What the hell is “the Church”? I’ve never heard of such a thing. There are many “churches”. Leaving your parish is not the same thing as leaving your faith. Rev. Jim Wallis is a big Lib and an Obama advisor.

“The Church advises Christians to stop watching Glenn Beck”
“This week the remarks prompted outrage from several Christian bloggers. The Rev. Jim Wallis, who leads
the liberal Christian antipoverty group Sojourners,…”

Ms. MacNicol, what “Church” exactly are you referring to?

The Sojourners are simply radical assholes who believe that the US should allow millions of foreigners to come to the US and get free assistance from US taxpayers. They don’t care about the enormous burden this would place on our government, culture or environment.

And obviously, you don’t either.

http://www.sojo.net/

Keep dreaming, Glynnis. He’s not going anywhere, no matter how much you libs hate him.

Every time “the Church” tells us not to read that book or watch that show, there’s all sorts of lefty outrage about how they’re a bunch of evil control freaks that rational people shouldn’t be associated with. Every time, that is, except when the target is Glenn Beck.

Beck is an ignorant asshole. Despite his ratings, he has no credibility. The mutants who watch his show are equally ignorant. His interview with Massa was a revelation. Trash tv at it’s best.

“It’s no secret that Glenn Beck’s cable show on Fox has lost a steady stream of advertisers…”

But apparently Mediaite wants to keep the reason a secret. It is because a radical black group named ColorofChange has been organizing leftists to intimidate sponsors.

The groups raison d’etre: “ColorOfChange.org exists to strengthen Black America’s political voice. Our goal is to empower our members—Black Americans and our allies—to make government more responsive to the concerns of Black Americans and to bring about positive political and social change for everyone.”

I suppose it depends on what your meaning of “positive” is. BTW, Van Jones, the Marxist kook who was a presidential appointee, and whose background Mr. Beck spotlighted on his show, was a co-founder of ColorofChange. I wonder if that has anything to do with the organizations campaign against Mr. Beck?

http://colorofchange.org/

From Media Matters:
Beck backtracks: “Social justice in which “you empower yourself to go out and help the poor” is permissible”

It would appear that it’s the bible thumpers who are kicking his ass now! Amen!

“moronic mini-Baboons Jesus”

Jesus was a baboon? I had no idea.

But I do believe in separation of Church and State. However, if any leftist baboons in leftist baboonic churches want to impose their ideology on US citizens, then let those baboons begin paying taxes.

It easy for a baboon to run its mouth when it doesn’t have to pay for the consequences.

Beck has several million followers who watch him religiously. But most of the nation, the overwhelming majority of the 300 million people in the U.S., either ignore him or are appalled at his rheteric. And that sums up FOX News as well. If you are an advertiser, its nice to reach the relatively large Beck audience, a few million people, but at what cost as far as the opinion of the other 280 million people?

As for Beck’s condemnation of Christian churches who preach social justice, that represents a condemnation of tens of millions of Christians. Like saying to them: “compassion and fairness are for suckers”. And it won’t be long until people are putting two and two together as far as Beck’s personal religious beliefs effecting his commentary. Not all Mormons subscribe to the the same wacky end of the world conspiracy theory as Beck. But there is a wing of the Mormon church that believes that these are the end days and that before the ultimate arrival of Christ, America MUST melt down, economically, politically and morally. Beck projects those beliefs all the time. Thus, Obama is the anti-Christ and those advocating positive change must be agents of the devil. Beck sees the glass half empty as a matter of religious faith.

Mr.GlennBovineKoldys says:
March 12, 2010 at 11:14 am
I am comforted in knowing that according to the moronic mini-Baboons Jesus

Looks like you’re the baboon here.

Now, our audience would like to know, how did you become a baboon? Do you like being a baboon? Is this a temporary stage, or are you going to be happy with being a baboon for the rest of your life?
And how do you shop? I bet hair products are a real concern. Anyway, get back to us with your answers after you finish that banana.

valkyrie101: “America MUST melt down, economically…”

Below is an excerpt from an article in the Washington Post, not exactly a publication that is simpatico with Glenn Beck. Unless you have a good solution for this scenario- “sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said.”- then it looks like the US has few problems.

“The CBO and the White House are in relative agreement about the short-term budget picture, with both predicting a deficit of about $1.5 trillion this year — a post-World War II record at 10.3 percent of the overall economy — and $1.3 trillion in 2011. But the CBO is considerably less optimistic about future years, predicting that deficits would never fall below 4 percent of the economy under Obama’s policies and would begin to grow rapidly after 2015.

Deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said. Interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030502974.html

Mr. GlennBovine,

I didn’t add your name in my comment to Valkyrie101 because, since you are a baboon, you obviously can’t read. BTW, have your fellow baboons ever called you a “retard”? Human’s tend to get hurt by that, but how do you, a baboon, feel about it?

PS: does your keeper know that you like to play on a computer?

It’s clear from some of the posts that this latest from Chief Tea-Bagger and lunatic Glenn Beck has got the tea-baggers all lathered up; frothy if you will. What to do? For you tea-baggers who call yourselves Christian, do you worship Jesus or Glenn, Jesus or Glenn? It’s a tough call, pray on it. If you choose Jesus, then you are left with a vexing question. Which Jesus? The Jesus that’s for social justice (as most first graders know is clearly stated in the New Testament) or Glenn Becks Jesus; the one that he just makes up because it fits his pathetic narrative? Fear not, Glenn will lead you through the Valley of Death. What a guy!!

“The Jesus that’s for social justice…It’s a tough call, pray on it.”

Not a tough call at all. When Jesus moves to America and starts paying taxes, then I’ll listen. Until then, I think all this blather about “what would Jesus do” should be left to right-wing religious kooks, oh sorry, LEFT-wing religious kooks.

Do you leftists ever read your comments? I’m so glad I don’t have to live my life with that level of anger on a daily basis. You can’t even write a single post without swearing. I feel like I’m visiting my son’s elementary school grade playgroud. Grow up.

It’s strange how all the Libs that preach “social justice” suddenly WANT the government involved in their religious beliefs when it comes to redistribution of wealth and using the government as a charitable organization. Phonies. Charity is personal and voluntary.

Well said Christine.

Actually MichelleF, you are visiting a college dorm at Brown or Cornell or Berkeley, where they grow leftists.

Unfortunately, our friends only heard the beginning this quote and not the rest of it:

“If one is under twenty-five and is not a socialist, he has no heart; if one is over 25 and still a socialist he has no head”.

Mr. Glennbovine,

I’m afraid it’s time for you to go back in your cage. It’s OK-that’s where the bananas are!
Goodbye!

