in that sentiment that any decent person finds problematic or offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neshanic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #188
198. Not our job here to protect "Good Christians" from "Bad Christians"
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 05:45 PM by Neshanic
It is our job here to protect all of us from "bad" Christians. The Fundamentalist Born agains. Ones that I as a Christian have no problem calling out, but others here want a dialogue and warm and fuzzy with.

If you go to your church and feel comfy, good for you. If you and your same sex partner can sing hymns with a congregation that has individuals that really hate you, that's your business.

Ths business here is keeping "Bad" fundamentalist born agains from taking over, and if you want to rice-paper/judo the fight with them go ahead. There are others who will call them out on their bullshit.

I have first handed seen the crap these people do in the name of their faith. A Christian faith so divorced from it's roots and sprouting from a born again/screw you if you are not stump, into a ugly tree that will poison our lives, the things we hold dear as Christians, the fabric of our society.

They no nothing of dialogue, acceptance, openess. They only know naked raw power from their expanding base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #198
218. It IS our job to protect each other.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 06:44 PM by Selwynn
(Note: the last time I regularly attended organized Church, I did so in a congregation with a gay minister, and a heathy gay and lesbian church community right along slight lil ol' straight people like me. So I guess, I could respond to you and say, if you want to make sweeping generalizations about which you have no clue, that's your business. I don't reguarly go to any organized church building now, as that has little if anything to do with actual faith.)


I am just like you. And you are just like me when it comes to our core reasons for being in community together here at Democratic Underground.

When you are threatened or your dignity of personhood is assulted by those outside, I want to defend you, and I want you to KNOW that we in this community stand behind you, and affirm and esteem you as a fine human being. :)

I expect, and generally receive, the same from the community. That is what I expect, and all I ask. It is easy to misdirect or anger at those who don't deserve it. It happens all the time. I am guilty of it. We all can be. It's hard when we feel things so strongly not to do a little of that. But I want to work hard to avoid doing that. The religious folks here on these boards - they are good people. They are allies. They are not part of the problem. Many, if not most DUers believe this, and act accordingly. Those who don't, need to get a clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
186. I simply don't agree.
The problem is not with our refusal to reach out to people of faith. The problem is our refusal to pander to some people of faith who insist that we embrace and institutionalize even further the hatred and bigotry that is done in the name of faith. I wouldn't call that a problem, I would call that principles, and those are principles we should never abandon for the sake of votes, which I think you would agree.

You give too much weight to the bigoted comments against religion that some people make on a message board, or even outside of DU, and I'm not defending them. It simply has nothing to do with the liberalism or the Democratic movement, and it has nothing to do with why some people choose to align themselves with the right believing that is the side that is righteous and faithful. Those are the types of people we are never going to win over anyway, and don't deserve even one second of time wasted pandering to them.

If anyone wavers in their support of the Democratic movement because of the bigoted comments made by some, then I say we probably never had their support fully in the first place. If they want to throw away the principles of the progressive movement because they think they have to in the name of faith, then I say good riddance.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #186
202. Good Post.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 06:01 PM by arwalden
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbyboucher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
194. More of the same bullshit.
This is just like the "don't be mean to Southerners" crap. It is not the policy of the Democratic Party to ridicule any religion, ANY. It is, however, quite possibly a very lucrative position taken by the right-wing that seems to have taken root and paid healthy dividends.

You see, all they have to do is scream over and over and over that the Democrats hate the religious, want to ban bibles, and all kinds of lying crap and voila, not only do all the wannabe victims rise up in anger, but so do a great many here who believe that a few posters on a DEMOCRATIC discussion board represent the whole of the Democratic Party's policy.

It is actually quite pathetic and :boring: to the extreme. The Democratic Party believes in freedom of religion MORE SO than do the liars on the right. We believe that there should be a distinct and iron clad separation between church and state, and we are not professing that certain belief systems are better than others.

The preponderance of threads that are basically espousing what the rabid right-wing of the Republican Party is striving in earnest to tattoo on the brain of every person of religion and every person from the South is getting disgusting.

Quit projecting, it's not real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #194
196. That would be interesting, if it bore any resemblance to what I wrote.
Since it doesn't, what's to say?

;shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #196
205. Then, what are you saying?
I pretty much got the same thing. That the Democrats are alienating people of faith because some people make intolerant comments about Christians. Isn't that what you meant by your post?

Discussion of the religious right and fundamentalism almost never escapes accusations of Christian and God bashing in ANY public venue. Even here at DU. The thread criticizing those who oppose breastfeeding in public got some sniffs about implied Christian bashing, for crying out loud. If you think it's tough being a Christian in the Democratic party, try being an atheist ANYWHERE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #205
206. I said quite clearly what I meant.
We would not tolerate members of our party calling gay people 'fags', or Black people the 'n word', yet we sit quietly by and never utter a peep at even the most vicious ad hominems on people of faith. Furthermore, it seems as though it's 'liberal chic' to snub or ignore people of faith.

please re-read my post, if you're confused. It's quite clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbyboucher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #206
207. "liberal chic"?
Remarkably familiar. Where would I have ever heard such a saying.

