Protestantism

» paper_turtle - Falwell

I wrote:
Certainly Falwell has said and done things which give creedence to the belief that he would like to see America exclusively Christian.
.
Brother Jones responded:
There sure are a lot of accusations flying back and forth these past days. Are you certain about this one?
.
.
.
Just a sampling of the wealth of information I *could* have presented about Falwell to back up my claim:
.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Falwe...

Jerry Falwell wrote in America Can Be Saved that "I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them."
.
Falwell is a controversial subject for his theological, political and social beliefs. After the September 11, 2001, attacks Falwell said on the 700 Club, "I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America.
I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'" (to which Robertson totally concurred). After heavy criticism, Falwell apologized.
.
.
from: http://atheism.about.com/library/glossar...
.
In 1979 he began what would become perhaps his most famous venture, the Moral Majority. Although it is traditionally believed that he was the driving force behind it, many believe that he was more of a figurehead. Much of the ideological and political muscle seems to have come from the financial backers Bob Billings, Paul Weyrich, Ed McAteer and Howard Phillips.
.
The Moral Majority group took a religious and political stance against abortion, pornography, feminism, homosexuality, and a variety of other things, thus helping in the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. This represented a tremendous break from his own previous beliefs - during the Civil Rights era, he sharply criticized black ministers who participated in the movement on the basis that Christian ministers should not be politically active.
.
. . .
.
In the end, it is uncertain just how much either Falwell or the Moral Majority has accomplished in real terms - but it is certain that he paved the way for other, more successful groups like the Christian Coalition.
.
.
.
from: http://www.salon.com/news/1998/03/cov_11...
The Falwell connection
.
HOW THE REV. JERRY FALWELL AND A CALIFORNIA POLITICAL ORGANIZATION HELPED FINANCE AND ORCHESTRATE AN EXTENSIVE ANTI-CLINTON PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
BY MURRAY WAAS
(you can read the article for yourself)
.
.
.
from: http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quot...
.
The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell, Sermon, July 4, 1976
.
If we are going to save America and evangelize the world, we cannot accommodate secular philosophies that are diametrically opposed to Christian truth ... We need to pull out all the stops to recruit and train 25 million Americans to become informed pro-moral activists whose voices can be heard in the halls of Congress..
.
I am convinced that America can be turned around if we will all get serious about the Master's business. It may be late, but it is never too late to do what is right. We need an old-fashioned, God-honoring, Christ-exalting revival to turn American back to God. America can be saved!
-- Jerry Falwell, "Moral Majority Report" for September, 1984
.
.
.
Seems pretty clear to me he's talking about a LOT more than just urging individuals to get right with God.
.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» Brother_Jones - Falwell

In response to Falwell posted by paper_turtle:

Seems pretty clear to me he's talking about a LOT more than just urging individuals to get right with God.

I'm trying but I can't really see how you have made the point of your earlier post.

But don't just take my word for it. There may be others here who can see it. I am not exactly like a lot of the liberals you know. I'm sorta getting old too and a little cranky about this stuff on Jerry Falwell. I feel like sometimes that he is attached to my foot.

i am just an oldtimer for the Lord.

-- posted by Brother_Jones

» Migisi - Just for fun...

.
Well, this quiz was fun. Read the statements, and see if you can identify who said it... the Christians or the terrorist. No cheating! (Note: the quiz maker intentionally mispelled Osama's name).
.
.
1. In today's wars, there are no morals, and it is clear that mankind has descended to the lowest degrees of decadence and oppression.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
2. America is polluting the whole world.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
3. The government is committed to supporting God's religion, the country remains a strong bulwark for religion, and the people are among the most protective of God's religion, and the keenest to fulfill His laws.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
4. One-world opinion is taking the side of the Palestinians, not the side of Israel.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
5. There will never be world peace until God's house and God's people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
6. The government does not cease to cry over matters affecting religion, without making any serious effort to serve the interests of the religious community.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
7. We are on the brink of our destruction, and if we do not awaken now, it will be too late. We have been victimized by traitorous behavior on the part of our leaders.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
8. The media strives to keep the people occupied with minor matters, and to stir their emotions and desires until corruption becomes widespread among believers.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
9. There is no way that a United Nations, treaties, or any other human instrument can bring about peace. Such things mean nothing when one nation desires the land and resources of another.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
10. We have allowed rampant secularism.... We have insulted God at the highest levels of government.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
11. One particular report described the gaps and the shortcoming in the philosophy of the government, the situation of the law within the country and the arbitrary declaration of what is lawful and unlawful regardless of divine law as instituted by God.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
12. Priorities of spiritual work are lost while blasphemy and polytheism continue its grip and control. We should be alert to these atrocious plans carried out by the government.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
13. America is in imminent peril... rotting from within.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
14. The American people have put themselves at the mercy of a disloyal government, and this is most evident in Clinton's administration. The American government is leading the country towards hell.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
15. The termites are in charge now, and that is not the way it ought to be, and the time has arrived for a godly fumigation.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
16. If America is not suffering the irrevocable judgment of God, she is dangerously close.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
17. Americans have committed unprecedented stupidity. We anticipate a black future for America.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
18. If the judges appointed by man will not deal with those who take innocent human life, then God is going to enter in and bring justice. And when that happens many of the innocent will suffer along with the guilty.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
19. All these crimes and sins committed by Americans are a clear declaration of war on God.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
20. A condition like this will bring about the destruction of your nation. It'll bring about terrorist bombs; it'll bring earthquakes, tornadoes and possibly a meteor.
Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson
Usama Bin Ladin
.
ANSWERS and sources here: http://www.funnystrange.com/quiz/answers...
.
Have fun!