Wow! Mediaite had to use a PhotoShopped picture for Beck, they didn’t have the integrity to use an actual picture. So much for this being a “news” site.

Slogging through the crap that was left as comments reminds me why most of the time I don’t read peoples comments. People on both sides are being extremely rude and mean spirited in their name calling and vitriol spewing. Yet many of these same people can’t figure out why our political discourse is nonexistent.

Did your parents ever tell you “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all” because mine sure did. When it comes to politics maybe it should be amended to “if you can’t consider anyone else’s point of view and feelings don’t say anything at all and don’t post unnecessary comments” because that’s what the majority of these comments are. Some have legitimate points but they get lost in all the crap that people are spewing, all the name calling and violence and hatred.

Now I’m whole heartedly for boycotting Glenn for many reasons and I think “the Church” is doing the right thing because he’s basically telling anyone that goes to a church that preaches whats in the bible, he’s telling them to leave that church. And FYI, “the Church” is probably referencing the Christian faith as a whole. Or possibly the Catholic faith more specifically since they’ve always been more inclined to refer to their religion and group as the church. However, that wasn’t the important part of this whole statement. Why do people feel a need to pick at stupid little things instead of focusing on the whole of it?

Joshua,
You are incorrect in your analysis of Glenn’s point. Where in the Bible does it state that the government should provide for your every want and need? It teaches you to serve others, but that’s not having the government take what’s yours through taxes and redistribute it. Pure charity is giving of yourself and what is yours to help others ot your own accord.

“name calling and vitriol spewing”

Obviously Joshua, you are referring to Mr.GlennBovine. Forgive him, for he is a baboon, and knows not what he is doing.

By the way MichelleF, I would be considered a lefty, or at least left of center, and My post has no swears, name calling or anything else. Don’t judge a group by the people online that like to play the game of “Who’s epeen is bigger?” because we don’t all fall into that. Righties online go just as overboard, it’s not solely the area of expertise for one side or the other. Until people on both sides stop seeing it as them vs us our country will NEVER get better. The whole reason for having a system like this is so that both sides can be represented and then they can generally meet somewhere in the middle. As with anything sometimes one side will win out but the theory behind it that the founding fathers subscribed to was compromise in order to keep this country running.

When’s the last time we had compromise? I can’t remember any on a topic of great importance since maybe the Clinton presidency, and early early early in his presidency at that. For the last 10-15 years our political rhetoric has gotten awful. It’s a shame that these people that refuse to get along, refuse to work with each other for our country, and refuse to even talk respectfully of each other in public are the best we can find.

It doesn’t say that in the bible, it says help your fellow man. Social justice and equality and all that are not the sole possession of the government. The church I used to go to while growing up did all kinds of community work on their own. No government stuff involved. However, it was still the same idea. We collected food for the poor and homeless, we collected clothing for children so they’d have warm clothing during the cold winter months, we did soup kitchen type meals for the homeless in our area once in a while with donated food.

Not all help has to be from the government and from my general experience most churches that preach social justice don’t do so in regards to govt but in regards to our own interactions with each other. However, Glenn isn’t talking about one or the other, he only says “social justice” or “economic justice”…fine, most churches have nothing to do with welfare and unemployment and all that. However, any church that follows the teachings of the Bible do have something to do with social justice, at least when it comes to helping out the community they’re in.

Also, any church worth a damn would preach economic justice in regards to a few things. Ideas like maybe having a minimum wage that people can actually survive on. Maybe getting equal pay for work no matter your sex, race, religion, etc. Or maybe economic justice along the lines of those that have helping those that haven’t. I’m guessing that Jesus would have helped economically had he been born to a family that was rich…granted that would ruin the whole born in a manger storyline and what not but still, I’m guessing he would have done so if the situation had been different.

…also, what’s the point of having a government if it isn’t there to help it’s citizens out? Why have one? Protection? If they’re only here to keep us safe from outside invaders then get rid of it and give everyone their own fortified bunkers.

Joshua, I believe as the parable says, give a man a fish feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime. What is happening now, is the government wants poeople dependant on them for what they need, instead of helping them do for themselves. This, in my humble opine, give the government way too much control over the lives of its citizens. My church does many things to help those less fortunate, even those who don’t belong to our church, but they also teach self-reliance and how to get there.

So Christine, you would therefore be philosophically against the government run medicaid/medicare systems? How about government aid to Katrina victims? Emergency government aid to hungry school children? It is obvious that personal charity alone does not always efficiently get what is needed to the suffering people. Right? Thus, we individual citizens, under certain circumstances, empower our government to administer care to needy people, on our behalf. Since there are something like 50,000 people dying (slowly) each year for lack of access to health care, and millions more going into bankruptcy because of health care’s inflated cost, would this constitute an emergency sufficient to empower our government to take action on our behalf?

valkyrie101,
You do what most libs do, paint conservatives as uncaring and selfish and that simply isn’t true. No one that I know of is against helping those in need, what we are saying is why completely change the whole HC system, when by the last poll I saw, around 85% of americans are happy with their current HC. Why not work on getting those that are unisured the help they need and let the rest be? Can I assume that you are for tort reform and buying across state lines? Those seem like a good place to start. I don’t know anyone who say’s do nothing, which is what R’s are accused we just think the plan on the table is dead wrong.

Michelle,
You say that your church does many things for those less fortunate, but also teaches self-reliance. I would ask, why does your church do anything other than teach self-reliance? What is the reason that it does those other things (like giving food to the hungry, gifts to children at Christmas time, etc.). Does not that make the people your church is helping reliant on your church?

Why do you say the government wants people dependent on them for what they need? I would think the government wants the opposite of that, since money is pretty tight and there are many other things it would like to use its money for.

I agree that there are some people that learn to be dependent on the govt aid they get. However I don’t believe that it’s a big % of the people. I’ve been on unemployment as have some of my friends and family (especially recently). Every time I had to go down to the unemployment office I always saw TONS of people there trying to find jobs. In Illinois at least they have computer areas that can be used by those on unemployment to search for jobs. Part of that process is teaching them to fish so to speak.

Welfare is a totally different beast. Again, there are bound to be people that abuse the system but what about the thousands and thousands of people that have disabilities that can’t support themselves? What about the people that have a job that pays minimum wage but still can’t afford food and clothing along with a place to live? Should we tell all those people that they’re S.O.L because we don’t want them to be dependent upon the govt aid? Should we tell them they had better hope that their fellow man helps them out? In my humble opinion the govt has to provide that aid because a lot of our fellow man would never help these people out. It sucks but it has to be done somehow and if our communities can’t/won’t do it then the govt needs to step in and take care of it’s people to the best of it’s ability.

