Protestantism

» pink101 - Champion of Religious Prejudice

In response to What is Religion's Role in Politics posted by BrianTubbs:
.
An excerpt from your paper reads,
"If the United States is a democratic Republic, then people of faith have as much right to play in the sandbox as anyone else. And if people of faith dramatically outnumber those without faith, then it should be no surprise that the nation (its government, its media, its culture, etc.) will reflect faith and religion more than atheism. This is both natural and democratic.
.
Hah!
.
That--precisely--is why we have a Bill of Rights.
.
Your paper does a great job of sidestepping the real issue and shows you to be a champion of the people of religious prejudice. It makes a play to put religion in a position where it can control society.
.
The danger is not that Christians have a voice in societal affairs--they obviously do as you prove by making your voice heard. No one attempts to shut you down, do they? But, the danger is that Christianity would impose its religious based laws on society given the chance. America is NOT--repeat--NOT a PURE DEMOCRACY; but, a Constitutional Democracy with controls imposed by WE THE PEOPLE. Thanks to the God of Providence.
.
You would do well to read a little Max Weber and his work on the Protestant Ethic.
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - More To The Point

In response to Champion of Religious Prejudice posted by pink101:
.
More to the point.
.
Unscrupulous Religionists have figured it out that the Bill Of Rights is the one thing standing in their way of taking over the United States by majority force. SO they have now come to the place where they realize that the Supreme Law of The Land is the only way for them to over rule the Amendments and to take over our government. They are currently loading Our Supreme Court with judges only too willing to subvert the Constitution for the political expediency of the religionist right.
.
The facts of the matter are that--in a secular society--all voices should be heard. We DOUBLE WANT your voice and views to be heard. And we DOUBLE WANT our voice to be heard in opposition. YOU are the ones that run and hide when the going gets tough complaining that opposition to your views is an attempt to silence you. NO WAY do we ever want your voice silenced.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - More To The Point

In response to More To The Point posted by pink101:
.
Yesterday, my state (Illinios) legislature over-rode the governor's veto on a bill REQUIRING a 'moment of silence' in every school each morning. The religionists are winning, Pink.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - His Spirit Is At It Again

In response to More To The Point posted by Migisi:
.
"The religionists are winning..."
.
Maybe.
.
OR, maybe a different force is playing on the religionists to subvert our Constitution in a take over of our society. Who says Hitler shot himself in 1945? His spirit has been resurrected and he seems to be alive and well in the world today. Remember how Christian his words were when he started out in the twenties and thirties?
.
His spirit is at it again.
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Hillary Clinton

.
I have been against Hillary Clinton as president of the United States; but, while I listened to her talk yesterday, I think she is a wise and viable choice to be elected.
.
It's time for a change and she is in a powerful position to instigate the changes we need. And, she does promise to do the right things for America.
.
One of her first acts will be to reverse the Bush hammerlock against science and in stem cell research. She promises to make choices based on open inquiry rather than on ideological grounds.
.
George W. Bush's opposition to stem cell research is a prime example of the idiocy of putting Religion in Politics. It's high time we get it out of politics!~
.

.
You owe it to yourself to pay close attention to Hillary Clinton and to compare her to the any of the Republican candidates. They are neanderthals in comparison. This is the twenty-first century and it's America!
.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Hillary Clinton

In response to Hillary Clinton posted by pink101:
.
My very real concern:
Hillary Prods Bush to Go After Iran
By Robert Parry
September 28, 2007
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/09270...
.
(quote)... "But Hillary Clinton, who also voted to grant Bush the authority to go to war with Iraq in 2002 and staunchly supported the war for the next three years before reinventing herself as an Iraq War critic, now has reverted to her old hawkish self, jumping out ahead of Bush in urging a more hostile policy toward Iran."...

