Protestantism

» pink101 - Answering Pink

In response to Answering Pink posted by BrianTubbs:
.
"... my comments are no more 'framing' than yours"
.
That may be true.
.
The tarring and feathering was done by the Sons of Liberty and other mob type gangs.
.
Mob type gangs is it? Hmmm.
.
I thought that was pretty good the way they trashed Hutchinson's house.
.
Insurgents fight with whatever tools or weapons are available to them. For us to judge what it is acceptable behavior for people who are so enraged by what they see as injustice doesn't do us well in the light of truthfulness.
.
I know that the Iraqi culture has existed under injustice for a long time going back to the change from the ninteenth to the twentieth centuries. They have a generational history in which the last of the originals have finally died off. So, everyone in Iraq is used to being treated with violence from within and without. They are a people torn every which way. I cant' say how I would react to the occupation forces if I were an Iraqi under siege.
.
In a way, there is a comparison can be drawn to America's late days of colonial rule under an occupying force. I may or maynot agree; but, I can understand insurgents being seen as freedom fighters.
.
"... a pastor (one who is doing his job) is accountable to GOD and not the 'people's court.' I don't submit my sermons for public approval, nor do I think ANY pastor should!!!".
.
That's why Baptist churches get new pastors every once in a while. They disapprove of the sermons they're hearing. heh heh.
.
The "people's courts" as you know were the ones held in local taverns when the king's courts were disestablished by the local assemblies under the Continental Associations. And, they DID confront preachers for their sermons regarding obedience to the laws under the king. Preachers did get in line.
.
Beyond that, what can I say?
.
That there is a suppression of certain aspects of American history and that such a suppression serves the interests of so-called conservative politics? Could you say that?
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Paper Turtle

In response to Paper Turtle posted by paper_turtle:
.
I think it is difficult for a father to identify with what it means for a mother to give birth to a child. Further, to raise that little bundle of joy to grow, to develop, and to mature into a young adult--to offer it up for sacrifice to a whatever just or unjust cause--finally, to welcome the body back to be buried in the ground--dead. Sad, sad, sad, sad.
.
All mothers must grieve.
.

-- posted by pink101

» paper_turtle - Paper Turtle

In response to Paper Turtle posted by pink101:

.Phil wrote:
I think it is difficult for a father to identify with what it means for a mother to give birth to a child. Further, to raise that little bundle of joy to grow, to develop, and to mature into a young adult--to offer it up for sacrifice to a whatever just or unjust cause--finally, to welcome the body back to be buried in the ground--dead. Sad, sad, sad, sad.
.
All mothers must grieve.
.
Yes. It breaks my heart.
.
I fell in love with my children the moment I knew I was pregnant. I would have done anything for them. For nine months a woman carries a mystery, a possibility, and a hope for the future. The connection between mother and unborn child is indescribable, but so real. And the days when my children were born are two of the most joyful days of my life.
.
These beings are bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh, and yet they are each their own person, each my gifts to the world.
.
There are no words for it. The thought of losing these precious children is unbearable. Anything that hurts them wounds me.
.
You may remember that earlier this year my daughter had a stillborn baby. She still grieves this loss, and so do I; the pain will lessen with time, but it will never go away. There will always be an absent space in the universe for one who almost was.
.
Kathe Kollwitz was a German artist whose entire life work was dedicated to, and haunted by, the memory of her son, who died in WWI. You can find out a bit more about her here:
.
http://www.pbs.org/greatwar/historian/hi...
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» Brian Tubbs - Paper Turtle

In response to Paper Turtle posted by paper_turtle:

Go back and read my first post about Sheehan and this should clarify why I keep mentioning Falwell.

I read it, PT, the first time you posted it. And I disagree with your reasons for bringing him in. But, whatever.

I don't see how having sympathy for someone should be connected with whether or not you approve of their actions. To say "good riddance" seems, well, cold and (frankly) self-righteous.

I sympathize with her as a grieving mother. But I say "good riddance" to the public figure who called the people who killed her son and 3,000 of his colleagues "freedom fighters." I don't consider myself self-righteous, but, on this point, I am absolutely confident in my position. To be right isn't necessarily to be self-righteous.

She lost a child. There is no more painful loss in the world. Her loss caused her to work to try to save other parents from losing their children. You may not agree with her, or approve of her, but a little sensitivity would go a long way.

HOW one goes about protesting their government is more important than whether they do so or not. If Cindy Sheehan had dedicated herself simply to peace activism, I WOULD disagree with her, but would still respect her. She went much further than that. In many ways, she became an advocate for the insurgents. To align oneself with the enemies of your country is not peace activism. It's treason.

» Brian Tubbs - Founding Fathers and Mobs

In response to Answering Pink posted by pink101:

Pink, history has often been used to support different positions. Your implication that this is unique to conservative politics is outlandish.

The truth is that the CONSENSUS which emerged from the American Revolution is that the people should govern THROUGH their elected leaders and ACCORDING to the Rule of Law.

I can prove that consensus with two words: ELECTORAL COLLEGE. It's there as a filter - to regulate our democratic system. To balance the will of the people en masse with the will of the states.