Michelle,
What that poll didn’t do was seperate the HC they can recieve from the rising rates, the constant fear of loosing HC and much much more. My wife loves her HC coverage, she hates the costs. I can’t be on her plan because we can’t afford another $350 a payday just to get me covered. I haven’t been sick or had any health issues since I was in high school (1997 grad) and it would cost that much. That’s horrible. So I can’t get a checkup or find out why I have dry skin issues on my hands because it would cost too much. Yes we have great health care available but lots can’t afford it. We can debate how best to fix it but to claim that 85% are happy and want the status quo to continue is just wrong. Especially considering the status quo means that by this time next year most people will pay 15-30% or more then they do now and that will continue.

Michelle,
No, I never said anything about conservatives being uncaring and selfish. So pleae do not pin that on me. I would doubt that 85% of the people are happy with their current HC since the cost of that HC is going up dramatically every year, and thus, the premiums and co-pays are also going up. Not to mention the 40 or more million people who have no insurance. As for tort reform, sure, Obama agrees. But when you look at the numbers, tort reform would render only a couple percentage points in the equation, at best.

The problem with the “Rs” saying that they do not like the current plan is that from the beginning the Rs have not put anything at all on the table. Rather, as several members of the R’s leadership has said, opposing health care reform is how they intend to sink the Obama presidency. Indeed, the R leaders have been very overt about that. The Rs do not like the current plan, or any plan other than maitaining the status quo. In the mean time, 50K people dies per year, and millions more live in misery.

Actually they have put some stuff on the table. Last I heard there were over 100-120 specific amendments that the R’s proposed in the bill. 4 or their main 5 talking points are in the bill as well. They may not be as strict or specific as they’d have liked but that’s part of the whole compromise thing I was talking about earlier. Kind of like this whole Stupak crap. There’s already stuff in place making it illegal to federally fund abortions yet he wants stricter language and is willing to sink HCR if he doesn’t get his way. His argument of the $1 thing is totally obtuse and wrong, he’s just trying to play the hardass and I for one am sick of people being like that on either side.

I always thought ya’ll wanted to keep religion the hell out of government? What happened to that? Hard to keep track what the left believes in today isn’t it? Don’t they (the left) rant and rave about any church preaching politics?

Mr.GlennBovine has been banned from the comments section, for obvious reason I think. Also, on closer inspection I think @germ is right and that is a photoshopped pic. My mistake! Also, not my intention: I think I mistook it for one we’ve used before…but now that it’s been up for so long will leave.

There are liberal christians. they do exist. They just don’t believe in forcing their beliefs on everyone else via laws. I don’t get how the comment by the Soujurners guy to boycott Beck has anything to do with preaching politics. It has to do with disagreeing with what a person is saying…aka freedom of speech (for both sides).

germ says:
March 12, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Wow! Mediaite had to use a PhotoShopped picture for Beck, they didn’t have the integrity to use an actual picture. So much for this being a “news” site.

Had you not said that, I wouldn’t have noticed.

But now that you did… you’re 100% right. If Glynnis felt any shame for the lies and distortions she pushes, she would change the image… but she doesn’t, so this doesn’t even show up as a blip on her radar.

Glynnis MacNicol says:
March 12, 2010 at 1:50 pm

Look who wrote, while I was posting!

Of course, she says the picture will remain because it’s been there for almost 4 hours. La-ame.

Although, I do applaud the banning of Bovine… thank you!

Wow, if you are talking to me when you say I’m forcing my views on others, I think you are seeing things that just aren’t there.

@valkyrie101

Actually, “R’s” did have some good ideas; and it’s not just the tort reforms (eg…competition across state lines, etc..). Problem is, their ideas fell on deaf ears until Scott Brown.

Not sure how HC got into this discussion, but to put the plans into perspective…if you have a flat tire, and don’t even have money to fix your flat tire, the MOST you would consider would be to try to come up with money to fix your flat tire; and not to buy a new car.

In order for Obamacare to work, Congress will have to get rid of money altogether. Don’t think that’s happening…

Getting back to topic of the original article, it is not correct to suggest that social justice is a communist notion since that notion has existed for thousands of years and within both the religious and secular worlds. Social justice was the mantra, for example, of the woman’s sufferage movement and the civil rights movement. Neither were or are communist. But the woman, and minorities that pushed civil rights, were indeed often accused of seeking to undermine our culture during the stormy years when those rights were being pressed in the forum of public discourse.

MichelleF,
Actually I wasn’t, I was thinking of all the politicians I have heard say “My faith says….” or “Because I’m *insert faith* I am voting…”…faith and religion can give people a good base for morals and right and wrong. I fully believe that. I’ll debate my opinions and beliefs any day but I’ll never try to make someone live by them and that’s what I feel some people do. The abortion thing is a perfect example, I can see both sides argument. However, if you believe it’s wrong then don’t get one. Don’t tell others that don’t believe as you that they can’t do something, especially when that something currently is deemed legal.

Personally, I’ve rather enjoyed sparing with you and the few others that haven’t gone completely overboard and into the angry hate spewing.

Glynnis,

How about an update then explaining to the casual reader that the photo is at least satire. I think it shows a huge lack of integrity to use a Photoshopped image and pass it off as fact. Much like when MSDNC used the Sarah Palin fake photos but then issued a retraction – which, of course Mediaite was all over.

How about policing yourself for once?

Valkyrie101:
3/11: “…worship of a status quo that offers 45,000 dead people per year for lack of health care….”
3/12: “Since there are something like 50,000 people dying (slowly) each year….”

If the number keeps going up at this rate, I predict everyone in America will be dead by the end of the year.

Good point Valkyrie. In america it seems that often times change = socialism/communism.

…as for Bias Media…why would money have to go away for it to work? Other countries have HC that is way more socialized then “Obamacare” (which is just a stupid name designed to create fear and anger) would be. Guess what, they all have money and most of them rank higher in overall health care. Yes we have great doctors and stuff but who can afford them? If you have health care will they allow you to see the best of the best or just one of a handful of random cheaper doctors? Also, all selling across state lines will do is lower the standards of health care for the states that try to require a higher quality.

@Joshua,

so..having government run health care gives you the “best of the best”? My point is, competition drives down cost. It’s the American way.

I’ll have to disagree with you on your argument, on all points, but we’ll save that for a different discussion

as for this article, I’ve never been a big fan of a preacher using the pulpit to talk about politics. Christianity is about God, not politics…

Joshua: “Guess what, they all have money and most of them rank higher in overall health care.”

It would be nice to have references for Europe and Canada regarding: individual tax rates, corporate tax rates, quality of care, time it takes for someone to see a doctor, what, if any, are the restrictions on care.

Oh, and to have comparable references and rates for the US.