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - The Internet

In response to The Internet posted by Brother_Jones:
.
You are sick.
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Falwell

In response to Falwell posted by Brother_Jones:
.
I get this feeling that you're a big guy on campus at your church there in Texas. You know how to use vulgarity as a way of expressing your manliness in your talk; but, you can be as harmless as a church mouse on the other hand. Very Texan, I can see that. Do you have a horse?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Republic

To All:

Every interest group tries to elect leaders and enact policies friendly to their agenda. It is NO different with Christian conservatives. Yet, somehow, I'm getting the feel (particularly from Pink and, to some extent, from Migisi and PaperTurtle as well) that there needs to be some special or extraordinary limitation placed on Christian conservatives. They can't play in the public policy sandbox like the other groups. No, they have to jump through a few extra hoops (mixing metaphors, I know) in order to play.

I am 100% supportive of the First Amendment's establishment clause. Check your history, and you'll find that the BAPTISTS (of which I am one) were at the forefront of making sure Church and State were institutionally separated in the United States. The whole "wall of separation" thing comes from a letter Mr. Jefferson wrote to a BAPTIST association.

The Founding Fathers wanted to make sure that no one denomination or faith group controlled the government to the detriment of other denominations - as was the case with Great Britain. In Britain, the Church of England IS part of the state. Church and State are intertwined. Today, it's largely just symbolic, but back in the 1700s, it was much more substantive. Colonists in some English colonies, including Virginia, had to pay taxes to support the salaries of Anglican ministers. Non-Anglican ministers had to be licensed and were subject to levels of regulation by the royal governor and/or colonial legislature. This is what the Baptists (and others) were protesting.

So, the Founding Fathers erected a wall of separation to make sure that no religious entity would be intertwined ORGANIZATIONALLY and OFFICIALLY with the US government. But, this was NEVER - and I repeat NEVER - a separation of God and/or religious morality from the public square! At least not in the minds of the Founding Fathers.

If it were, then you all have A LOT of explaining to do with the actions, policies, and rhetoric of our early Founding Fathers - including George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and on and on.

What you all are doing is saying that religious leaders or groups (Falwell, Robertson, Dobson, etc) who organize and/or lobby and/or speak out to influence the political process should be held SUSPECT and should be eyed very carefully. That they should be given not quite the same amount of latitude as other special interest groups who seek to engage the political process.

THAT is a bias that America's Founding Fathers would not share. Pink, Migisi, and Paper Turtle - you are free to believe what you want and to vote what you want and to organize however you want (I am not the one advocating any restrictions here)..BUT...

Make no mistake about it. You are out of step with the Founders of this country. (Oh, and Pink, my reading of the Founders includes but also goes beyond Thomas Paine and third party sources like David Hackett Fisher).

» paper_turtle - Republic

In response to Republic posted by BrianTubbs:

