For Liberal's, Lefties and Democrats ONLY!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Jun 10 2006, 02:41 AM) [snapback]269092[/snapback]</div>

by saying church you did narrow it to Christians...the rest of us Americans, if we go to a religious facility, go to mosques, temples, synagogues, meeting houses, etc. That is why I wasn't certain if your choice of words was a typical mistake, or if it was intentional.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Jun 9 2006, 03:03 PM) [snapback]268729[/snapback]</div>

I couldn't have said it better myself.

I left the Methodist church in my teen years when I first came to realize some of the more "exclusive" tenets of congregationalized Christianity. (You're a bad person if you don't believe in Jesus as the savior, etc...)

I consider myself religious, but not as a member of congregationalized religion. I think Jesus was a great role model (if more Christians TRULY chose to follow him, it would be a great faith--and don't get me wrong, there are a lot who do TRULY follow his teachings), but so was Mohammad, and the Buddha...and what about the polytheistic religions (e.g., Hinduism) who also have some great nuggets of wisdom/philosophy/life lessons?

I believe that being decent, loving, and compassionate transcends religion. I try to help the collective consciousness on a day-to-day basis by just being good to people. I think Jesus likes that.

And furthermore, I don't expect anyone else to feel the same way. If you do, great--we can talk at length about our agreements. If you don't, great--we can talk at length about our differences. Just don't preach hate to me in ANY form...I won't buy in.

 

I belong to a church. Specifically the Unitarian Universalist Church of Spokane. However I did not have a religion or a faith until recently (lots of UU's are atheists) until I saw the light of His Noodly Goodness and became a Pastafarian. The Flying Spaghetti Monster has touched me with His Noodly Appendage and opened my eye (the one not covered by the pirate eye-patch). May you, too, be touched by His Noodly Appendage and enter into a state of grace, from whence the beer volcano and the stripper factory await you in heaven.

For those who are not quite sure, the Church of the FSM offers a unique god-back guarantee: Try the FSM for 30 days, and if you are not completely satisfied, your own god will probably take you back. This promise is taken directly from the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, (available in libraries, bookstores, and on-line) so is indisputable Truth. No other religion makes such a promise. You have nothing to lose.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(geologyrox @ Jun 9 2006, 06:04 PM) [snapback]268887[/snapback]</div>

I admit the same type of feeling...but then I look at who I am, and my code of morals and ethics, and the way I live my life, and I feel like I am on a righteous path. Falwell (blech) and Robertson (blech) may choose to condemn me, but frankly, even per their religion, that is NOT their responsibility...only God's.

I live my faith on a day-to-day basis. I don't "save it up" for one or two days a week. Sounds like you do the same.

Hey, at least you're listening, thinking, and making decisions. Congrats!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jun 10 2006, 10:47 AM) [snapback]269159[/snapback]</div>

Daniel- I know there are UU-Wiccan, UU-Buddhist, etc. organizations with their own web sites. Is there a UU-FSM organization? If not, maybe you should start one! Spaghetti and beer dinners in the parish hall!
"God-back guarantee"- that is indeed funny! :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tanteb & rgrpick @ Jun 10 2006, 05:39 AM) [snapback]269126[/snapback]</div>

That was no mistake. As far as his type is concerned, America is a Christian nation. That is why they try ramming their brand of religion down our throats at every point and turn.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Jun 10 2006, 12:27 PM) [snapback]269195[/snapback]</div>

This is something I have never understood. The communities I have most loved, the ones that to me most embody all that is good in the USA, have been communities as rich in cultural, religious, and ethnic difference as a beautiful tapestry is rich in varying hues and textures.

But you are right, and it is that very attempt to force feed religion, or a specific religion, that led me back to Temple...a sanctuary, a community.

 

"I think what we have here is a failure to communicate"
- Captain Strother Martin, "Cool Hand Luke"

Ann Coulter, the James Carval of the Republican Party, has a new book where she evidently says that liberalism is the liberals religion since they eschew God and normal religion. We should ignore Coulter and Carval, as their acid tongues and bitter ruminations don't help us acheive anything, except perhaps to increase political polarization. I don't think that's a good thing.

Here's what I think is happening: you will find a higher percentage of atheists and committed agnostics in America to be in the liberal camp rather than in the conservative camp. So there is some correllation there. I don't think its a case of cause and effect, but rather a result of the polarization that happened between religious conservatives and liberals in the 1980s.

Prior to the rise of the "religious right", most religious influence in American politics was on the liberal side; the ulta-liberal anti-abortion activism of Daniel Berrigan in the 1970s, the support for the civil rights movement in the white churches in the 1960s (Methodist, Congregationalist, Society of Friends) and farther back to the idealism of the Wilson administration in the early years of the 20th century. Prior to 1980, I don't think you would be able to find as much difference in party affilliation or "voluntary membership" in either liberal or conservative camp among agnostics and atheists.

There are very many religious liberals, and they should make sure America hears their message. I'll still disagree with them, but it would be nice to hear more about the majority of liberals who love the country, believe in God, want to make their marriages work and desire to make the world a better place for their children (you guys can start by disbanding the ACLU and their ridiculous lawsuits).

Conservatives are so closely identified with religious conservatives that the line has been blurred between them, and atheists don't feel welcome in a conservative political organization even if they do believe in limited government, less taxation, more individual freedom, etc. Those beliefs have been the core of conservative thought, and belief in God (or not) has no bearing on those ideals.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jun 10 2006, 03:29 PM) [snapback]269251[/snapback]</div>

I assume you mean James Carville? Sure, he runs off at the mouth a lot; and I believe that Carville and political consultants of his ilk have been detrimental to the Democratic party. But you can't compare him to Ann Coulter. James Carval has never dome anything as mean-spirited and disgusting as vilifying the family members of those who were killed in 9/11; nor as he tried to incite violence in crowds by using hate speech. I don't have the highest regard for Carville, but I don't think that's a fair comparison. The only person I can think of on the left that might even be close to Coulter's league is Ward Churchill, who also made some offensive remarks about 9/11 victims, but most progressive people I know regard him as a loon.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jun 10 2006, 03:29 PM) [snapback]269251[/snapback]</div>

I don't agree with everything that the ACLU does (I particularly don't agree with their internal politics as of late, but that's another matter); nor do I get upset about every single public display of religious symbols as long as they are not overtly suggestive of government sponsored religion (the Ten Commandments do not belong in a courthouse) and as long as particular religions are not excluded at the expense of others. I even wrote a letter to my state chapter of the ACLU (yes, I am a card-carrying member) to state my objection to their attempt to prohibit the police in my town from being assigned to protect crosswalks during services at the Catholic church. While I believe in separation of church and state, I was more concerned in this case about someone being hit by a car.

However, in the current political climate, with the Patriot Act, illegal wiretapping, datamining, and suppression of free speech and expression, the preservation of civil liberties is crucial if we are to remain a free and democratic society.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Jun 10 2006, 01:30 AM) [snapback]269081[/snapback]</div>

I don't think any liberals instituted the Patriot Act.

And I don't think there are any liberals looking to amend the Constitution to make sure that if you don't marry someone they approve of, you can't get married at all.

There was a conservative Republican legislator in California that tried to pass an amendment to the state constitution forbidding teachers from voting for any proposition that had anything to do with education because they were "biased".

Liberals protect everyone's rights. Conservatives protect themselves.

Liberal:"I don't agree with what you're saying but I defend your right to say it."

Conservative "You can't say that. If you do you're a traitor. If you do you're Godless. If you don't stop saying it we'll pass a law against saying it and you'll be arrested and thrown in jail."

Oh wait. You can be thrown in jail indefinitely anyway because if you say it you're obviously a terrorist.

Someone made a post asking for oxymorons. I think altruistic conservative would be one.

By the way....I never thought much about politics until 2000. And I didn't get this extreme until 2004. You do the math.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Jun 10 2006, 11:27 AM) [snapback]269195[/snapback]</div>

Instead of Christian Nation he should have said Protestant Nation.

I took a poll in class once. You'd be surprised how many kids don't consider Catholics to be Christian. Christians are Methodists and Baptists. Catholics are...Catholic.

Interesting thing is....I think those who talk of this nation being a Christian Nation think exactly that way. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and Catholics couldn't possibly have the same "Christian" Values. Apparently it's an exclusive club. (Ooooo...wasn't it the liberals who were responsible for doing away with exclusive clubs?)

(Groucho Marx married a woman who wasn't Jewish and they had a daughter. They stayed at a hotel and his daughter went swimming in the hotel pool. The manager came out and asked him to ask his daughter to get out of the pool because it was an exclusive hotel. He told the manager she was only half Jewish...couldn't she just wade up to her waist?)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Jun 10 2006, 12:54 PM) [snapback]269261[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, Carville. While he's credited with the very effective "Its the economy stupid" slogan of President Clinton's successful campaign, he has also villified conservatives, and called them crazy and unamerican. Its a good comparison, but perhaps you can't see how conservatives view Carville because he doesn't attack your views.

I don't know if Coulter has ever worked on a campaign ... I first became aware of her when she appeared on the scene as a conservative "attack dog" during the Clinton years. Her rhetoric is certainly no more inflammatory than several of the posters here, who accuse our current President of all sorts of horrible things. I just wonder if those over-the-top folks realize they are looking into a mirror when they hear Coulter?

Coulter's criticism of the "9/11 Widows", who are actually just 4 or 6 wives who first formed their organization to get a larger settlement after the attacks, was over the top. But we should remember that these "Jersey Girls" are not above criticism simply because they were victimized. Like Cindy Sheehan, it is fair for people to examine what they say and analyze it. (And by the way, were the victims of the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma ever given $3.1 million each? How many people know that the payments were simply a bail out of the airlines so they could avoid civil lawsuits that would bankrupt them?)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 10 2006, 08:34 PM) [snapback]269392[/snapback]</div>

No, but the Democrats voted for it in great numbers. The Democrats have enough seats in the Senate to sustain a fillibuster, and so could have blocked any of the worst excesses of Bush, but have not done so. They could have prevented the war, they could have blocked the Patriot Act, they could have rejected the obscene tax cuts for the rich, but instead they supported Bush all the way. Only a few of the most liberal voted against. When it comes right down to it, the "liberals" in U.S. government are not all that much different from their conservative colleagues.