Below is an excerpt from a NYTimes article regarding high taxation in Denmark and its unintended consequences:

“Settled in Frankfurt, where he handles computer security for a major Swiss corporation, Sorensen, 34, has no plans to return to the days of paying sky-high Danish taxes…
The problem, employers and economists believe, has a lot to do with the 63 percent marginal tax rate paid by top earners in Denmark – a level that hits anyone making more than 360,000 Danish kroner, or about $70,000. That same tax rate underpins such effective income redistribution that Denmark is the most nearly equal society in the world, in that wealth is more evenly spread than anywhere else.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/business/worldbusiness/05iht-labor.4.8603880.html

Just a reminder to all you good-hearted leftists out there: Nothing is free in this world-someone has to pay.

valkyrie101~

1st, people pay into Medicare their whole working lives. Still most buy supplemental private insurance b/c medicare is insufficient. 2nd, private charity did a hell of alot better job after Katrina than the local, state, or federal gov. Only the military did their jobs well. In fact, private charity always does a better job for less money. Of course the gov is good at giving people poisonous trailers, if that’s your idea of gov assistance.

I understand the need for a limited safety net. But there is no need for even more entitlements. It’s ridiculous to try to pretend that the Left does not want a bigger government w/ more welfare programs to create a permanent voting base dependent on the government for more and more. That’s the entire point of Progressivism. There’s a huge difference between reforming the health care system and the gov taking over yet another aspect of our lives which is the ultimate goal of the Left. What do you think ‘single payer’ is, which is promoted by the Left including Obama when he was honest?

Ugh. Your use of language…”empower our government” …”on our behalf” …and the combo “to empower our government to take action on our behalf” Feel free to empower yourself to take action on your own behalf. Or someone else’s behalf.

There is nothing noble or charitable about wanting others to pay more taxes so you can feel good about the government providing services so you don’t have to put in any effort. (‘you’ speaking generally, not specifically)

Joshua,
Isn’t that what Obama is doing? He believes the governemnt should take care of us, and is trying to change the law when the majority of americans do NOT want it. As for abortion, heaven (excuse the pun) forbid that we want to protect unborn children. And yes they are children. You aren’t female, so you haven’t been pregnant and had an ultra sound, but I have and from very early on, you could clearly see a child.

Joshua~

People in countries w/ socialized medicine, in fact, don’t have money. They are taxed at such a high rate that most can’t afford to own property.

Also, the health care rankings are so misleading. They take into account the murder rate and auto accidents, etc and count that towards your health ranking which pushes the US way down the list. Makes no sense since murder and highway deaths are a safety issue, not health care.

Not to get side-tracked, but if you want to read about the effects of ultra-sound on abortion clinics:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/mugged-ultrasound?page=2

And Germ, don’t hold your breath. I’m sure Glynnis knew exactly what she was doing, judging from her total body of work (and i use the term loosely).

So, if churches start hating Beck, and the far left hates religion, that means that soon the far left will be embracing Beck?

Oh boy writer, I fear you just opened a can or worms! Stand back!

Glenn Beck says he’s all for freedom, love of America and the constitution then he tells Christians to stop going to the church they belong to. He sounds a little communistic to me.

Michelle,
With regard to abortion, a majority of Americans (and woman) favor choice. Also, as interpreted by our Supreme Court, the U.S. Constitution protects “choice” as a Constitutional right. As for when a fetus becomes a child, yes that question remains and their is sharp disagreement on that. Some believe that a fetus is a child at the moment of conception, while others say that does not happen until birth. But one thing we do know, and there is no disagreement, 45-50 thousand people or so die every year because they have no access to medical care (other than a trip to the emergency room, often too late, when their health reaches emergency status). Are you concerned about all the living people who are suffering, or die because of lack of medical care? Bringing an unaborted child into the world to face poverty, and a slow death via no medical care is not particularly humane.

As for Obama believing that government should take care of us, I would ask: Is that not one of the important purposes of government? Why do we maintain a military force? Why do have meat inspectors, or rules regulating the dumping of toxic wastes – to give just three examples from among thousands. We the people delegate certain functions to our government precisely to take care of us. But does Obama want to create a welfare state any more than any other president? Why would you say that, other than his notion that affordable health care should be provided?

We actually talked about the underlying problem, causing concern to ministers of the Gospel, last Fall in an adult study group in our parish. Some lonely souls and some extreme rightists who are inherently uncomfortable with the content of the Gospel have turned media personalities into their gods. In other words, idolatry is afoot in our land, and the idols most often worshipped, in place of God, albeit by the smallest of groups, are Limbaugh and Beck. The message offered is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but a Confession of Extreme Rightism. Of course Limbaugh and Beck revel in this, with Limbaugh often being blatantly blasphemous. Religious leaders were concerned about the worship of Baal, and they would be remiss if they weren’t concerned with the worship of Limbaugh and Beck.

writer says:
March 12, 2010 at 2:40 pm

So, if churches start hating Beck, and the far left hates religion, that means that soon the far left will be embracing Beck?

—

So another day, another lie from Danny Boy. Every Sunday, across our land, there are millions of moderates, progressives and liberals genuflecting to the Presence, kneeling in prayer, lifting their voices in praise and adoration, kneeling in supplication, living the Sacraments and joining their rightists brothers and sisters confessing their faith and preparing themselves to take the Gospel into the world. Of all the many, many lies you have told, Danny Boy, this is the most horrific, for you are slandering God’s people and working hard (but failing mightily) at diminishing God. Shame on you! At long last, have you no shame, no decency?

Don’t give me the “you’re not a woman” crap about abortion. I never said it was good or bad, I know females that would argue for both sides. I’m pointing out that religious beliefs shouldn’t have anything to do with the law since not everyone follows those beliefs.

I’ve been overseas, I have friends that live in some of those socialized medicine countries or have lived there before. Many of them like it. Yeah the taxes suck but often times they get higher base wages and what not. We can cherry pick from polls and stats and everything else till we’re blue in the face to prove either side…but should we cherry pick? Should we only ask questions or look at numbers that help prove our points or should we look at both sides? I’ve talked to people that love their socialized HC, people that love our HC, people that hate ours and that hate their socialized…and guess what. Those that “hate” the socialized generally hate the taxes. Yeah sometimes theres a wait but I have numerous experiences here where I’ve had to wait 3-4 days and sometimes a week or more to get a doctors appointment so that argument is moot.

I fully agree that competition is needed which is why I like the idea of a public option, depending on how it would be implemented. Let for profit HC companies compete against something that operates at a 5% overhead and see how they like it. Something tells it would end up being like medicare where people have it and generally like it, but they also get suplamental coverage for the stuff that the govt can’t afford to pay for or won’t pay for for numerous reasons.

I don’t think we need a 100% govt run program but why can’t we get the best of both worlds…and yes there is a best of the govt side or else congress and all the senior citizens would give up their insurance that is payed for with tax payer money.

Anyway, back to Beck. Why do people hate that there are those that boycott him? Isn’t that the American way? If you don’t like something, do something about it. No one is arguing that he has the freedom to say what he says, they’re using their freedom to disagree. In a free market society it only makes sense to go after the sponsors of stuff that you disagree with if you can get the support to do so. Then again, if this were about free market then Fox would have taken his show off the air in Europe where he hasn’t has a sponsor for his show in over a month. Free market is just an illusion.

Christine,
America has far more poverty than, for example, Canada or England (both with nationalized health care and assorted other social programs that you might call “welfare). On the other hand, America has far more super wealthy than Canada or England, with roughly 2% of our population controlling something like 90% of the wealth. Canada and England both pay for their social programs by taxing their wealthy. I mean they continue to be wealthy, just not as wealthy as their American counterparts who, for example successfully reduced their taxes by 1.4 trillion dollars via the Bush tax cuts.

And they are here who have finally found their lives. Here.

HACK

From my experience, mixing religion and politics is a dangerous mix for most churches. The realms of the spirit and the realms of this world tend not to mix too well. This affects both left-wing and right wing churches What I have seen is that introducting politics into a church service tends to polarize the congregation. The people that like the preaching against a sinful politican will stay, and become more vocal in their disapproval of any congregation members that disagree. Those members who disagree then leave the church, usually to find another one that matches their views. Some church pastors/elders value a large membership (and the tithes that membership brings), and dislike a controversial message, others value purity of doctrine over an impure world, even if their membership suffers as a result. A Unitarian service is quite different from a Southern Baptist service, and thanks to the 1st Amendment, people are free to choose which one they wish to attend. Mr. Beck is a little late to the party on this one, most people have already made their choice. “Social Justice” is a pretty vague term and it depends on what the pastor does with it, this could be a condemnation of rich people and the influence of mammon, or a call to feed more poor people with a modern day version of the loaves and the fishes. Which approach is the best one I leave for the reader to decide, I have no dog in this fight.

About as much decency as you (White) Royal King. Always casting those first stones at anyone who doesn’t toe your far left bullshit line. And aren’t your far left buddies such as Bill Maher always knocking and mocking religion? Maher even made a movie about it. Where’s your outrage toward the far left, (White) Royal?

valkyrie101~

The middle class in Europe is considered poor in America. We have a higher standard of living. Don’t know what you’re talking about.

Joshua~

Just wanted to quickly clarify my earlier comment, for accuracy purposes, b/c I was in a rush and needed to finish work stuff. I should have said that people can’t afford ‘much’ property in Europe. We love to give them credit for their small homes and cars, like we’re gluttonous, when in reality that’s all they can afford.

Also, w/ socialized medicine the wait is often months, not days. No comparison to the US.

Anyway, I’m done for the day. Peace.

I believe writer’s post was satire. And satire usually has an element of truth. Of course not everyone on the political left is anti-religion. But more often than not when there’s an attack on religion, it comes from the left. Bill Maher is a good example. And when he’s on an anti-religion rant, I’ve yet to see his leftist guests do anything but nod or laugh. And I don’t know how many times I’ve seen people on MSNBC saying ‘fundamentalist Christians’ in the same sneering tone as if they were talking about bin Laden or bank robbers. If they’d knock off the mockery, they do a lot to break that image of the left being anti-religion.

Sounds reasonable, Helix. People have made there own religious choice. However, many churches are evangelical in there approach and consider their own church to be superior, in some way. “Our members are saved and the others are not.” Something like that. Of course it is their right to feel that way. The conflict comes when the evangelical leaning church member seeks to witness to or convert a member of another church or religion to his flock. And one way that is done is by demeaning the other church in some way. Suggesting that the other church is not pure, or flawed, not saved, or secretly communist, or something like that. Disputes between warring sects, that arise from that, are quite common. I would ask, is that what Beck is doing? And if so, is not the reaction of “social justice” oriented churches to Beck, or at least those offended by him, quite natural? I have pointed out before, Beck is greatly motivated by his religion and his beliefs about the “end days”, and the notion that America WILL melt down preceeding the return of Christ. Is Beck combining his religious beliefs with his propensity for alleging a conspiracy under every rock. I think so.

valkyrie101, Your comment about Beck and Mormons is moronic. While we do tend to believe the earth will get worse before Christ returns, we in NO way hope for the worst. Why not learn a little about someones religion before you claim to know it.

I’ve been to a Mormon church. Some of the nicest people I’ve ever met. The poster above who says some in his church worship Rush Limbaugh…he’s kidding, right?

Christine,
Sure, among the top percentiles, especially the upper 5%, America arguably has the highest standard of living, but there are masses of American people living at or below the poverty level with a middle class shrinking more and more into that mess, and from that perspective, many countries rank above the U.S. I am not going to post a bunch of statistics, but if you are interested, google it.

The reason that the gap between rich and poor in the U.S. is dramatically increasing is because the wealthy now generate much of their wealth by out sourcing manufacturing to other countries where labor is cheaper. That makes for greater profits for the owners of industry, but fewer jobs for the working class people, and a widening gap between rich and poor in this country. Poor people are an economic burden on the nation as a whole, including the billions of dollars that must be paid to subsidize the un-insured who end up going to emergency rooms. So who should pay for that? Who has the money? Who has created the situation where massive jobs have been out sourced to other countries? Look at Wal-Mart. Great store. But the majority of the items it sells are made in China, or some other country where labor is cheaper. And what is the result? The Sam Walton heirs are among the richest in the world, while they pay their employees close to minimum wage to boot. The Rs keep talking about small businesses and how taxes devastate them. Well, the taxes in the U.S. are among the lowest in the world. It is not taxes that put the small business man out of business. It is Wal-Mart that does that because the small businessman can not compete with that store’s massive buying power from overseas manufacturing plants.

Clearly, if the owners of industry are going to cut the American worker out of the equation, and then the U.S. government (ultimately, whether it wants to or not) has to foot the bill, then those owners must pay for that.

Anyone else see a disconnect between these statements?:

“Actually I wasn’t, I was thinking of all the politicians I have heard say “My faith says….” or “Because I’m *insert faith* I am voting…”…faith and religion can give people a good base for morals and right and wrong. I fully believe that. I’ll debate my opinions and beliefs any day but I’ll never try to make someone live by them and that’s what I feel some people do. The abortion thing is a perfect example, I can see both sides argument. However, if you believe it’s wrong then don’t get one. Don’t tell others that don’t believe as you that they can’t do something, especially when that something currently is deemed legal”

“If you don’t like something, do something about it. No one is arguing that he has the freedom to say what he says, they’re using their freedom to disagree. In a free market society it only makes sense to go after the sponsors of stuff that you disagree with if you can get the support to do so. Then again, if this were about free market then Fox would have taken his show off the air in Europe where he hasn’t has a sponsor for his show in over a month. Free market is just an illusion.”

Well Michelle, you did not read my post very carefully. This is what I said: “But there is a wing of the Mormon church that believes that these are the end days and that before the ultimate arrival of Christ, America MUST melt down, economically, politically and morally.” Please do not make me post examples of some of the more extreme Mormon prophets on that subject. Most Mormons do not believe in that stuff, to be sure, but Beck clearly does. And I certainly did not suggest in any way that Mormons “hope for the worst” as you say. My thesis would be that if you believe these are the last days, and you believe that the last days scenario involves a general melt down of the American culture, then you will see that taking place in everything you look at. And Beck’s well documented reading list includes a number of John Birch era anti-communists (e.g. W. Cleon Skousen – to be sure, a Mormon who the Mormon church officially rebuked as outside of the mainstream) who in their day saw a communist under every rock, so is it a surprise that Beck now sees communists infiltrating our “social justice” leaning churches? Or, in general, that the glass is half empty?

Writer says:
March 12, 2010 at 4:10 pm

About as much decency as you (White) Royal King. Always casting those first stones at anyone who doesn’t toe your far left bullshit line. And aren’t your far left buddies such as Bill Maher always knocking and mocking religion? Maher even made a movie about it. Where’s your outrage toward the far left, (White) Royal?

—

There you go, again.

It’s not possible for you to tell the truth, is it?

The leadership in the Civil Rights Movement and a very strong element in the Peace Movement were people of faith, generally mainline church, RC, Episcopal, Lutherans, Methodist, Presbyterian, AME, joined by Quakers, Congregationalists, Unitarians and Anabaptists. This group is at the heart and soul of each and every reform movement in our nation today. And, I am sure everyone of these good and decent people were as offended by Maher’s film as my family and I were. We protested by not buying tickets. There is nothing here that you don’t know, Danny. Yet, you hide behind the clamor of reactionary fundamentalists (and not all, not even most fundamentalists are reactionary) and echo their trash about godless liberals. When you repeat something you know to be a lie, you are a liar. And, you have made it a full time job.

Once again: Shame on you!

I shall pray this weekend that you need only see the light but that you be transformed by it. My undergraduate university, a bastion of liberalism, has a famous tower, built by the WPA. Carved into it is that marvelous passage from St. John the Divine: “You Shall KNow the Truth, and the Truth Shall Set You Free.” How I look forward to that day when we can all join hands and say, Free at Last! Free at Last! Danny Is Free at Last!

valkyrie101, you should try reading Cleon Skousen’s the 5000 year leap. You might learn a little history, if you are interested.

Lighten up, (White) Royal. I was making a joke about Beck and the left joining up through a common dislike of religion. If you really thought I envisioned such a thing, you need more help than I thought. I know not everyone on the left is anti-religion. (gasp) But so many of your left leaning celebrities (such as Maher) are so virulently anti-religion, it does tend to give much of today’s lefties an air of intolerance toward different opinions. (Something I know never happens with you.) But while you’re praying for me, (White) Royal, I shall pray for you. I’ll pray that you shall lose the arrogance you’ve acquired from attending a private school, and the elitist attitude you have toward we peons who went instead to inner city hell holes where the people of color weren’t quite so friendly. That you’ll understand that there is indeed such a thing as black racism, and that you will stop labeling entire sections of the country as racist simply because they didn’t have your privileged upbringing and have different political opinions than you. Hallelujah!! Can I get an ‘Amen’, (White) Royal?

I appreciate the prayers of others.

I’ll pray for you anyway. I think you really need it.

Hopefully this is the first step in dismantling the unholy alliance between the religious community and the conservative Republican right.

The dichotomy between Christian values and the pro-war, anti-poor, anti-civil rights for multiple groups, pro-business at any cost to people and the planet, authoritarian Republicans was always a naked power grab more than an alliance of principle.

The resulting freak show of proclaimed “pro-lifers” being pro-war, pro-death penalty, and against social programs for the poor and civil rights for all; was almost as revolting as blatant lassiez faire capitalists and imperialist war mongers spouting platitudes about “traditional family values” they couldn’t care less about.

Anyone really practicing their faith should “render unto Caeser…” and let the Constitution rule, while those who always intended to hijack our government in order to enforce their religious beliefs on everyone will have to eventually accept rule by our secular governing system.

Michelle,
With regard to Skousen, I read his Naked Capitalist book when I was in college. I suppose I would have given it more consideration if I was living in the 1960s, but all that angry fearful rhetoric did not ring my bell. Beck’s fixation on that guy does explain why he sees a commie under every rock, however. Amazing to see the John Birch society come back from the grave. Hey, I thought we won the cold war. Do we really have to keep fighting it? Reminds me of that Jackson Browne lyric: “the veterans dream of the fight, fast asleep at the traffic light…”

“The resulting freak show of proclaimed “pro-lifers” being pro-war, pro-death penalty, and against social programs for the poor and civil rights for all; was almost as revolting as blatant lassiez faire capitalists and imperialist war mongers spouting platitudes about “traditional family values” they couldn’t care less about.

Anyone really practicing their faith should “render unto Caeser…” and let the Constitution rule, while those who always intended to hijack our government in order to enforce their religious beliefs on everyone will have to eventually accept rule by our secular governing system.”

In other words, unless you worship at the Church of the Large Safety-Net, shut up.

It’s all very well that Jim R. would use those devises allowed by the Constitution to further matters of his faith, but if you don’t see it his way, your hypocritical religiousity must stay within in confines of stained glass…

“I’ll pray for you anyway. I think you really need it.”

Trust me. He thinks of internet operative machinations as being God’s work.

Cecelia, they really, really need you over at the Koldys’ PHOX Phan Klub. It is reminding me of a Cabernet Sauvignon reduction at the moment.

In other words, unless you worship at the Church of the Large Safety-Net, shut up.

—

Cecelia, think way back to your days in Sunday School. The New Testament had come out. What was it Jesus told Simon Peter he ought to do if he loved him? I’ll give you a hint. It wasn’t to wrap up in a warm blanket with a cup of cocoa and watch the hungry starve and the naked shiver.

Well, thank you, TRFRK, for making my point.

Thank you for affirming that many liberals base their desire to tax me upon their religious precepts, and for illustrating the larger concept that there is no difference between a morality based upon a deity from any other precept predicated upon some concept of goodness.

BTW– TRFRK, when Jesus told Peter to feed his sheep, he wasn’t speaking of how Peter might vote on bills of govt largess…

That some people feel that voting yea on such matters is a matter of religious conscience, is fine with me. However, I hold the sound Biblical position that it is just as important that each man and woman weigh weigh each bit of legislation in the light of intended and unintended consequences. That this is the proper and wise sort of stewardship.

I certainly don’t hold with finger pointing and vicious denunciations of the motives of believers who may arrive at conclusions different from my own.

I see Glenn Beck one day shouting from a deserted apartment balcony ala Andy Griffith in “A Face in the Crowd.” Beck can’t stop himself and he WILL over play his hand. I look forward to the fall.

It is as inevitable as the Gretch’s make-up melting in the Summer, as O’Reilly running salacious tidbits on his show.

As inevitable as utter control freaks, who assuage themselves over their totalitarian impulses with the assumption that they know what’s for the best.

A bruised reed he does not break. The meek inherit the earth. Liars are condemned to darkness.

As inevitable as that.

I see on another thread that Bill Maher has once again been mocking religion. Cover your ears. The howls of outrage against him from the far left will be deafening.

Well, as for Maher’s mocking. Really, who mocks the other side more? The Christian side is constantly mocking, condemning, castigating, to the extreme. the secular world. And recently, they have been making a push to end the notion of separation of church and state. So as they say, if the Christians can not take it, then don’t dish it out.

Glenn Beck – is he the anti-Christ? He fits the description.

I don’t think you can divide out the camps in quite such a manner, valkyrie101.

Bill Adkin, nahhh… I’d wager if Glenn Beck were the anti-Christ he’d go for 333.

There are a few ‘Christian’ nuts, such as Pat Robertson. And any true Christian knows many of his statements are dopey. I don’t see this as a widespread movement of Christians castigating people. Only the extremists do that. And on the other side, Maher is one of the extremists. So to be fair, when the left is pointing out the extremists in the religious ranks, they should also point out the extremists in their own.

Maher doesn’t always mock religion, he’s smart enough to go fairly easy on the Muslims…

No dopier than Jeremiah or Isaiah. John Calvin or John Wesley. A plethora of popes or Martin Luther.

Maher may have some sort of animus against religion, but he’s not an extremist.

The majority of his humor is on target and biting and that’s the job of the humorist.

Semantics, Cecelia. Maher made an entire movie mocking religion. (mainly Christianity. It’s politically incorrect to mock the Muslims too much. Plus, they might kill you.) So I tend to view Maher as being extreme. You say potato, I say Maher is a nut.

Maher is a comedian. But Pat Robertson, for example, who routinely castigates secular people as being the scum of the earth, is not. He’s fully serious with no humor intended.

Agreed writer, for people to say Maher’s NOT an extremist is frightening in itself. All aboard the crazy train!!!

Then there is Glenn Beck who, after having called half the churches in America Nazis and Communists, is now condemning Bruce Springstein over his “Born in America” song. Says Beck: “This is the thing that people who come from the Soviet bloc or Cuba, they’re all saying…”

Waterloo,

Got to love that reference to Ozzy “Prince of Darkness” Osborn’s song, waterloo. :-)

Writer, there are people who have written whole books, not just mocking religion, but playing up every dire human failing as being heightened by the practice of it.

If you’re going to condemn Maher as an extremist, you’re going to have to do the same for Mark Twain, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Voltaire, Sinclair Lewis…

Some of you need to acquaint yourselves with statements from Old Testament prophets and famous preachers/ministers BC…

Ever read a sermon by Jonathan Edwards?

Jesus went as far as to say that those who didn’t “know” him were “dead already” and that there is no way to come to God BUT by him. That you could NOT serve both him AND the secular world. He described the earth as being evil.

Is THAT castigating “the secular world” enough by him.

Pat Robertson sounds downright laid-back compared to famous believers and Christ, himself!

Valkyrie101, Springsteen’s song is called “Born In The USA”.

Yep, Born in the USA. :-)

The point is not that Pat Robertson is more tame than Jonathan Edwards, or even Jesus, rather, the point is that religion castigates the secular world, so why is it outrageous for a secular comedian to castigate religion? When the Dutch newspaper ran that cartoon making fun of Mohammed. What was your take on that, and the reaction of the Islamics to issue a death threat?

valkyrie101, if you’ll read what I’ve written you’ll see that I have no trouble with Maher “castigating religion”. Or with anyone else. That’s THEIR prerogative. Religion is strong enough to take it…

I thought it was hideous of SOME Muslims to issue death threats. THAT is extremism.

And you’re playing both sides in your argument about Pat Robertson. One can’t claim that Robertson is PARTICULARLY extreme or particularly dopey ( as people here have ) and ALSO claim that it unimportant how Christian or Biblbical notables (Christ, himself!) have acted.

You have trouble with Christianity condemning the secular world, don’t stop with pointing at Pat Robertson, point at the religions Founder and Savior– Jesus Christ.

Cecelia,
I agree with most of what you say. :-) But Jesus is an historical figure speaking within a different time zone, and a completely different culture. In fact, he is my hero. I love Jesus. And I do not think he spent too much time castigating the secular world because he was living within a non-secular environment and his castigation of things was in that world. He primarily went after the religious people, not the secular ones. By “castigation” was by no means the focus of his message. Rather, his message of love, forgiveness, not judging lest the be judged, let he who is without sin cast the first stone, etc. is the message he brought.

As for Robertson, well, there are dozens of outrageous things that he has said that have nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus. The most recent one being he saying that the reason the Haitians suffered an earthquake is because many years ago they “made a pact with the devil”. Or his comment that the reason 911 happened is because God was punishing America over gays and the ACLU.

I think Maher’s stuff is not only funny, but beneficial to Christians.

valkyrie,

Jesus taught that without repentance from there is no forgiveness.

In order to be forgiven you have to offended the forgiver.

Jesus expressly stated that “the world” was condemned already. That God’s love was made manifest in the forgiveness to be found in Jesus Christ only.

Jesus taught that famines and earthquakes were signs of God’s impending judgment of the earth.

Jesus taught his disciples that obedience to him would bring persecution….from the secular world…that they would be thought of kooks, negative nellies, and the devil himself, because of their belief in Him as Savior from a FALLEN SECULAR WORLD.

You must see the entirety of what Christ said, THEN judge whether he is your hero.