.
For the sake of illustration, let's consider a fictitious group which calls itself The People of Broccoli. They adhere to a high moral code of conduct, and are generally law-abiding citizens, just like their Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, or atheistic brothers and sisters. But they have certain unique beliefs-the most notable being that they hold Broccoli to be a manifestation of the Divine Presence.
.
They are so attached to Broccoli that they require all members of their sect to eat broccoli three times a day. BUT they would deny broccoli to anyone who does not belong to their sect, and they would not allow a non-believer to grow, harvest, transport, or sell broccoli.
.
Now, all of this would not be of serious concern to anyone if they kept to themselves and followed a policy of live and let live. But they don't. They consistently try to convert others to their cause. They pester local school boards to teach history and science from their point of view (which heavily features the work of the God of Broccoli). They form political lobbying groups which work to promulgate their view of reality to the exclusion of all others. They would like to enact legislation which requires all citizens to profess faith in the God of Broccoli, and adhere to its doctrines, rituals, and practices.
.
Those who speak on their behalf in the media portray those who oppose them as being amoral, foolish, and downright evil. They encourage discrimination against those who disagree.
.
.
Or, suppose the Jehovah's Witnesses, or the sect which practices snake handling, or the Wiccans, were trying to put a person into public office. Suppose one of these groups actually had the political clout to enact laws endorsing their particular beliefs while prohibiting others. Suppose they had the power to say that ONLY members of their group were entitled to certain rights and privileges within their city/state/nation Suppose, in their political campaigns, they consistently portrayed their opponents as not having any morals at all simply because they have different beliefs.
.
Please, try to suspend your objections and just consider how it would feel if you were not a Broccoli-ite, a JW, a snake handler, or a Wiccan. You would be concerned that one set of beliefs was trying to predominate over another. You would want to maintain your right to believe as you choose, and you would not want your children being subjected to beliefs and practices contrary to yours (particularly by people who seemed to be devaluing yours). You would object to having the rituals and symbols of the predominant belief being displayed/practiced to the exclusion of others.
.
And, in such a circumstance, you might well say to yourself, I am also a person of high moral standards. I believe in a different God, and I believe my God is THE God. I feel oppressed and discriminated against.
.
Be very clear, I am not making accusations here. I am simply trying to portray how it feels to NOT be a conservative Christian, living in a country where all are supposedly guaranteed the right to worship/not worship as they please-without fear of discrimination or persecution.
.
Those of us who are not conservative Christians also have moral standards. Yet (IMHO) conservatives have a very marked tendency to claim they are the only ones with morals/ethics. As I see it, they love to talk about their values, but they seem unwilling to admit that those with differing beliefs might also have values (which might not be so very different from theirs).
.
Those of us who are not conservative Christians do not want to eradicate God from public life, but at the same time we do not believe it is necessary to constantly label everything as Godly/Un-Godly (or whatever). We are not asking for any group to jump through hoops, but we are asking people to seek to be objective when formulating public policy. We would like those in office to decide on the basis of what will bring the greatest good to the greatest number of people-while maintaining the highest level of freedom and self-determination.
.
Brian, didn't you, in another post, say that you expect those who preside in the Supreme Court leave their opinions at home and decide objectively? Shouldn't politicians be expected to do the same?
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» paper_turtle - Republic, part 2

In response to Republic posted by BrianTubbs:

.
Brian wrote:
.
What you all are doing is saying that religious leaders or groups (Falwell, Robertson, Dobson, etc) who organize and/or lobby and/or speak out to influence the political process should be held SUSPECT and should be eyed very carefully. That they should be given not quite the same amount of latitude as other special interest groups who seek to engage the political process.
.
THAT is a bias that America's Founding Fathers would not share. Pink, Migisi, and Paper Turtle - you are free to believe what you want and to vote what you want and to organize however you want (I am not the one advocating any restrictions here)..BUT...
.
Make no mistake about it. You are out of step with the Founders of this country.
.
I would place ANY person or group under scrutiny if they were speaking from the position of ONE belief system on behalf of all people. It wouldn't matter what his/her beliefs were.
.
.
What does matter is:
.
--does this person's position equally and impartially support the rights of all
.
--does this person's position support commonly held principles of right and wrong
.
--would this person's position lead to strife, suffering, or hardship
.
--is this person stating his case in a way which will promote honest dialogue, respectful interaction, and peaceful relationships
.
--has this person/group practiced honesty and fairness in conducting business
.
It wouldn't matter what this person/group was about. They could be Quakers, or vegetarians, or low-income women. It wouldn't matter how much I agreed with them. If I did not believe they were genuinely concerned with human welfare **above and beyond their professed beliefs,** I would not support them, and I would hold them accountable.
.
I think this is very much in step with the constitution.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» pink101 - Huh?

In response to Republic posted by BrianTubbs:
.
The whole "wall of separation" thing comes from a letter Mr. Jefferson wrote to a BAPTIST association.
.
Huh? What part of NO LAW is so difficult for you to understand that you have to try to put the focus on some letter Jefferson wrote to a Baptist congregation?
.
You cannot be thankful enough that you and the rest of us live in this great secular society for; without it, you would not have the freedom of choice that you are able to exercise here in the United States of America. Your freedoms would be drastically limited by what you were able to say, hear, and read and that would mean that you would be limited in your potential to be who it is you have come to be.
.
.
And I have seen no place here where Christians are given more hoops to jump through than anyone else. The erosion of our Civil Liberties must come to a screeching halt and the sooner the better.
.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - What fun!?

.
Since we're all here... and this thread's about the 'idea of evil', tell me what you think of this video....
.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...
.
Take note of the 'woo hoos' and 'yee haas' and bragging as these troops shoot at civilians on a Ramadi Iraq street. What fun for them, ay?
.
And Paper, you probably read this already: https://www.vermontguardian.com/dailies/022006/020806.shtml#top
Rape fears lead women soldiers to suicide, death
.
NEW YORK - U.S. female soldiers in Iraq were assaulted or raped by male soldiers in the women's latrines, and an alarming number committed suicide, Col. Janis Karpinski reportedly testified before an international human rights commission of inquiry last month.
.
"Because the women were in fear of getting up in the darkness [to go to the latrine], they were not drinking liquids after 3 or 4 in the afternoon," Karpinski testified, according to a report on Truthout.org. "In the 100 degree heat, they were dying of dehydration in their sleep."

-- posted by Migisi