The Evolution of Christianity in America

[ElsewheresDaughter]

[Roland99]

1. ouch

[Lerkfish]

2. um...dude.

the 2nd and third pictures have nothing to do with christianity.

and I don't appreciate the thread at all.

[ComerPerro]

3. Why not? Those acts were done in the name of God and Jesus.

Doesn't necessarily represent mainstream Christianity. By the same token, Al Qaida doesn't represent mainstream Islam.

But the religious fundamentalists have no problem painting all Muslims as murderers, so why not turn it back on them?

[Lerkfish]

4. then I'd prefer a more specific label than "christianity"

if the OP means religious fundamentalists, please say so.

[ComerPerro]

5. But that's just the problem

In America, Christianity has become hijacked by the 700-Club, Phelps worshipping zealots.

[Lerkfish]

6. riiiight.

and whenever anyone says they DON"T fit that stereotype, you insist on using it anyways.

[mzteris]

7. Then take it back

Christianity, I mean.

Why let "them" so horribly misrepresent your religion of choice?

Shouldn't you be coming down on those who do evil in the name of Christianity?

[ret5hd]

9. maybe it'd be too much "hard work".

[Lerkfish]

11. tired of arguing this point.

How about this analogy:

"you're a shiftless negro"
"No, I'm not."
"well, this black person is shiftless"
"Well, why don't you just say that person is shiftless"
"Because its your responsibility to change that negro so he doesn't represent you"
"I have a better idea, why don't you stop being a bigot, and assuming he represents my whole race?"

[mzteris]

13. off-base analogy

You wouldn't be whining about how that shiftless guy ISN"T you.

IF only the shiftless types were getting ALL the press, wouldn't you be doing something to say, "Hey! Wait a minute! We're not ALL Shiftless. THEY don't represent the whole of US. This is who WE are. THEY - while they may claim to be "us" - are NOT US! They are a shiftless bunch of liars and in no way represent the entire group."

Then you'd get out there and make sure the press and the people KNOW that "THEY" are a minor subset of the whole and in no way indicative of -- nor speakers for -- the Group in it's entirety. Right?

[Lerkfish]

14. Isn't that exactly what I'm doing right here in the this thread?

"Then you'd get out there and make sure the press and the people KNOW that "THEY" are a minor subset of the whole and in no way indicative of -- nor speakers for -- the Group in it's entirety. Right?"

but I don't have access to the press...I DO have access to this thread, and that is PRECISELY what I'm doing...and notice your response to my doing that.

so, what do you want? You claim I should be pointing out that they don't represent me. But...when I do, you rake me over the coals for doing so or insist I accept them as my represenative.


so...what do you want me to do in this thread? I suspect you want me to shut the hell up so you can continue to castigate all christians...yet that's not what you're demanding I do.

believe it or not, the arena to fight bigotry is in the heart of the bigot.

tis why I'm responding in this thread.

[mzteris]

20. you responded

by castigating the messenger.

Isn't the original premise correct? At least for those who claim to speak for Christianity in America today?

I don't doubt you're upset at being "lumped" with "them". I know *I* am - both as a Christian and as an American. But I recognized the sad truth of that photo progression. At least the truth as it is viewed by the world at large.

To most non-Christians - this IS the face of Christianity today, is it not? That is the sad point. Why are we arguing amongst ourselves about this?

You should recognize the horror and instead of just saying - don't say that, it's not true about Me, recognize that to those who don't KNOW you - to all those non-Christians out there - well, it IS you. Unless you tell them otherwise. Unless you help them understand that THEY don't speak for ALL Christians.

Isn't that the point?

I'm not talking about just countering statements here and there. I'm talking about taking down the Falwells and the Dobsons and exposing them for the evil they are. I'm talking about dismantling their organizations and thwarting their efforts to proselytize and to take over the government from the ground up. Their CALL2ACTION type methods must be countered by liberal *Christians* as a whole - not just liberals.

You can't just say, "I'm not one of them." That's just not good enough.

[Lerkfish]

23. "just not good enough"

thanks for posting your point of view.

[undeterred]

12. Not this rotten baloney again...

:banghead: :banghead:

Here we go again: Antagonize Christians on the left because we are responsible for what right wing lunatics do with religion....

All this accomplishes is to divide the left more miserably than it already is.

:banghead: :banghead:

[mzteris]

16. not antagonizing.....

Galvanizing!!

Get going. Get the message out. Don't let the ultra-fundamentalists usurp true Christians position in this Country. Expose them for the charlatans they are. You must fight them at every turn. THEY give all Christians a bad name. You must root them out and destroy their foothold on the minds of Americans.

"Liberal" Christians may still outnumber them, but they are far more organized and vocal and driven. They have power right now and are gaining power. Anyone questioning them are scorned as non-believers. It is going to take the entire Liberal Christian Community standing up as a whole to combat their vile misinterpretation of religion.