FYI, religion is a choice. Skin color, sexual orientation, nation of origin, etc. are unavoidable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #207
208. FYI, I know this.
So that makes it OK, right?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #206
209. That really isn't what you said.
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 06:13 PM by Pithlet
Or, at least, that wasn't only what you said. And I'd even disagree with that. Since when has this site EVER sat quietly by when anything was bashed? You and I obviously visit two different DUs.

As far as your "Liberal Chic" comment goes, I'll just re-iterate what I said. Try being an atheist ANYWHERE. Am I really all that off base by asking some of my fellow liberals who are Christians to give us atheists a break every once in awhile, and understand that as far as religious beliefs go, that it could arguably be said that we have it the worst? Just about everywhere? That it really does irritate us to hear Christians griping about the Democratic party, when they are a majority in that respect as well? Maybe instead of asking for that consideration, I should go off in a huff and post my own thread about how hard it is to be an atheist among Christians, and how they are alienating us from, oh, the public sphere in general. You might just feel a little bit indignant, wouldn't you? Rightfully so. And that is my point.

Edited for spelling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #209
210. Christian bashing is the second-most popular sport on DU!
You must indeed visit a different DU.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbyboucher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #210
211. Second only to "enabling",
a distant second.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #210
213. And atheist bashing is the second most popular
sport among Christians. We obviously live on two different planets.

You are the majority even here at DU. Your insistence that Christian bashing is the second most popular sport here is insulting, not to mention not based on anything remotely resembling reality. In probably the same way that my insistence that all Christians in general like to do is bash atheists. Any closer to getting my point?

Still not willing to give atheists a break, too, BTW? Still resisting the effort it might take to see things from another point of view when it comes to experiences in this country when it comes to religion? I don't see too many posts here from Christians defending atheism. Should I take that to mean that most of you don't give a crap about us? I would hope not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #213
224. Not on these boards.
I challenge you to post me three examples of "atheist-bashing" threads in the last six months.

yours truly,
Sel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #224
226. they meant real-life, i think...
sorry to butt in. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #226
228. I realize that - but that's not what this thread was about.
The whole... pushing the focus thing....or something.. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #228
238. More and more, I'm thinking this thread
is about all the meanie atheists on DU and how we all wreck it for everyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #224
234. See my post #229 in this thread.
I think that addresses the point you're trying to make nicely. This post you've just now made also doesn't convince me that I was all that wrong in my other responses to you in this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #224
244. Oh, and find me
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 07:03 PM by Pithlet
three examples of Christians posting on DU support of an atheist Democratic candidate in any office in the past month.

I guess that means that most Christians on DU don't care about that issue. That must mean that DU is hostile toward atheists! I can't believe this community wants me to feel welcome! It's passive-aggressive atheist bashing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selwynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #244
253. One has nothing to do with the other.
1. A person made a statement about atheist bashing.
2. I asked him to support his statement by giving me three examples of Christians bashing atheist threads in the last six months here.
3. I did not at any point say anything about Christian "bashing"

It's interesting from me that from that you can somehow "infer" all the things that you infer. You might try to limit your conclusion drawing to the information you actually have and not your emotionalistic jumping-to-conclusions.

There is NO connection in analogy between my point that if you can't list even three examples of Christians bashing atheist threads on DU in the last six months, I have a had time seeing any justification for claiming this is a pervasive problem here at DU and your saying (sarcastically) that the failure to find three Christians posts in support of an atheists candidate (Note: I would challenge YOU to show me three posts from an ATHEIST about an atheist candidate in the last month) means that Christians are hostile to atheists candidates.

Let's look at the logic shall we. Your argument form is: If ~A, then ~B. That makes no sense whatsoever. Mine however makes a very simple statement. If you cannot provide me with even a handful of evidence to support a claim, then I have not business believing in the validity of the claim.

I find it fairly hypocritical of you to say that somehow "your beginning to think your original responses to me were about right" when all I am doing is the exact same thing you are. You're point was that somehow religious folk can't sweepingly blame the whole community and develop a persecution complex because of the actions of a few bad apples. I agree. The same holds true for atheists or ANYONE else for that matter. And I find it interesting that you have such a problem with that logic when it doesn't have to do with "Christians" but has to do with atheists instead.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #253
257. You seemed to think
Edited on Wed Nov-17-04 01:58 PM by Pithlet
that the inability to find three examples of something was some kind of proof. It is not proof of anything. I was pointing out that that isn't the case by offering you a similar challenge that you would more than likely not be able to meet, and then claiming that was evidence of some sort of bias, with what I thought were obviously sarcastic claims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #210
229. Let's try this:
Should I take this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2702065&mesg_id=2702065as

as evidence that atheists aren't tolerated on DU? And, if so, can I assume that any Christian DUer who didn't show up in it to argue against the point the post was trying to make is complicit in the alienation of atheists on DU? Can I assume the fact that this thread wasn't locked or deleted, or that a majority of the Christians on this board didn't even reply to it as significant of DUs overall attitude toward atheists? That this thread only proves that Democrats are trying to alienate the unfaithful? I think you would agree that that is silly, wouldn't you?

