PDA

View Full Version : Elections Wow! This Black guy gets it.


Hog Farmer
08-05-2008, 12:02 PM
And I don't mean that in a predujice way. Obama, will destroy America in his first 100 days. Watch in it's entirity. Chilling! The American people have GOT to wake up.

http://www.atlah.org/broadcast/ndnr07-28-08.html

Direckshun
08-05-2008, 12:25 PM
"Obama wishes to rob America of its rich heritage, its glory to God, it's promise and prosperous horizons."

Ho boy.

Also included:

* Claim that Obama is not an American citizen.
* Call for a boycott against Oprah Winfrey's show and every news channel except Fox News.
* We will devolve into a fascist nation that hates God, and hates morality according to the Bible.
* Obama will put his hand on the Koran on Jan. 20th, sworn in as the first Muslim President.
* Obama is destroying the work of MLK, Dorothy Cotton, Fanny Lo Hamer, A. Phillip Randolph, and the Civil Rights Movement.
* Obama's speech in Germany was the same as Hitler's speeches. Obama and Hitler are the "same man."

I do this so you don't have to, Planeteers.

Although if you watch any part of this video, I recommend the last 25 seconds.

Sully
08-05-2008, 12:26 PM
ROFL
ROFL
ROFL

Direckshun
08-05-2008, 12:28 PM
I do want to say that in the leadership religious black community, there has been an inordinate amount of rage directed at Obama.

This guy, of course. Plus Jesse Jackson wants to cut his nuts off. Hell, his own former pastor (Wright) ridiculed him.

Why?

Because Obama represents a move forward that doesn't play the victim card, that says you have to work for your own gains in life. And that completely counters the leeching, exploitative tactics of these people who believe African Americans are helpless victims to be socially segregated with no constructive solutions.

BigChiefFan
08-05-2008, 12:32 PM
Heaven forbid somebody not use religion in their politics, like the constitution instructs us to do. I guess some forgot the SEPERATION of CHURCH and STATE is alive and well.

Some would rather politicians hijack religion for political benefit apparently. Make mine a McCain, please.

StcChief
08-05-2008, 12:36 PM
I love it as they continue to fight amongst themselves... SSDE

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 12:38 PM
Heaven forbid somebody not use religion in their politics, like the constitution instructs us to do. I guess some forgot the SEPERATION of CHURCH and STATE is alive and well.

Some would rather politicians hijack religion for political benefit apparently. Make mine a McCain, please.

Wrong. It's not separation of RELIGION and STATE; it's separation of CHURCH and STATE.

In this country we have freedom of speech and freedom to choose whatever religion we want. That does not preclude someone from referring to their religion in a political speech.

Religion forms a moralistic foundation for a person's core values. Those tie into politics, like it or not.

A CHURCH is a bureaucratic appendage of religion. Separation of church and state was necessary to the founding fathers as a means to keep the Church of England, the Vatican, and other religious bureaucracies from unduly influencing the Republic.

In recent years (see turn of 20th century) leftists have twisted this to a separation of STATE and RELIGION. It's straight from the Marxist playbook. Read Marx some time... scary shit.

BigChiefFan
08-05-2008, 12:40 PM
Why did you have to point out that he's black? The only reason to do so, is to cause more strife and show less unity amongst a certain race, thus attempting to DIVIDE.

White, black, green, purple, none of that should have any barring in the argument, but yet, there it is...

Reaper16
08-05-2008, 12:44 PM
That video was awesome LMAO.

BigChiefFan
08-05-2008, 12:45 PM
Wrong. It's not separation of RELIGION and STATE; it's separation of CHURCH and STATE.

In this country we have freedom of speech and freedom to choose whatever religion we want. That does not preclude someone from referring to their religion in a political speech.

Religion forms a moralistic foundation for a person's core values. Those tie into politics, like it or not.

A CHURCH is a bureaucratic appendage of religion. Separation of church and state was necessary to the founding fathers as a means to keep the Church of England, the Vatican, and other religious bureaucracies from unduly influencing the Republic.

In recent years (see turn of 20th century) leftists have twisted this to a separation of STATE and RELIGION. It's straight from the Marxist playbook. Read Marx some time... scary shit.The church is the home of religion, no?

Seperation of church and state is there for a REASON, so that religion isn't used to control the government. People have allowed this to happen for so long, that they actually belief some religion is okay in politics, when in fact, the founding fathers knew better and thus took issue with it. Which backs what I said, that there should be a seperation of church and state. Maybe know you'll tell me how the founding fathers were wrong in seperating the two.