[undeterred]

17. Get going yourself.

Your argument is ridiculous.

[mzteris]

18. What

is ridiculous about it?

The fact I suggest you actually do something?

[undeterred]

22. Let's suppose you and I live in the same neighborhood.

I have a dog but you do not. I am a responsible dog owner but there are other people in the neighborhood who are not. An irresponsible dog owner lets their dog run loose and it makes a big pile of shit on your front lawn.

Instead of confronting the dog owner yourself, you come over to my house and tell me it's my responsibility to confront the irresponsible dog owner and/or clean up his dog's shit. You smugly tell me to "get going" and then go home and do nothing about the problem.

You are being totally irrational. It is no more my responsibility to confront the irresponsible dog owner than it is yours. And if the shit is in your yard, I suggest you do something about it. Like now.

Go on, get going.

Hurry up!

[mzteris]

24. But I clean up after my dog,

and if the community wanted to say - ban ALL dogs - because of the bad acts of those few bad dog owners - would just wring your hands and say, but MY dog doesn't do that?

Or would you get together with the responsible pet owners to try and make sure the puppy isn't getting thrown out with the bath water because of a few bad apples (to mix some metaphors....(G))

[undeterred]

25. If that happened at the dog park, where everyone is a dog owner

then it would be in my interest to try to make sure a dog park wasn't closed because of a few irresponsible people. But a city or neighborhood doesn't have the power to ban dogs, only to enforce rules about leashing and cleaning up after dogs. Since I already obey the rules I have nothing to worry about.

If a strange dog is shitting on my lawn, its my problem. If its shitting on your lawn, its YOUR problem, not mine. Your argument implies that other people should take responsibility for changing something YOU don't like.

Good white people are not responsible for the things bad white people do.

Good black people are not responsible for the things bad black people do.

Good Christians are not responsible for the things bad Christians do, and have no more influence over their beliefs than atheists do. Maybe even less.

[mzteris]

26. so you're okay

with being lumped with the bad Christians by those who assume that all Christians are "like that".

I'm not.

[LaurenG]

10. Of course they don't

This is the hypocrisy of the current administration.

[LaurenG]

8. Unfortunately if people don't start to wake up

This will be Falwell's, Dobsons, Robertsons and Frists main stream Christianity. I honestly feel that they are dragging us toward an evil, evil religion. They speak with forked tongues and only pull passages out of the bible to scare people into believing with them that this is OK with God. I hope someone can stop them, they have perverted religion for all of us.

[undeterred]

15. According to DU Rules this post is out of line

"Democratic Underground is a diverse community which includes Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, Atheists, Agnostics, and others. All are welcome here. For this reason, we expect members to make an extra effort to be sensitive to different religious beliefs, and to show respect to members who hold different religious beliefs. Members are permitted to discuss whether they agree or disagree with particular religious beliefs, provided that they do so in a relatively sensitive and respectful manner. But members should avoid posting broad-brush bigoted statements about people who hold specific religious beliefs. Members should avoid highly provocative postings, such as comparing religion to fairy tales or mental illness, or arguing that religion (or the lack thereof) is the source of most of the world's problems."

[Yupster]

19. I don't understand why this kind of

ignorant bigotry is allowed here.

If a similar post would show up about any other religion, the poster would be roundly hooted, and probably banned as an ignorant bigot.

I'm not criticizing the original poster who I'm assuming is out doinking his sheep right now, but my criticism is with allowing this kind of religious bigotry to pollute the boards.

[RevCheesehead]

21. Why don't you change the title:

to "An Atheist's View on the Evolution of Christianity"?

I understand you're trying to make a political comment, but your broad brush just hit me smack-dab on my life and vocation.

If your intent is to make a social commentary, then please clarify. If your intent is to inflame and insult Christians on DU, then congratulations, because you are succeeding in that.

[Lerkfish]

27. I find it odd this thread has not been locked as flamebait.

Someday I will figure out the rule enforcement.
I had a thread asking why, during the debate, Bush mouthed he wanted to meet with Kerry later, I said I wondered what that was about, or if it was connected in some way to the 24 capitulation...

that thread was locked within hours and labeled "flamebait".

this thread, however, which is directly opposed to DU rules as I understand them, has remained for several days.

*scratches head* very odd.

[mopaul]

28. I get the point, and i agree

you see the man on the cross, and i was raised a christian so i understand, we are supposed to have empathy for the man on the cross, suffering as he does. the symbol of a man punished and tortured to death by an oppressive government, rome.

the kkk with the cross of jesus on their robes. the picture says it all. the kkk has infiltrated our government, ask trent lott.

and finally, the infamous 'electric wire crucifix' of abu ghraib, showing that america has utterly forgotten and ignored the message of christ, mercy, tolerance, turn the other cheek, love thy neighbor, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, feed the poor, protect the oppressed, forgive your enemies, etc.

i get it.