How about we take this even further. Because I feel like I actually do have a point with this one, and I am dead serious here: Can I assume that even though Christians make up the majority of both parties, and we still can't get an open atheist elected to a public position of power the vast majority of the time as evidence that Christians Dems are trying to alienate US from the party?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #194
216. No the problem
is when you give morons like Rush Limbaugh legitimate talking points it hurts the democratic cause. Did anyone actually bother to read the the link to how many Catholics voted for Bush? Worst showing by a democrat since 1952. Just out of curiousity at what percentage of the vote am I supposed to turn on that demographic. 50? 40? Heck Bush got 20% of the gay vote. Is that enough for me to demonize all gays? Or do I need them to get a bit higher.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
201. Oh Brother!
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
212. >X

>> Absolutely NO respect is accorded to those who may, as a matter of conscience and personal conviction, believe that human life does begin at conception--- none whatsoever. <<

So? If such a belief were kept as a private thing, then I'm sure it would get more "respect" as a personal belief and a personal decision. Trying to dictate that belief on others is where they start to get into trouble.

>> Those who believe that abstinence is the ONLY 100% effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and the spread of HIV and venereal diseases are openly ridiculed for their beliefs. <<

And rightly so. Such naive beliefs have limited (if any) relevance in today's reality.

>>While certainly not all Roman Catholics accept the Church's stand on these matters, nonetheless a majority (or large plurality) of us will quite understandably come to the defense of our Church in the face of such assaults, as would most any family member when they perceive that another family member is unjustly attacked by an outsider. <<

Ah... we're "outsiders". How revealing. That pretty much explains it all.

>> Does anyone fail to see how absolutely unjust and counterproductive such knee-jerk, institutional hostility toward people of faith is? <<

Whaaaaa! Boo hoo! It's going to take more that THAT to make me come around bub.

Christianity (and particularly the RC church) has a LOT to answer for, and it as well as folks like you are just going to have to suck it up. Get tough. Learn to live with it.

>> we will continue to alienate them in ever-increasing numbers, to the detriment of both our party and our nation.<<

No... PANDERING to religion will be to the detriment of our nation.

GET RELIGION OUT OF POLITICS!

-- Allen

P.S. Exactly WHEN was it that the RC church admitted that Galileo was right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
215. man
if you could channel all the energy you've expended today defending absurdity and sky beings, think what you could accomplish. and you have been prolific today.



now multiply that by the number of all the people who believe in santa claus, oops, i mean god. that's a lot of damn energy.

no wonder this world is in the shithouse.

funny, not once did i see you concede a point. or even consider that you might be wrong. or even consider that some of your beliefs are open to question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #215
220. What did I say I believed?
Please find where I said what I personally believe, if you'll be so good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #220
222. how many angels
fit on the head of a pin?

now really.

if you can't stand by your own statements, why do you defend them so vehemently? your strenuous, vigorous, undying effort today implies strongly that you at least care passionately about what you are saying, if not believe in what you are saying.

if you can expend THAT much energy defending something you don't believe or if you were proposing hypotheticals, you should be in advertising.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #222
227. That's a non-answer.
Again, where did i say what I personally believed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #227
232. i'll bite
right here:

"I personally believe that it is a good thing that this matter has come to the forefront, because it gives us an opportunity to successfully address it and effect positive changes in our own institutional behavior towards matters and people of faith."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #232
235. And....?
Is there a question to go with that prodigious copy-and-paste effort?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #235
236. look
you asked, i answered.

don't get mad at me because i simply quoted you.

what will it take to satisfy you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #236
240. A real question would be nice.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #227
233. and please
don't be so disingenuous as to make pretend that you don't stridently believe in what you are saying. otherwise you wouldn't defend yourself so vehemently.

please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #233
237. And please...
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 06:56 PM by Padraig18
... don't presume to know me, or what I believe in, will you? You don't even have a clue, just in case you're wondering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #237
241. i' m not
presuming anything.

i'm inferring on the basis of your own words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #241
243. You're ASSUMING, not inferring.
The first three letters of that word should clue you in regarding what most people make of themselves when they do so, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #243
245. no
i infer when i look at the evidence of my senses (namely your prolific posting and the contents thereof which constitute various statements from which one can deduce that you personally believe SOMETHING) and make a decision regarding the nature of your statements.

you asked me to cite where you said you "personally believed" something and i cited your own words which included the phrase "personally believe."

it doesn't get much plainer or simpler than that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #245
246. Well, I *do* believe we need to learn how to have a civil discourse..
Edited on Tue Nov-16-04 07:12 PM by Padraig18
... with people of faith. But since you're all fired up about going with 'plain meaning' here, the plain meaning of ...'what I believe...' clearly means my religious beliefs--- a subject you would plainly know precious little about...

