Why are Americans so scared? (homosexual, 2015, Army, foreign)

[EllenArlingtonPark]

I am more afraid of the Americans who pretend to respect the fabric and constitution of America and use their "christian values" to brain wash people. There are radicals in the country that scare me more than foreign or Muslim terrorists ever did, they are the true threat to this country.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by EllenArlingtonPark

I am more afraid of the Americans who pretend to respect the fabric and constitution of America and use their "christian values" to brain wash people. There are radicals in the country that scare me more than foreign or Muslim terrorists ever did, they are the true threat to this country.

Yes, I agree. Most are in Washington DC at the moment.

[Thaskateguy]

I have fear of electrical shock, and heights,(bad vertigo) and not much else.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by Thaskateguy

I have fear of electrical shock, and heights,(bad vertigo) and not much else.

Well, I've always had this irrational fear of a big hypodermic needle coming up through my mattress and piercing my navel as I sleep on my stomach. I always sleep on my back or sides.

OCD?

[jtur88]

Originally Posted by Thaskateguy

I have fear of electrical shock, and heights,(bad vertigo) and not much else.

You think that's bad, people down here in coastal Texas have bad Horizontigo.

[AxisMundi]

Originally Posted by jtur88

There is nothing religious or Christian in the doctrine of the KKK. They originally copied the Scottish practice of burning a St. Andrews cross, and D W Griffith erroneously depicted that as a Christian cross in "Birth of a Nation". That is the model that is copied by later Klansmen.

Actually, they are devout Christians and base their racism and actions on their intirpritation of your bible.

The Klan actually didn't burn crosses until AFTER Birth of a Nation, a movie based on a trilogy written by Thomas Dixon, the titles of which escape me ATM, romantisizing the Reconstruction Era Klan. Based on the movie (much like their ideology is based on fantasy as well) Simmins, founder of the modern Klan, burned a cross at the founding cerimony shortly after he and others lynched Leo Frank, a Jewish American.

While you are correct that such has it's roots in Scottland, it isn't based on St. Andrews. It was called Crann Tarra, the Declaration of War. A cross was iether burned on a hillside, or a smaller one carried through the town "to be extinguished in the blood of our enemies". The last known use in Scotland was during the Jacobit uprising, and is noted in the writings of Scott.

The burning cross certainly isn't religious in nature, it is a declaration of war and used to intimidate people, certainly. But the Klan itself is highly relgiious.

Know thine enemy jtur, that they may be defeated.

[Thaskateguy]

Some people I find, use religion as a crutch, to support their bad behavior.

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by AxisMundi

Actually, they are devout Christians and base their racism and actions on their intirpritation of your bible.

The Klan actually didn't burn crosses until AFTER Birth of a Nation, a movie based on a trilogy written by Thomas Dixon, the titles of which escape me ATM, romantisizing the Reconstruction Era Klan. Based on the movie (much like their ideology is based on fantasy as well) Simmins, founder of the modern Klan, burned a cross at the founding cerimony shortly after he and others lynched Leo Frank, a Jewish American.

While you are correct that such has it's roots in Scottland, it isn't based on St. Andrews. It was called Crann Tarra, the Declaration of War. A cross was iether burned on a hillside, or a smaller one carried through the town "to be extinguished in the blood of our enemies". The last known use in Scotland was during the Jacobit uprising, and is noted in the writings of Scott.

The burning cross certainly isn't religious in nature, it is a declaration of war and used to intimidate people, certainly. But the Klan itself is highly relgiious.

Know thine enemy jtur, that they may be defeated.

And which major body of authority within Christianity embraces their activities or attitudes?

I can proclaim myself to be anything I want. In doing so, it does not make that body that I proclaim to be a part of responsible for my actions.

If I proclaim myself to be acting in the name of PETA and go out indiscriminately shooting anyone who eats meat... is PETA to be held responsible for my actions? I say no. I have never understood the mentality of anyone who would make the claim that my actions are the fault of PETA (in this example).

[AxisMundi]

Originally Posted by Teak

Yes, terrorism is certainly an instrument to attempt change and that is probably the main reason that it is used in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. But what many of you are forgetting is that countries in which there is a Muslim majority, and Muslim-led government, there is a restriction on the freedom of those that would practice another religion or attempt to criticise the government. I live in one such country. They arrest bloggers and charge them with attempting to overthrow the government. (Yeah, right.) Do you think Saudi Arabia has its own version of City-Data forums?

Certain religions promote freedom for everyone. Some religions produce governments that restrict the freedoms of those that do not follow that religion or attempt to criticise the government. There is a difference. If Muslims gain significant political strength in the USA, watch out!

No, governments promote freedom for everyone, there is no religion that "promotes freedom for others". Some merely don't have prostylizing and "save the world, whether they want it or not" built into them.

When in control of governments, none of the three Abrahamics have a good track record with the freedoms of others, and Christianity has as bad a record as modern Muslim fundie countries like Saudi.

Prior to the final Enlightenistt Period that finally broke the back of the power of the RC Church, most of the Mediterrainian rim, all of Europe, and the British Isles would see people of the Old Religions (and fellow Christians believed to be as well) killed outright, and the colonies of those expansionist nations, such as France, Spain, and England, would see the attempted eradication of the indingeious people's cultures and especially, religions.

We here in the US face a much greater danger from our own Christian theocrats and Dominionists than we do from Muslim radicals. The latter may kill a few thousand people, out of 300 million plus, but the former can, and have, used our very own laws against us.

9/11 pulled the entire US together, for a short time until politics intruded, and united us in the face of a common enemy who committed a despicable act.

The nation sat idly by when religious institutions and clergymen urged our Elected Employees to turn each and every non-Christian in this Nation into what amounts to non-Americans with the inclusion of religion into our Pledge, and the eradication of our original Motto to be replaced with a Christin prayer.

Dominionism is an ongoing agenda in this Nation as well, and while struck a blow with the end of Bush43's reign and the power of the GOP, they can be found among the Democrats as well.

[AxisMundi]

Originally Posted by ChrisC

And which major body of authority within Christianity embraces their activities or attitudes?

I can proclaim myself to be anything I want. In doing so, it does not make that body that I proclaim to be a part of responsible for my actions.

If I proclaim myself to be acting in the name of PETA and go out indiscriminately shooting anyone who eats meat... is PETA to be held responsible for my actions? I say no. I have never understood the mentality of anyone who would make the claim that my actions are the fault of PETA (in this example).

Mind showing where I claimed they were supported and endorsed by anyone of your religion in general?

I not only explained that the Klan were, indeed, Christians, but took great pains to mention that they were a fringe group...

"...and base their racism and actions on their intirpritation of your bible"

Missed that part, did you?

I was also correcting a fellow poster on a small bit of incorrect history.

I have studied and researched the Klan for one reason, and that's not because I support or endorse their activities as some might think.

One cannot defeat an enemy compeltely unless one knows that enemy almost intimatly.

The Army of God are certainly Christians, but does that mean each and every Christian applauds and cheers whenever AoG firebombs an abortion clinic, kills an abortion provider, mails a fake anthrax letter or beats up a clinic nurse?

Or are you now going to claim that the AoG are not Christian?