M

Chief Henry
08-05-2008, 12:46 PM
Why did you have to point out that he's black? The only reason to do so, is to cause more strife and show less unity amongst a certain race, thus attempting to DIVIDE.

White, black, green, purple, none of that should have any barring in the argument, but yet, there it is...

Barry is not black....He's 1/2 Honkey and 100% Donkey :D

Reaper16
08-05-2008, 12:51 PM
Do you guys really "not care if Obama is the Texas Chainsaw MASSACRE! Guy!" ? I know I do.

Programmer
08-05-2008, 01:06 PM
Why did you have to point out that he's black? The only reason to do so, is to cause more strife and show less unity amongst a certain race, thus attempting to DIVIDE.

White, black, green, purple, none of that should have any barring in the argument, but yet, there it is...


In the strictest definition he is neither black nor white, he is a Mulatto. But in the definition that should be common is that he is part of a single race on this planet. Ethnic groupings aside there is only one race here and the sooner everyone lines up with that belief the sooner we can get past the thing called racism.

Each mans ability according to his personal gifts. Everyone has the ability to excel, but they have to make an effort. Our government seems to reward laziness with free money.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 01:08 PM
The church is the home of religion, no?

Seperation of church and state is there for a REASON, so that religion isn't used to control the government. People have allowed this to happen for so long, that they actually belief some religion is okay in politics, when in fact, the founding fathers knew better and thus took issue with it. Which backs what I said, that there should be a seperation of church and state. Maybe know you'll tell me how the founding fathers were wrong in seperating the two.

M

For Christianity it is. For others, it's not. again, freedom of RELIGION. Not all religions require a church.

Many of the founding fathers were Christian; many wanted to place a lot of Christian language in our most important documents. Others were agnostic, atheist, Jewish, Deist, et al.

The recent definition of "separation of church and state" has been employed by the left to mean the separation of CHRISTIANITY and state. It's an overt attack on Christianity in general. I find it highly offensive... and I'm not a Christian.

Programmer
08-05-2008, 01:11 PM
For Christianity it is. For others, it's not. again, freedom of RELIGION. Not all religions require a church.

Many of the founding fathers were Christian; many wanted to place a lot of Christian language in our most important documents. Others were agnostic, atheist, Jewish, Deist, et al.

The recent definition of "separation of church and state" has been employed by the left to mean the separation of CHRISTIANITY and state. It's an overt attack on Christianity in general. I find it highly offensive... and I'm not a Christian.

I do not agree that Church is what Christianity is all about. Christianity is being Christ like. Most all religions encourage you to associate with others of your religion, in a building or out.

Attacks on Christianity have been part of the world's history. If you aren't a Christian, why do you care?

Ultra Peanut
08-05-2008, 01:12 PM
ahaha

ahahaha

Hog Farmer
08-05-2008, 01:12 PM
Why did you have to point out that he's black? The only reason to do so, is to cause more strife and show less unity amongst a certain race, thus attempting to DIVIDE.

White, black, green, purple, none of that should have any barring in the argument, but yet, there it is...

I was wondering how long it would take for some A-hole to try to twist it this way.

Sully
08-05-2008, 01:16 PM
It's an overt attack on Christianity in general. I find it highly offensive... and I'm not a Christian.

Help me out here.
What exactly has been an attack "on Christianity?"
I haven't seen any examples of that, but perhaps I missed some.
And I don't mean some obscue thing, I mean an "attack" by "the left."

Thanks in advance.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 01:19 PM
I do not agree that Church is what Christianity is all about. Christianity is being Christ like. Most all religions encourage you to associate with others of your religion, in a building or out.

Attacks on Christianity have been part of the world's history. If you aren't a Christian, why do you care?

Who said the church is what Christianity is about? The church is supposed to be the House of God in Christian circles. It is the place to congregate and worship; not the only place, but for the majority, the primary.

As for "why do you care", I care because we have a thing called the CONSTITUTION which protects the right of individuals to worship. I find attacks on religion to be petty and empty, no matter what the religion. In this instance, it is overt and constant IMO. I guess some people don't see it... or don't care.

***SPRAYER
08-05-2008, 01:26 PM
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/434449/all_white_people_are_racistthe_university.html

:)

beer bacon
08-05-2008, 01:27 PM
Why did you have to point out that he's black? The only reason to do so, is to cause more strife and show less unity amongst a certain race, thus attempting to DIVIDE.

White, black, green, purple, none of that should have any barring in the argument, but yet, there it is...

Uh huh.

I love it as they continue to fight amongst themselves... SSDE

Hog Farmer
08-05-2008, 01:30 PM
Uh huh.


Great post. You should contribute more often.:clap:

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 01:34 PM
Help me out here.
What exactly has been an attack "on Christianity?"
I haven't seen any examples of that, but perhaps I missed some.
And I don't mean some obscue thing, I mean an "attack" by "the left."

Thanks in advance.

The removing of Christian symbols from public buildings
Merry Christmas being changed to Happy Holidays, or Holiday Parades or Holiday vacations in the schools
Local govt's not allowed to fund nativity scenes on public property
Battles to remove God from the pledge and currency


We have had to make a few changes in our office to not step on any toes. So I just make it a point to spout off "If you don't want Christmas in the office place give back that fat Christmas bonus you don't mind sticking in your pocket every year and get your butt tow work on the 25th". I would actually have respect for someone that did that.

penchief
08-05-2008, 01:40 PM
Obama, will destroy America in his first 100 days.

It's kind of hard to destroy something that Bush has already destroyed.

The sound you hear is the sound of righties projecting again.

HolmeZz
08-05-2008, 01:40 PM
Merry Christmas being changed to Happy Holidays, or Holiday Parades

Inclusion is a slap in the face to Christianity, eh? I can't say I'm surprised.

Holiday vacations in the schools

What?

Battles to remove God from the pledge and currency.

Christianity doesn't own the term God. Or is that some kind of admission that the government was enforcing a state religion?

Sully
08-05-2008, 01:41 PM
The removing of Christian symbols from public buildings
Merry Christmas being changed to Happy Holidays, or Holiday Parades or Holiday vacations in the schools
Local govt's not allowed to fund nativity scenes on public property
Battles to remove God from the pledge and currency


We have had to make a few changes in our office to not step on any toes. So I just make it a point to spout off "If you don't want Christmas in the office place give back that fat Christmas bonus you don't mind sticking in your pocket every year and get your butt tow work on the 25th". I would actually have respect for someone that did that.

So you equate keeping the government from favoring one religion over another as an "attack on Christianity?"

***SPRAYER
08-05-2008, 01:43 PM
"All White People Are Racist?"...The University of Delaware Takes on the Role of George Orwell's Big Brother

By Rolando Cruz, published Nov 01, 2007
Published Content: 206 Total Views: 191,413 Favorited By: 6 CPs
Contact Subscribe Add to Favorites
Embed:
Rating: 4.7 of 512345 Font Font
close window
George Orwell's Big Brother is alive and well, and living at the University of Delaware. It seems that that particular state university has decided to bypass whatever rights the First Amendment grants us, and taken it upon itself to engage in 'systematic thought reforms."

At the core of the latest controversy is the university's mandatory program that requires all resident hall students to acknowledge that "all whites are racist." Citing that racism is a term that applies "to all white people living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion., cultural or sexuality." The school goes on to offer 'treatment" for any "incorrect attitudes" the students might have upon entering the school.

Wow! To think I once left a communist country to get away from such oppressive left wing doctrine only to find it within a state university of the United States of America. By shear force of experience, I can tell you where this type of faulty thinking will lead. I still vividly recall a distant country where there was no freedom of expression or religion. A country where "re-education" was state sponsored as well. It was a place where kids as young as the age of five where taught a simple refrain, "we will be like Che'," Che of course meaning Che Guevara, the Cuban communist revolutionist. I thought I had left that country and that type of thinking behind some 38 years ago when, I hopped on a plane bearing an American flag on its tail, and was granted political asylum in the United States of America.

But here it is again, same oppressive thinking, only this time it's thinly veiled in the cloth of a state university. A university who is insisting with total disregard for the law of the land, that 7,000 students in its resident halls subscribe to a way of thinking that is not only incorrect, but which borders on Orwell's nightmarish "Thought Police." In fact, my first thoughts on the subject were that someone had overdosed on Orwell's brilliant novel and embraced its darkest most disturbing doctrine.

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 01:50 PM
So you equate keeping the government from favoring one religion over another as an "attack on Christianity?"

When the foundation of the government has been Judeo-Christian from the beginning, yes. The Christian marks on the country are being stripped away little by little, so I consider it an attack.

Sully
08-05-2008, 01:54 PM
When the foundation of the government has been Judeo-Christian from the beginning, yes. The Christian marks on the country are being stripped away little by little, so I consider it an attack.

A) The foundations of the country aren't Judeo-Christian. They are decidedly not so. Don't believe me? Just ask guys named Madison, Jefferson, Adams, and Payne.
B) No one... and I mean NO ONE is trying to take Christianity out of the country. Just out of the government. That's the hyperbole that people use, ie: "They are trying to strip us of our Christianity!!!" But no one is trying to do that. At all. Anywhere. Not even a little bit.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 02:03 PM
A) The foundations of the country aren't Judeo-Christian. They are decidedly not so. Don't believe me? Just ask guys named Madison, Jefferson, Adams, and Payne.
B) No one... and I mean NO ONE is trying to take Christianity out of the country. Just out of the government. That's the hyperbole that people use, ie: "They are trying to strip us of our Christianity!!!" But no one is trying to do that. At all. Anywhere. Not even a little bit.

Strip? No. Marginalize, denigrate, rebuke at every turn, yes.

Sully
08-05-2008, 02:07 PM
Strip? No. Marginalize, denigrate, rebuke at every turn, yes.

Marginalize?

I don't see that in but a very small amount.

Denigrate?

Sorry, I just don't see that, either. I see certain Christians denigrated, but mostly it's deserved.

Rebuke?

Same thing. It happens to certain Christians, but as a whole, I just don't see what you see. I'm a dedicated Christian, and I just don't see these attacks. Especially not at "every turn." Taking Christianity out of government certainly isn't an attack ont he religion itself, either.

HolmeZz
08-05-2008, 02:09 PM
Strip? No. Marginalize, denigrate, rebuke at every turn, yes.

Is it marginalizing other religions to suggest that our money and the pledge of allegiance are Christian?

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 02:16 PM
Is it marginalizing other religions to suggest that our money and the pledge of allegiance are Christian?

No; these are traditional symbols that have been in place for decades. "Under God" and "In God We Trust" does not specify a CHRISTIAN GOD, but a Deity upon which many of our founding fathers' beliefs were formed. That "Under God All Men Are Created Equal" - as written by Thomas Jefferson, but altered by Benjamin Franklin.

The dollar does not read "In Jesus We Trust". The Pledge does not quip "Under Jesus, Indivisible" (Mexican joke in that one....)

THAT would marginalize other religions. In this instance, God is a word - it can be taken for whatever deity the individual chooses.

HolmeZz
08-05-2008, 02:18 PM
No; these are traditional symbols that have been in place for decades. "Under God" and "In God We Trust" does not specify a CHRISTIAN GOD, but a Deity upon which many of our founding fathers' beliefs were formed. That "Under God All Men Are Created Equal" - as written by Thomas Jefferson, but altered by Benjamin Franklin.

The dollar does not read "In Jesus We Trust". The Pledge does not quip "Under Jesus, Indivisible" (Mexican joke in that one....)

THAT would marginalize other religions. In this instance, God is a word - it can be taken for whatever deity the individual chooses.

And what if you don't believe in any deity?

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 02:20 PM
And what if you don't believe in any deity?

That's still a religion, like it or not. Atheists choose not to believe in a deity, but that is still a belief system. To them I suppose the God is themselves.

In any instance, f*ck them. Atheists are assholes. :p

Sully
08-05-2008, 02:20 PM
No; these are traditional symbols that have been in place for decades. "Under God" and "In God We Trust" does not specify a CHRISTIAN GOD, but a Deity upon which many of our founding fathers' beliefs were formed. That "Under God All Men Are Created Equal" - as written by Thomas Jefferson, but altered by Benjamin Franklin.

The dollar does not read "In Jesus We Trust". The Pledge does not quip "Under Jesus, Indivisible" (Mexican joke in that one....)

THAT would marginalize other religions. In this instance, God is a word - it can be taken for whatever deity the individual chooses.

So you think that, as long as you believe in some God, we aren't marginalizing you. But if you happen not to believe in any God, our Founding Fathers meant that it was okay to marginalize you?

Taco John
08-05-2008, 02:26 PM
A) The foundations of the country aren't Judeo-Christian. They are decidedly not so. Don't believe me? Just ask guys named Madison, Jefferson, Adams, and Payne.

I'll never understand why anyone tries to make this argument. American culture has been heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian morality. What's the point in trying to say that it wasn't?


B) No one... and I mean NO ONE is trying to take Christianity out of the country. Just out of the government. That's the hyperbole that people use, ie: "They are trying to strip us of our Christianity!!!" But no one is trying to do that. At all. Anywhere. Not even a little bit.

Count me among those that would like to see the government taken out of Christianity. You'll never take Christianity out of government, because it will always exist in the people. I'm ok with my representative being a Christian. I'm a Christian. He is my representative. You can't take Christianity out of government. It's impossible as long as we allow religious people to hold office.

