Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it seems to me whenever the ultra left can demogog christians they dont hesitate to do so why is this? i am talking about the ultra left i know plenty of democrats that are good christians, it just seems to me this progresive wing of the democrat party and the left media have no problem putting christians down.
Many people have used Christ as a shield to commit some of the most heinous crimes against humanity in history. Take the Klan for instance. Will the most enlightened among us protest? You bet! Being a Christian doesn't automatically elevate anyone to superior status on any level.
Jesus wouldn't even teach in a church. He taught in a robe by the mountain side or by a river. Those were ancient times. And if you want to be a real Christian then get with it and start living "anciently." Get rid of your televisions, get rid of your cars, stop focusing on money, stop over-eating, attend an outdoor church by a river or a field in a robe, etc.
The government, any government, can not take away
one's faith. It comes from within. You will always be
free to believe.
Now, if you get burned over it, such as Witches of The Burning Times from the year 1000 to around the 1700s, where countless numbers of witches were killed through the misapplication of biblical texts, we might have a problem.
This is true, the government can not take away one's faith. However, they can make a person's life miserable.
I understand now. They're not anti-Christian, just anti-scripture.
Quote:
A Non-Literal View of Scripture
Conservative Christians are often content to answer religious questions by appealing to the absolute authority of Scripture. Liberal Christians, on the other hand, find such an approach to be flawed. Many see the Bible as a witness to revelation, or generally inspired, rather than completely inspired in all its parts. Just as Jesus was fully human and wholey divine, so one must also see the Bible as a product of both human and divine influences. Indeed, liberal Christians are quick to point out that the falleness and imperfection of its human authors gives the Bible an imperfect quality and authority. http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/13746.htm
Quote:
Universal Salvation
The concept of personal salvation is not typically stressed by liberal Christians. Accordingly, traditional images of heaven, hell, and the End Times are not given much weight in their theologies. When salvation is discussed, liberals are more apt to stress its “this worldly†aspects, and appeal to a universalist interpretation of Scripture when confronted with questions of eternal punishment and rewards.
Emphasis is mine and are they in for a rude awakening.
Now I understand what all the fuss is about....carry on.
To be honest, I have a feeling that the ultraleft isn't fond of the ultra-right, Christian conservatives because the laws the ultraright wants to pass tend to be targetted at restricting freedoms of minority groups (minority as in numbers, not just skin color, etc.). The so-called ultra left is simply trying to defend them against unnecessary restrictions on self-determination couched in religious rhetoric.
Quote:
Originally Posted by actonbell
So you believe the government gave you the freedoms you have to make life choices, because they thought it to be a good idea and good ideas just go poof up, out of thin air?
Just remember this as you see nanny laws progress and become more favored on the law books.
The government giveth and the government can taketh away.
If they take it all away, what's left that we would still remain free?
This may be part of the problem. The government isn't what gives us our freedoms. Our freedoms are ours because we are human; they are innate, natural, with a bent towards self-determination. The Constitution is not a recitation of our freedoms, but rather a recitation of the restrictions on what the government can and cannot do. It is usually only when there is a perceived need that the constitution goes out of its way to articulate a "negative right" that needs special protection. Consider the 13th and 19th amendments. The Drafters constructed the Constitution this way because it would have been impossible and inadvisable to draft a set of "positive rights," the danger being a repugnant construction of the Constitution that those ennumerated rights were exhaustive.
We needed an amendment to officially declare slavery unconstitutional.
Would you argue, then, that the Bible is sufficient to restrict slavery? That's something of a hard sell. The rights granted to us as humans would include the right to own slaves if we followed the teachings of the Bible. A similar issue exists for cruel and unusual punishment, women's rights, and the mixing of races. Each of these is a natural right, codified through negative limitation in the Constitution, and none of which is defined in the Bible with sufficient specificity to have been a common place notion in 18th century America.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Bible is great. Maybe the problem the left has is that they are still waiting for some on the right wing to, you know, read it.
It is a good thing that the KKK used cross burnings as their symbol, this way that symbolism was taken by an insignifcant groups of fools. If they didn't monopolize it and make it universlaly unacceptable, the liberals would probably love to burn Christian crosses, especially I would imagine, those from the pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage camps.
To be honest, I have a feeling that the ultraleft isn't fond of the ultra-right, Christian conservatives because the laws the ultraright wants to pass tend to be targetted at restricting freedoms of minority groups (minority as in numbers, not just skin color, etc.). The so-called ultra left is simply trying to defend them against unnecessary restrictions on self-determination couched in religious rhetoric.
This may be part of the problem. The government isn't what gives us our freedoms. Our freedoms are ours because we are human; they are innate, natural, with a bent towards self-determination. The Constitution is not a recitation of our freedoms, but rather a recitation of the restrictions on what the government can and cannot do. It is usually only when there is a perceived need that the constitution goes out of its way to articulate a "negative right" that needs special protection. Consider the 13th and 19th amendments. The Drafters constructed the Constitution this way because it would have been impossible and inadvisable to draft a set of "positive rights," the danger being a repugnant construction of the Constitution that those ennumerated rights were exhaustive.
We needed an amendment to officially declare slavery unconstitutional.
Would you argue, then, that the Bible is sufficient to restrict slavery? That's something of a hard sell. The rights granted to us as humans would include the right to own slaves if we followed the teachings of the Bible. A similar issue exists for cruel and unusual punishment, women's rights, and the mixing of races. Each of these is a natural right, codified through negative limitation in the Constitution, and none of which is defined in the Bible with sufficient specificity to have been a common place notion in 18th century America.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Bible is great. Maybe the problem the left has is that they are still waiting for some on the right wing to, you know, read it.
Moses led the people out of Egypt and away from....slavery. Heavy handed people put more people right back into that situation. Do you really want to know what I think of people? Don't ask, don't tell....
Did you read the material from the link? Did you do a comparison with the Bible and the Bill of Rights? If so, what did you see wrong with what the author had to say?
All you have to do is look at their actions, defending the ground zero mosque for example. I think part of it is naive, liberals don't realize how Islam goes against so many of the values they hold dear. They simply gravitate towards wanting to like it because it isn't Christian
Can't say for anyone else, but the reason I 'defend' the mosque two blocks from 'ground zero' is the same reason I would defend any Christian group that wanted to build a church there, or any Jewish group that wanted to build a synagogue there. It's because of the first amendment right to religious freedom in this country. Note that I'm not saying it should be built, but that they have the right to build it as long as they've complied with local zoning laws. And, btw, I am a Christian.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Eureka
Heavy handed people put more people right back into that situation. Do you really want to know what I think of people? Don't ask, don't tell....