But it's not the only one. We are a REPUBLIC. Not a direct democracy. Granted, New England has a tradition of town meetings and more direct democracy. But that is NOT the direction that the United States went overall. We are a REPUBLIC!

And our Founders warned against mob rule. You are basically holding up mob rule and mob violence as a badge of honor. The Founding Fathers would NOT agree with you.

One common tavern toast during the Revolution was "Freedom from mobs as well as Freedom from Kings."

» pink101 - Founding Fathers and Mobs

In response to Founding Fathers and Mobs posted by BrianTubbs:

.
"...history has often been used to support different positions. Your implication that this is unique to conservative politics is outlandish.
"
.
Not so. We know that establishment politics sets up the educational programs for text book publishers. And, we know that Lynne Cheney was involved in the controversy regarding how American History is taught in American high schools. To claim otherwise is what is outlandish.
.
You rale against me for making posts in favor of the role ordinary people played in the American War for Independence. YOU are the one who has an agenda. I'm the one who is searching for truth.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Casey Sheehan

In response to Casey Sheehan posted by BrianTubbs:

.
Besides, I care more about what CASEY Sheehan thought regarding the war, than Cindy.
.
If he had lived, he might've thought like his comrads in arms do today.... (reposted from another thread here)...
.
"With allies in enemy ranks, GIs in Iraq are no longer true believers"
.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/27/n...
.
(quote)... "But now on his third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this past February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb. When they searched the bomber's body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.
.
"I thought, 'What are we doing here? Why are we still here?' " said Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the 1st Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. "We're helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us."
.
"His views are echoed by most of his fellow soldiers in Delta Company, renowned for its aggressiveness.
...
"To O'Flarity, the Iraqi security forces are militias beholden to local leaders, not the Iraqi government. "Half of the Iraqi security forces are insurgents," he said.
.
"As for his views on the war, O'Flarity said, "I don't believe we should be here in the middle of a civil war."
.
"We've all lost friends over here," he said. "Most of us don't know what we're fighting for anymore. We're serving our country and friends, but the only reason we go out every day is for each other."
.
"I don't want any more of my guys to get hurt or die. If it was something I felt righteous about, maybe. But for this country and this conflict, no, it's not worth it."

-- posted by Migisi

» Migisi - Paper Turtle

In response to Paper Turtle posted by BrianTubbs:
.
To align oneself with the enemies of your country is not peace activism. It's treason.
.
It is NOT treason to speak one's mind, Brian. It's a constitutional right, remember? Sheehan pointed out that the US became a colonizer when Bush invaded Iraq (for no legitimate reason, I might add). The US became an occupier, just like so many other countries had occupied Iraq before. If you look at if from the Iraqi POV, the Iraqis and their allies ARE freedom fighters... They are fighting for their freedom from US occupation.
.
A world super-power invaded your country for no valid reason, dissolved your federal and local governments, and established their own military government and police squads. And then they hunted down and killed your President's family, and hung your President. Whether you liked your national leaders or not, they were YOUR countrymen. I'm betting you and everyone you know would take up arms against them, and defend your country with your life. Walk in another (wo)man's shoes for a day.

-- posted by Migisi

» Brian Tubbs - How audacious

In response to Founding Fathers and Mobs posted by pink101:

Not so. We know that establishment politics sets up the educational programs for text book publishers.

"Establishment politics" - what the bleep does that mean? The government does not control our textbooks.

And, we know that Lynne Cheney was involved in the controversy regarding how American History is taught in American high schools. To claim otherwise is what is outlandish.

I didn't say ANYTHING about Lynne Cheney. She has been involved in educational issues long before her husband became VP. Is it somehow WRONG for her to be involved? Should she NOT have been involved all along - because she's a Cheney? Or because she's conservative?
.
You rale against me for making posts in favor of the role ordinary people played in the American War for Independence.

This is incredibly audacious for you to say. Quite frankly, you're full of nonsense (that's the polite word for it). I have NOTHING against emphasizing the role ordinary people have played in America's history. What I "rail against" is when people like you and Zinn ONE-DIMENSIONALIZE the "ordinary people" and then define history according to your terms.

I don't see people as classes. I see them as individuals. And I don't one-dimensionalize them. Do you think Ethan Allen was representative of all the people in 1775? Do you? I ask this, having nothing against Ethan Allen. He was quite the character. But so were a lot of others.

YOU are the one who has an agenda. I'm the one who is searching for truth.

This is one of the most ridiculous and audacious things I've heard anyone say. How sanctimonious can you possibly be??? YOU seek the truth and I seek an agenda? How about we both are arguing for what we see as the truth? Can you accept that? Probably not.

» Brian Tubbs - Nonsense

In response to Paper Turtle posted by Migisi:
Migisi,

With all due respect, your post is full of left-wing, extremist propaganda nonsense. The United States is not colonizing Iraq.

If the United States were colonizing Iraq and all Bush wants is profits for Big Oil, then what the US SHOULD do is Seize ALL - not most, but ALL - of the oil for ourselves -- and continue to do so until the fields are DRY! Leave nothing for the Iraqi people.

But, that's NOT what we're doing. Which means we're either stupid and incompetent colonizers OR we had different motives for going in there.