Perhaps you favor allowing only the election of athiests?

Sully
08-05-2008, 02:31 PM
I'll never understand why anyone tries to make this argument. American culture has been heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian morality. What's the point in trying to say that it wasn't?

Culture, yes. Absolutely. Government? Not at all.




Count me among those that would like to see the government taken out of Christianity. You'll never take Christianity out of government, because it will always exist in the people. I'm ok with my representative being a Christian. I'm a Christian. He is my representative. You can't take Christianity out of government. It's impossible as long as we allow religious people to hold office.

I couldn't agree more. It seems we are right in line with our views. Hell, i don't even mind them reveling in their religion, so long as they aren't legislating it to us. Who says my Christianity and any representative of mine is the same?

Perhaps you favor allowing only the election of athiests?
I'm not sure where I gave that impression, here.
I was simply trying to figure out where this "attack on Christianity" from the left was coming. I don't see it. Taking Christianity off of government funded things is far from an attack, IMO.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 02:35 PM
Culture, yes. Absolutely. Government? Not at all.

And how, praytell, do you separate the Culture (i.e. the PEOPLE) from public service?

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 02:37 PM
[QUOTE=Taco John;4892762]I'll never understand why anyone tries to make this argument. American culture has been heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian morality. What's the point in trying to say that it wasn't?


Because they feel it better helps them to advance an agenda to argue that the country was never established on Judeo-Christian values and we should get back to what was intended (then quote an incorrect interpretation of church and state), rather then just say "We know God was a big part of our countries history, but we don't like it and want to change it".

HolmeZz
08-05-2008, 02:39 PM
That's still a religion, like it or not.

No. The definition of religion is a belief and set of practices/rituals geared towards a higher power.

Atheists choose not to believe in a deity, but that is still a belief system.

It's not a belief 'system'. It's a singular belief. The differences in other beliefs from one atheist to another very well could be drastic. There's no set of atheist beliefs they adhere to or celebrate.

To them I suppose the God is themselves.

Yay, atheist demonizing.

In any instance, f*ck them. Atheists are assholes. :p

Yay, atheist denigrating.

I'm glad to see you're as accepting about atheism as you claim people aren't about Christianity.

Sully
08-05-2008, 02:45 PM
And how, praytell, do you separate the Culture (i.e. the PEOPLE) from public service?

This is how this whole thing gets started, because people can't read the argument for what it is without adding stuff that just isn't there. Let me be as clear as I possibly can, because apparently I haven't been.

1) I, and many on the left, simply want religion kept out of government. That means you can put the 10 commandments in your church, in your yard, wear them on a shirt, talk about them all day, just keep it off courts and schools. If the government pays for it, it shouldn't be there. Simple.

2) As a private citizen (or company, etc) I don't think many have any problem at all with you doing whatever you want as far as displaying your beliefs. There is a Christian Brothers auto shop down the street with no picketers. There are a few Christian bookstores near here, with nary a protest. I don't care if you put a 30 story replica of the tablets with the 10 commandments on them in your front yard (pending HOA approval :D). The point is... no one is tryin to take Christianity out of America... just out of the government.

3) It is a politician's prerogative if he wants to speak about/ pontificate on/ discuss or sermonize about his religion. He's a free person just like the rest of us. When he starts legislating solely due to his religious beliefs, that becomes a problem. If his religious beliefs lead him to legislate on something, that can also be backed up with actual facts about common good, that problem goes away. ex 1: A lawmaker decides to push a law banning football because touching the skin of a pig is a sin=BAD ex 2: A lawmaker decides to push a law maing it illegal to kill another person because God says so, but ALSO because it's bad for the country to allow legal killing=Good.

Sully
08-05-2008, 02:47 PM
[QUOTE=Taco John;4892762]I'll never understand why anyone tries to make this argument. American culture has been heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian morality. What's the point in trying to say that it wasn't?


Because they feel it better helps them to advance an agenda to argue that the country was never established on Judeo-Christian values and we should get back to what was intended (then quote an incorrect interpretation of church and state), rather then just say "We know God was a big part of our countries history, but we don't like it and want to change it".

Or, another reason would be, because we've read the very specific words of the Founding Fathers, and seen that they wanted no entanglement between Religion and Government.
God WAS a big part of our country's history. But it was not meant to be a part of the government.

Sully
08-05-2008, 02:49 PM
Another question for those who believe Christianity is under attack:

What do you think the motive is for those of us who want government and religion separated?

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 03:20 PM
Another question for those who believe Christianity is under attack:

What do you think the motive is for those of us who want government and religion separated?

So we, in St. Joesph, Mo decorate a public park every year for Christmas. Thousands of people drive through this spectacle that is so bright it could probably be seen from space. There are references to Christianity thoughout the decorations and it’s obviously in honor of Christmas, a holiday to celebrate the birth of Christ. It’s something I’ve done since I was a kid and can’t wait to take my son through it this year for the first time. Is it your position that this travesty of justice that so many enjoy needs to be shut down because it’s done in a public park? Well there a few that do, and that my friend it why I feel we are under attack and why I think it’s a very petty attack at that. OMG it’s Christmas lights, someone dial 911!!!!!

The attack on Christianity is political. The stances of many Christians differ from those on the left and it’s also trying to appease every Tom, Dick and Harry. Then you have those who are bitter and have nothing to do with their life but complain.

mlyonsd
08-05-2008, 03:22 PM
What do you think the motive is for those of us who want government and religion separated?

You lack tolerance to the point you have some phobia about it.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 03:24 PM
No. The definition of religion is a belief and set of practices/rituals geared towards a higher power.

And if that higher power is self-fulfillment/enlightenment?

It's not a belief 'system'. It's a singular belief. The differences in other beliefs from one atheist to another very well could be drastic. There's no set of atheist beliefs they adhere to or celebrate.

Parsing. Atheism is atheism, no matter how you try to spin it. An atheist holds a position of conscience non-belief in a higher power/god. It is a doctrine, a belief system not unlike Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, et al.

Yay, atheist demonizing.

:spock: Just how in the hell can seeing God/enlightenment/whatever in one's self be "demonization"? Methinks you have limited experience with eastern philosophy...

Yay, atheist denigrating.

I'm glad to see you're as accepting about atheism as you claim people aren't about Christianity.

If you took that seriously then you're a f*cking idiot.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 03:27 PM
The attack on Christianity is political. The stances of many Christians differ from those on the left and it’s also trying to appease every Tom, Dick and Harry. Then you have those who are bitter and have nothing to do with their life but complain.

It's also a method of indoctrination to Marxism. Kill God, then reinvent Him in the State.

Sully
08-05-2008, 03:27 PM
So we, in St. Joesph, Mo decorate a public park every year for Christmas. Thousands of people drive through this spectacle that is so bright it could probably be seen from space. There are references to Christianity thoughout the decorations and it’s obviously in honor of Christmas, a holiday to celebrate the birth of Christ. It’s something I’ve done since I was a kid and can’t wait to take my son through it this year for the first time. Is it your position that this travesty of justice that so many enjoy needs to be shut down because it’s done in a public park? Well there a few that do, and that my friend it why I feel we are under attack and why I think it’s a very petty attack at that. OMG it’s Christmas lights, someone dial 911!!!!!

The attack on Christianity is political. The stances of many Christians differ from those on the left and it’s also trying to appease every Tom, Dick and Harry. Then you have those who are bitter and have nothing to do with their life but complain.

Yes, I believe it shouldn't be done in a park that is funded by the government. I'm sure it's beautiful. I'm sure it's moving. I'm sure I would love it. But as tax dollars of atheists, Jews, Muslims, and many others paid for that park, I don't think they should be forced to pay for your Christmas celebration. I assume you wouldn't want to chip in to pay for a celebration for a Muslim holiday, correct?

As far as your reasoning. let me ask you this.
The discussion of separation of church and state has been going on since the ink on the constitution dried. Do you know who the first "lefties" who wanted a strict wall were? They were the ministers os many churches throughout the smaller nation.
So what was political about their opposition to government and religion intermingling?
Who were they trying to appease?
What were they bitter about? Did they want to do nothing more than complain?

By the way...
I think your reasoning is paranoid and flat out incorrect.

Sully
08-05-2008, 03:29 PM
You lack tolerance to the point you have some phobia about it.

That's silly.

Sully
08-05-2008, 03:30 PM
It's also a method of indoctrination to Marxism. Kill God, then reinvent Him in the State.

Wow.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 03:32 PM
Wow.

Haven't read Marx eh? Maybe you should. Works of brother Che are also enlightening. May shed some light on your boy BHO's acquaintances and why they tend to make people a little more than nervous.

mlyonsd
08-05-2008, 03:37 PM
That's silly.

Not really, at least the way I see it, a non-believer.

People that want religion and government separated seem to have noble intentions but take it too far when it gets to the point they think you can't have an Xmas tree or a manger in front of a court house or some such government building.

Some phobia in their little brains make them believe someone is trying to brainwash them and their kids.

noa
08-05-2008, 03:39 PM
Haven't read Marx eh? Maybe you should. Works of brother Che are also enlightening. May shed some light on your boy BHO's acquaintances and why they tend to make people a little more than nervous.

That's not paranoid or anything.

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 03:42 PM
Yes, I believe it shouldn't be done in a park that is funded by the government. I'm sure it's beautiful. I'm sure it's moving. I'm sure I would love it. But as tax dollars of atheists, Jews, Muslims, and many others paid for that park, I don't think they should be forced to pay for your Christmas celebration. I assume you wouldn't want to chip in to pay for a celebration for a Muslim holiday, correct?

As far as your reasoning. let me ask you this.
The discussion of separation of church and state has been going on since the ink on the constitution dried. Do you know who the first "lefties" who wanted a strict wall were? They were the ministers os many churches throughout the smaller nation.
So what was political about their opposition to government and religion intermingling?
Who were they trying to appease?
What were they bitter about? Did they want to do nothing more than complain?

By the way...
I think your reasoning is paranoid and flat out incorrect.


If 90% of the population that I lived in were Muslim and it had been going on for 25 years, I would accept it as the culture and area I choose to live in. It’s just tradition and I would understand that.

You asked my why people today attach Christianity and I told you. I have no statistical analysis of why they do what they do. Why do you feel they are attacking Christianity today? Why are greeters now asked to say ‘Happy Holidays” as opposed to “Merry Christmas”, why did the schools change from “Christmas Vacation” to “Winter Vacation”, why is there now a push to get the 10 commandments out of courthouses after decades?

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 03:45 PM
That's not paranoid or anything.

Hey, he's the one who hung out with Ayers and Dohrn. He's the one who has party offices featuring Che flags. He's the one that the young, hip, Che-T sporting crowd "associates with".

Sully
08-05-2008, 03:59 PM
Not really, at least the way I see it, a non-believer.

People that want religion and government separated seem to have noble intentions but take it too far when it gets to the point they think you can't have an Xmas tree or a manger in front of a court house or some such government building.

Some phobia in their little brains make them believe someone is trying to brainwash them and their kids.

It's not about thinking they are going to be brainwashed, it's about their place in our society. If we are to be an open society to all sects, like Madison, Jefferson and Adams all specifically said, then what do we tell those who don't subscribe to a particular belief when that belief is being funded, in part by their government?
And as a Christian who also happens to be a leftist, I don't want government involved in supplementing my belief. That is the job of my church and my family. My faith isn't so insecure that I must constantly reassure myself through governmental means.

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 04:03 PM
It's not about thinking they are going to be brainwashed, it's about their place in our society. If we are to be an open society to all sects, like Madison, Jefferson and Adams all specifically said, then what do we tell those who don't subscribe to a particular belief when that belief is being funded, in part by their government?
And as a Christian who also happens to be a leftist, I don't want government involved in supplementing my belief. That is the job of my church and my family. My faith isn't so insecure that I must constantly reassure myself through governmental means.

And if the minority is so secure in their beliefs then they shouldn't be offended by the site of a Christmas Tree. As long as we don't place restrictions on the rights of the minority faiths, then I'm cool with Santa and some lights in a park.

Sully
08-05-2008, 04:06 PM
If 90% of the population that I lived in were Muslim and it had been going on for 25 years, I would accept it as the culture and area I choose to live in. It’s just tradition and I would understand that.

You asked my why people today attach Christianity and I told you. I have no statistical analysis of why they do what they do. Why do you feel they are attacking Christianity today? Why are greeters now asked to say ‘Happy Holidays” as opposed to “Merry Christmas”, why did the schools change from “Christmas Vacation” to “Winter Vacation”, why is there now a push to get the 10 commandments out of courthouses after decades?

I don't believe Christianity is under attack, so I don't have an answer for you. I feel government and religion being intertwined is under attack, and I'm happy with that. I've stated the reasons in several posts on here. I have the exact same reasons ministers in the 18th and 19th centuries had, and believe most who are against that intertwining do, as well.
As far as companies saying "Happy Holidays, AFAIC, that's on the company. If they decide to be more inclusive in their language, then perhaps they feel it is better for business. I personally don't care one way or another. If they feel they are getting enough backlash from folks for emphasizing Christmas, then they change. Schools, being government entities, I believe should say "Holidays" if they say anything at all. The school district I work at has a huge number of Muslim kids. I'd hate to see that district marginalize those kids because of their faith. It's the same thing with the 10 commandments.
People who aren't Christian chose to live in a country with mostly Christians, but they didn't choose to live under a government that is Christian, or favors Christianity over other faiths.