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #246
247. okay
very good, so why were you trying to be evasive earlier?

that's okay, i'm probably not being very fair anyway. i like to pick apart language more than anything. i shouldn't enjoy myself so much at your expense.

here's to "civil discourse"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #247
248. OK.
That's all I want--- civil discourse with people of faith. As a practical matter, we won't win elections unless we get more votes than the Rethugs*, and we sure won't get votes from people of faith if we can't even have a civil discourse with them.

* May not apply in FL and OH.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #246
249. fyi
and it's "incivil" not "uncivil"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #249
250. Depends.
Both are acceptable usages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
217. i'm confused as to why what goes on in this...
message board has any effect on discourse with anyone. We're a bunch of dems and liberals who mostly voted for kerry. Christian Bush voters probably aren't nearby to be offended. Plus Kerry, other elected Dems, and visible Dem Party officials are mostly Christian and are respectful of everyone. DU's mostly anonymous (yes, it has gotten attention these past weeks).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #217
219. Because
It gets mentioned by a LOT of right wing pundits. Theres also the simple fact that its wrong. Discrimination is wrong period. Doesnt matter who you do it to. Or at least thats what I was raised to believe. Its possible I am wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #219
223. what do you mean by discrimination?
DUers appear to me at least to attack the right-wing types, not all christians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #223
225. Read the thread.
Heck read about 1/10th of the posts here. Theres as much sheer vitriol here as there is in the republican boards. Only different targets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #225
230. but like i said...
it's the right wing types being attacked. Kerry's a christian and most people here like him (or use to).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boosterman Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #230
231. No its the fact that people
are lumping anyone of faith into the same group. Not all but some of the posters here do it. Its bad for the party IMO. Theres also the whole hillbilly thing and the low IQ of the red states. Its just plain wrong and it hurts us IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-16-04 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #231
242. i'm guessing very few do that
every group has a couple a-holes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddhamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
255. for me a person's "faith"
is not an issue. the issue is how their "faith" determines their thinking/ behavior and therefore how it affects me.

I am civil and even respectful toward people of faith.
What I cannot do is respect individuals who would use their faith as a justification for bigotry and hatred nor can I respect anyone who would impose/force their faith everyone else.

btw, for the record, I was raised Catholic. Went to church on Sundays, attended a Catholic school, etc., I've known a few progressive Pastors, and for the most part my personal experience with the Church was a positive one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cuban_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #255
259. I basically agree with you.
I don't even really have problems with pro-life folks, as long as they're sincerely pro-life, rather than just pro-birth, e.g. . If their value system extends to education, support and the like and also includes an anti-CP stance, I can at least respect them for their integrity and moral continuity. I'm personally a pro-choice, pro-birth control, pro- sex ed. Catholic (we do exist!), but I also know many progressive pastors, nuns and even a few bishops.

Bottom line for me is this: I can agree to dosagree with them, and leave the matters we disagree about to the ballot box and the courts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddhamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #259
260. I know you exist
I was one. There are issues where I can find common ground with the Church. As you say, if someone is anti-choice but their value systems are extended into other areas you can respect their position. I am of the same mind.
The Catholic church has supported and championed human rights (with the exception of the GLBT community) worker's rights, spoken for the poor, education, etc. I can't leave it the ballot box though.
The issues need to be addressed. But, it is possible to be civil, respectful while disaggreeing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUDUing2 Donating Member (968 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-17-04 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
261. so basically you are complaining about being treated the same way
Edited on Wed Nov-17-04 02:35 PM by RUDUing2
the conservatives and the anti-choicers in the church treat those of us who do not agree w/the ultra-conservative agenda of the current church hierarchy?

I cant even begin to count the hate and virulant animosity that has been shown to me by *pro-life* catholics because I am a *pro-choice* catholic...I can't begin to count the times I have been told that I am either not a *real* catholic or that I should *leave and not let the door hit me on my way out* cause I am a liberal and democrat...I guarentee it has been much worse then what you have experienced here..

btw people are not against you or your views because you are catholic but rather because of your views...the same response would be made if you said you were a Baptist or a Buddhist and expoused those stances. Quit trying to claim it is anti-catholic bias or bigotry..it isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC