Thank you Clark for your response. Just to make this point clear in my mind. Your point that every administration is influenced in some way by something is well taken. You are saying it is all the same. I guess from that statement you are inferring that having a religious bias to policy making is the same as having a liberal or conservative bias.
You also said that there is a faction of the party that does use religion as an influencing factor and you believe that this is wrong.
Do you then believe that having a conservative or liberal influence in policy making is also wrong?
Please don’t get me wrong… I am trying to be clear here. If you feel having a liberal or conservative bias is also wrong, that is fine. I am just trying to understand your stance.
Mike
| Quote (DrGuitar @ April 04 2005,16:44) |
| Thank you Clark for your response. Just to make this point clear in my mind. Your point that every administration is influenced in some way by something is well taken. You are saying it is all the same. I guess from that statement you are inferring that having a religious bias to policy making is the same as having a liberal or conservative bias. You also said that there is a faction of the party that does use religion as an influencing factor and you believe that this is wrong. Do you then believe that having a conservative or liberal influence in policy making is also wrong? Please don't get me wrong... I am trying to be clear here. If you feel having a liberal or conservative bias is also wrong, that is fine. I am just trying to understand your stance. Mike |
Mike,
I am probably the wrong person to get a clear answer on this one, to be honest. But yes, I tend to be annoyed by bias from both sides of the aisle. I tend to fall more towards the right on fiscal issues, and I care not much about social issues except how they impact fiscal issues. See what I mean. even I read myself as confused.
I love the discussion though.
Thanks,
C
Thanks Clark, that does explain my confusion with your answer. I consider myself also a fiscal conservative. Certainly much more conservative than the current administration. Yet I am socially liberal. So I lean both ways (the reason I am always laying down 
). It is hard to have your cake and eat it too.
Mike
See? There are no cut and dried answers to MANY problems. Percieved OR real. The reason I answered the way I did is this;
Dub painted a big set of crosshairs on his back when came out so openly and boldly as a Christian. It was a gamble that apparently paid off. The negative side to that is he now has all the far right Christian contingent to deal with who saw a golden opportunity to grab some media coverage and make some waves.
I think things will swing back toward the middle soon. All this fretting and worrying about nut-ball Christian fanatics is unwarranted IMO.
Rational minded adults know that fanaticism about anything is not good. At least I hope they do.
TG
TG
Yeah! Long live fanaticism and excess in everything!
Moderation is for monks!
Ali
| Quote (gtr4him @ April 04 2005,17:26) |
| See? There are no cut and dried answers to MANY problems. Percieved OR real. The reason I answered the way I did is this; Dub painted a big set of crosshairs on his back when came out so openly and boldly as a Christian. It was a gamble that apparently paid off. The negative side to that is he now has all the far right Christian contingent to deal with who saw a golden opportunity to grab some media coverage and make some waves. I think things will swing back toward the middle soon. All this fretting and worrying about nut-ball Christian fanatics is unwarranted IMO. Rational minded adults know that fanaticism about anything is not good. At least I hope they do. TG |
Nut-ball Christians? I don't believe that you really think there are "nut-ball christians" influencing the white house do you? If fact, what is the definition of a "Nut-ball Christian" Sounds pretty derogatory to me.
You know, I must be pretty naive. I really didn't expect this to be a discussion of calling names. I thought people would voice their opinion on whether or not they thought the fundamental christian right had some influence on policy making in this country and if you thought that was good or bad. I had no idea that so many people would be so sensitive to this issue. Maybe it is a knee-jerk reaction to the question or maybe there is some sort of concern about this with many people.
I hope more people will chime in on the discussion and vote the poll. If nothing else, the reaction is interesting.
Mike
TG said nutball Christians an hour ago, and I’m still laughing! 
Keep shinin’ guys, interesting reading on the crapper once again…
jerm 
Dubbreak - if you check with the folks at the United Church of Canada (mainstream methodist for the Yanks here) you will find a very sizable group of Christians who support gay marriage, and in fact perform the ceremony for gay couples.
Christianity is a lot more diverse than most people realize. Generalizations usually run into counter examples.
And, by the way, complaints about hypocritical or lax believers are found in every religious tradition.
Anyway, on to the topic - why even ask the question when Bush and DeLay and Frist and the rest are very explicit about it? They want to turn the US into the US of Jesus. They have said so, over and over.
Tom, I have not heard these gentlemen say they want a church state. Do you know where I can read such talk?
I can only guess that you voted your belief that US policy is influenced by fundamental christians. If you did, do you believe this is a good/bad thing and why?
thanks in advance,
Mike
Sorry Doc. I think you mis-understood me. I’m not calling anybody anything. I was sarcastically referring to a lot of stuff I read on here (and other places) where opinions are rampant (incorrect opinions) that ALL Christians are fanatics and would LOVE to see the US become a “Church” state. I think that worry is unfounded. Checks and balances?
Sorry for the confusion. Interesting thread…
TG
| Quote (gtr4him @ April 05 2005,10:07) |
| Sorry Doc. I think you mis-understood me. I'm not calling anybody anything. I was sarcastically referring to a lot of stuff I read on here (and other places) where opinions are rampant (incorrect opinions) that ALL Christians are fanatics and would LOVE to see the US become a "Church" state. I think that worry is unfounded. Checks and balances? Sorry for the confusion. Interesting thread....... TG |
Thanks for clearing that up. I had a hard time believing that you thought there were nut-ball christians (whatever that is).
About the checks and balances. There are those that believe that it isn't just the White House that has been influenced, but all 3 branches of government. After all, we have republican controlled judiciary, legislative and executive branches which could side step the concept of checks and balances with a common agenda. I'm not saying it is, I am interested in seeing if other people think this is good or bad or even possible.
Thanks for your reply. There are those here that believe this post is too devisive to even reply to. I believe that if people are concerned about a situation, the best way to put it to rest is to discuss it openly and let the thoughts and feelings out. This way, concerns can be answered.
again, thank you for your reply,
Mike
| Quote (DrGuitar @ April 05 2005,09:48) |
| Anyway, on to the topic - why even ask the question when Bush and DeLay and Frist and the rest are very explicit about it? They want to turn the US into the US of Jesus. They have said so, over and over. |
Tom, I have not heard these gentlemen say they want a church state. Do you know where I can read such talk?
I can only guess that you voted your belief that US policy is influenced by fundamental christians. If you did, do you believe this is a good/bad thing and why?
thanks in advance,
Mike
Did you read Frist's and DeLay's comments that I posted a few days ago?
It's clearly a bad thing, not b/c they have the wrong moral or theological views (although I do think that fundies are wrong on both counts in many cases) but because they locate sovereignty in God and not in the people. The US is an experiment in tolerance and the will of the people, and however flawed it may be, we cannot lose sight of what that means. It means, inter alia, that govenment must not be used as a tool to realize a religious agenda. In this sense there is no relevant difference between the Taliban and Fundamentalist Republicans.
Having said that, I know someone might say that the analogy is unfair, that the Taliban oppressed women, etc., and while all those differences are in fact differences, there is one way in which the Taliban and Fundamentalists in the US are exactly the same - they both see the state as a tool for realizing religious purposes. They see the state in Augustinian terms, in fact. Anyone who thinks this is OK needs to think again.
I am concerned Mike. I’m just hoping and praying that wiser heads prevail before something REALLY stupid goes down!
I am a Christian, but I also believe that the way to win people is NOT by shoving stuff down their throats. Educate them as best you can and let them come to their own conclusion. That and a lot of praying on thier behalf!
TG
Naw, carmming down throats is best. Then everyone gets pissed. There is a revoltution. We start over with a maginally better system. In a billion years or so of this, we’ll get it right. Sure, some of the revolutions will result in dictators being in control, but look at what Mussolini did to electrify the Italian country side and what Castro has done for cigars. But there will always be another revolution… until the machines take over.
Hmm… good point Bubba. No electricity in Italy means NO n-Track… hurray for Mussolini!! The cigars? Eh… I can live without those.
TG
Dear God, I hope folks realize we are being sarcastic…
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
must resist humor
| Quote (jeremysdemo @ April 04 2005,23:55) |
| TG said nutball Christians an hour ago, and I'm still laughing! Keep shinin' guys, interesting reading on the crapper once again..... jerm
|
Jerm, you have a computer in the bathroom ? - now that is cool! I would too, but my wife says it doesn't match the "Decor" (whatever that is).
.-=/gp\=-.
| Quote (chutz @ April 05 2005,16:08) |
| "Decor" (whatever that is). .-=/gp\=-. |
Its a chick word. Sounds French to me. Maybe it means "crapper" or "throne"?
I'm lucky my wife lets me carry a book to the head. Otherwise, I'd never get to read!
HAH! I can hear her now if I tried carrying a laptop to the bathroom! LOL!
TG