T

Main Entry: 1ex·treme
Pronunciation: \ik-ˈstrēm\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin extremus, superl. of exter, exterus being on the outside — more at exterior
Date: 15th century

1 a : existing in a very high degree b : going to great or exaggerated lengths : radical c : exceeding the ordinary, usual, or expected
2 archaic : last
3 : situated at the farthest possible point from a center
4 a : most advanced or thoroughgoing

Cecilia, note especially #4a. Maher qualifies.

I meant to say 1a. Radical.

Jesus was speaking to the religious people of the day, not the secular ones. Jesus was not preaching to the Romans. Do you agree?

As for my own beliefs on Jesus, and whether I do or do not see “the entirely of Christ”, well, faith is a personal thing. For me, the “yoke” of Jesus is simply a committment to loving God and my fellow man. And of course, my hero, Jesus was a big proponent of that. Yes?

Unlike Pat Robertson, who blamed natural catastrophy, and a terrorist act on the sins of the effected people, I believe the signs of the end that Jesus was referring to, or at least the ones attributed to him in the Bible, are allegorical in nature, not literal. And in any event, those “signs” of the end were not purported to be a punishment from God to innocent people, whether they be sinners or otherwise.

And by the way, I know Jesus, and Pat Robertson is no Jesus. :-)

As for the notion of persecution, most of the Biblical persecution that is referenced in the Bible was performed by religious people. Indeed, St. Paul was saved by the Romans. Jesus, St. Stephen, and a host of others in both the old and new testaments were martyred by the religious people.

Peter, Timothy, and Paul were persecuted and killed by the Roman. Foxes Book of Martyrs details the persecution of the Christians at the hands of the Romans and others.

The whole of the Bible speaks to a God who uses natural disaster to punish and to bring repentance for sin. It’s very convenient to say that you believe that “wars, and rumors of wars”, “famine and earthquake” are allegorical, but there’s nothing that would indicate that this is the case, starting with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in the Old Testament, Noah’s flood, the plagues on the Egyptians, to Paul and John’s description of cataclysm.

Pat Robertson is following a long tradition…

Jesus was mocked, spat upon, beaten, and ultimately killed by Roman soldiers. He was rejected by the world. To insist otherwise is the sort of logical doctrinal fallacy that argues that Jesus death stands solely upon Jews (a fallacy that has its own long horrible history).

Writer, thank you for the definition of extremism, however, I was aware of it from the start.

Yes, and in that last days the sun and the moon will be darkened and the stars will fall from the sky. Is that literal too? Since our physical world would no longer exist after those events, and the Bible indicates that life will go on after those events, then you can pretty reliably deduce that those events, the darkening and the falling, are allegorical. I also consider the rapture as an allegorical reference too. Though, I do have a sun roof in my car in case I am wrong. :-) Debates over these issues are endless and unresolveable, and perhaps that is the reason there are more than 5,000 denominations of Christianity. I just know that when someone blames the victim of a natural catastrophy for causing that catastrophy, thereby causing those suffering or other suffering people greater pain, I get a strong feeling that my hero, the loving, compassionate and forgiving Jesus, is not smiling.

Actually, the sun and moon are darkened during an eclipse and parts of the world exist in a shroud of darkness during their winter months.

As to the “stars falling from the sky” (as opposed to a star which contaminates much of the earth’s drinking water as mentioned in Revelation) these things occur at the coming of Christ according to the Gospel of Matthew.

You don’t have to “like” anyone who blames a natural disaster on divine punishment nor do you have to believe them (In fact, Old testament prophets were killed for prophesying such things.)

What you do have to logically do is to admit that there is an historic and Biblical tradition for such things that includes the man who founded the faith…

Whether you believe that stars following from the sky is allegorical for the demise of Hollywood prior to Jesus’ return or no, it does not change the essential meaning that God causes disaster in one form or another as retribution for sin.

Your hero, the compassionate, loving, forgiving Christ still prophesied of the diaspora and the destruction of the temple as judgment for the rejection of the Messiah of God’s Chosen People, and he still described people as being one of the dead unless they believed in him.

Yes, well, as I said, these kind of religious discussions go no where. Subscribing literal meaning to the Bible unfortunately, often causes a person to have to suspend rationality. That is why, for example, Thomas Jefferson famously created his own Bible by cutting out all the passages that were physically impossible, such as the miracles of Christ. Here is a Jefferson quote: “Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.”

Well, to quote someone less impressive than Mr. Jefferson, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” Prov. 1:7

I suppose we’d better stop before you declare the whole of existence to be allegory, or a social construct…

Ezekiel 5:10
Therefore in your midst fathers will eat their children, and children will eat their fathers. I will inflict punishment on you and will scatter all your survivors to the winds.

I prefer to interpret this passage as a metaphor.

You’d be wrong.

During the siege of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD the Jews were starved and some resorted to cannibalism of their own children.

The Jews were scattered to winds by the Romans in what is called the diaspora.

I see. So you are suggesting that the Jewish parents literally ate their children? Is there really an historical record of that?

Yes, I’m saying that during the Roman sieges of Jewish cities the people were starved and some resorted to cannibalism.

This would not have been the first nor the last time such a thing would happen in the midst of starving people.

Yes, there are historical references. Look them up.

I will let you go with the literal reading of the Bible, though I personally think that is incorrect. Thus, as I mentioned, there are over 5000 denominations of Christianity, mostly divided over issues like literal v. allegorical and such. I love the Constitution for protecting people’s right to believe what they want, while likewise prohibiting what some people believe from being forced upon others by rule of law.

Cecelia, I appreciate the effort on this thread, but you’re wasting your time with these libs. I picture valkyrie101 right now with his hands over his ears saying, “I can’t hear you!”. It’s not worth your sanity to try to get them to see another point of view.

Well, I’m glad you’ve come to rest a bit easier in that democratic process, valkyrie101.

I hope you’ve come to the place too where you now see that all sorts of people wish to narrow our freedom of choice by forcing upon us what they see as being best for everyone, and that allusions to divine punishment and calls to repentance have been stock-n-trade Christianity (even from one Rev. Jeremiah Wright)

If you can take that step into less strum und drang, I think the 3000 words might have been worth it…

It does not constitute “force” to utilize the democratic process to bring change. To the extent that Christians seek to bring about the change they seek through that process, I am totally good with that. But of course the same thing goes for secular liberals who wish to bring change through that same process. Since change is governed by the democratic process, as outlined by our Constitution, the battle ground is the forum of public opinion.

When I used “force” I was using your word.

My entire argument has been that the democratic process and the public debate is all the battleground any entity in this country has, whether it’s school boards or organizations arranging boycotts.

Well, after all, we agree. :-)

Lets see what we have learned today, open minded social caring christians, don’t care for fake christian lies, fear, false gods and scare tactics, but so we practise turning the other cheek, let him lie, let him lie!