The hyperbole of the beliefs by the left are far scarier than the actual stances.

BTW, the actual percentage of Americans who claim to be Christian is 70%. When you ask them if they are practicing, the percentage drops considerably. So my question is, at what percentage is it okay to marginalize the minority?

Sully
08-05-2008, 04:08 PM
And if the minority is so secure in their beliefs then they shouldn't be offended by the site of a Christmas Tree. As long as we don't place restrictions on the rights of the minority faiths, then I'm cool with Santa and some lights in a park.

I'd counter that with:
If the majority is so secure in its beliefs, it won't feel that being asked to keep a Christmas tree on private property, rather than government, is an attack on Christianity. See how it works both ways?

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 04:13 PM
I'd counter that with:
If the majority is so secure in its beliefs, it won't feel that being asked to keep a Christmas tree on private property, rather than government, is an attack on Christianity. See how it works both ways?


Yes, you said it first and I countered, then you recountered me recounter or something like that.

InChiefsHell
08-05-2008, 04:17 PM
In the strictest definition he is neither black nor white, he is a Mulatto.

Hmmm...why does that make me want to drink a delicious Italian coffee flavored drink from Starbucks??

BigCatDaddy
08-05-2008, 04:19 PM
I don't believe Christianity is under attack, so I don't have an answer for you. I feel government and religion being intertwined is under attack, and I'm happy with that. I've stated the reasons in several posts on here. I have the exact same reasons ministers in the 18th and 19th centuries had, and believe most who are against that intertwining do, as well.
As far as companies saying "Happy Holidays, AFAIC, that's on the company. If they decide to be more inclusive in their language, then perhaps they feel it is better for business. I personally don't care one way or another. If they feel they are getting enough backlash from folks for emphasizing Christmas, then they change. Schools, being government entities, I believe should say "Holidays" if they say anything at all. The school district I work at has a huge number of Muslim kids. I'd hate to see that district marginalize those kids because of their faith. It's the same thing with the 10 commandments.
People who aren't Christian chose to live in a country with mostly Christians, but they didn't choose to live under a government that is Christian, or favors Christianity over other faiths.

The hyperbole of the beliefs by the left are far scarier than the actual stances.

BTW, the actual percentage of Americans who claim to be Christian is 70%. When you ask them if they are practicing, the percentage drops considerably. So my question is, at what percentage is it okay to marginalize the minority?

So do you feel we should also repeal Grant's making Christmas a federal holiday in 1870? Since this is obviously a 140 year old endorsement of Christianity by the Fed Govt.

Sully
08-05-2008, 04:39 PM
Yes, you said it first and I countered, then you recountered me recounter or something like that.

:D
Well, at least we can see it from both sides, between the two of us.

Sully
08-05-2008, 04:40 PM
So do you feel we should also repeal Grant's making Christmas a federal holiday in 1870? Since this is obviously a 140 year old endorsement of Christianity by the Fed Govt.

I think it should stay a federal holiday simply because most people wouldn't be working even if it wasn't a holiday. It's something that makes me uneasy, but for practicality purposes, I don't think we could do without it like we could the other things that are discussed.
If I were around in 1870, though, I would've been firmly against it being a Federal Holiday, though.

HolmeZz
08-05-2008, 04:40 PM
And if that higher power is self-fulfillment/enlightenment?

You can believe in all the spiritual stuff you want. Self-fulfillment/enlightenment is not a trait specific to atheism though. You can be atheist and not subscribe to any of that and vice versa for the religious.

Parsing. Atheism is atheism, no matter how you try to spin it. An atheist holds a position of conscience non-belief in a higher power/god. It is a doctrine, a belief system not unlike Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, et al.

It's not a f*cking belief system. It's one singular belief: there is no God. There's no one set of beliefs/morals that come from that.

:spock: Just how in the hell can seeing God/enlightenment/whatever in one's self be "demonization"? Methinks you have limited experience with eastern philosophy...

You resorted to a typical talking point against atheists by the religious. Accusing someone of thinking they're God is not a compliment, it's a shot at their perceived arrogance. You think because they don't worship a God like you might that they must think they're better than everyone else. On the contrary, on a lot of occasions it's those that are religiously-motivated that think their actions take on added importance.

'Hamas' Jenkins
08-05-2008, 04:44 PM
My origin myth is better than your origin myth.

POND_OF_RED
08-05-2008, 05:44 PM
This guy reminds me of Uncle Ruckus from the Boondocks.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_pnXj1ppsx0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_pnXj1ppsx0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>