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - Good Stewards Of Their Wealth

In response to Hillary Clinton posted by Migisi:
.
This period of time--politically--is a shake out for ideas to fuel the coming national elections in America.
.
When both major parties have so many horses in their separate races, We the People have to concern ourselves with why this is happening. For what purpose are these candidates expressing their views?
.
What seems to be happening is that there is a search for a Political Profile that will express each party's ideals in the final contest that will take place nearly 3 months from now. "Let's see. I like this about so and so and I like that about what's her face and this about who's it, etc." Finally, we get one person who will be offered to us as the Great American Savior to get us out of the mess in which we now are wallowing.
.
But, in the back ground, the powerful multinational corporations will be gleefully abusing themselves over the prospect of even more power grabs as we move deeper into the 21st century.
.
Which country will eventually emerge as the greatest world power of all time?
.
What Empire will end up ruling the entire world? For, THAT does seem to be what an unbridled capitalist economy is all about. Competition is good for business.
.
They're good stewards of their great wealth, doncha know?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Good Stewards Of Their Wealth

In response to Good Stewards Of Their Wealth posted by pink101:
.
Hillary is a chameleon (Meriam-Webster: a person given to often expedient or facile change in ideas or character). I haven't forgotten her support for Bush's war, or her back-pedaling later.
.
Obama Names Clinton in Iraq Speech
October 12, 2007
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/...
(quote)... ""Leading Democrats - including Senator Clinton - echoed the erroneous line that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda," Mr. Obama said.
.
"In his remarks, in addition to taking issue with her statements on Iran, Mr. Obama used the action of another rival - former Senator John Edwards - to take another swipe at Mrs. Clinton. (Mr. Edwards, by the way, doesn't mention Mr. Obama at all, when he addresses the topic.)
"
"He has renounced that vote, instead of pretending that it was a vote for anything but war," Mr. Obama said. "But Senator Clinton makes a different argument. She says that she wasn't really voting for war back in 2002, she was voting for more inspections, or she was voting for more diplomacy. But all of us know what was being debated in the Congress in the fall of 2002." (end)
.
-------------------
.
They're good stewards of their great wealth, doncha know?
.
Great wealth is what it's all about - for ALL of them! It means millions of $ in campaign funds even for those who don't have a chance in hell of winning. Win, lose, or drop out - it's theirs.
.
Where Does Campaign Money End Up?
http://www.nbc5i.com/politics/13814199/d...

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - To Be Blessed

In response to Good Stewards Of Their Wealth posted by Migisi:
.
I was thinking more about the corporations when I wrote, "They're good stewards of their great wealth..."
.
The idea of individual persons investing in the stock market has come to be almost a necessity if any one is going to develop enough money to send their children off to university or to build a nest egg retirement fund. And, IF one is to invest in the market, it gets important that the investment is made in a company that is led by Good Stewards of the wealth the corporation is accruing.
.
Christians, and especially Calvinist ones, make sure that their economic talents are put to work so that they can be given more. In other words, the Protestant Ethic of hard work and Good Stewardship gets to be making money for the sake of making money so that one can get more. They often live a life of frugality in order to accumulate wealth. It is its own reward and proof that one is blessed by God. And, that is the seminal act that gives birth to capitalism. In fact, it is what capitalism is all about--making money for the sake of making money. So individuals buy stocks and bonds in ventures where the management proves itself to be good stewards--that is to make more money for the sake of making money.
.
Is there something wrong with the accrual of wealth; when it comes to sending your kids to university; when it comes to retirement time; when it comes to some costly emergency? Probably not. But, when is enough enough? Maybe the latter is the better question. I know it's heady stuff; but, how much wealth do the mega-corps have to accumulate before they quit whining about paying taxes?
.
What about creating more scientific research, pharmaceutical, nursing, and medical schools? How about expanding public safety departments to include walk-in medical clinics featuring paramedics, nurse practitioners, and emergency medical technicians? How about putting an end to the marketing of tobacco products in the United States? How about spending more money on developing healthy children in our society? How about individual citizens standing up and making heavier demands on the types of services our governments provide for us?
.
If people in poverty were frugal, they--too--would be blessed; but, alas, they waste their talents and the master will not reward such behavior. Have you noticed?
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - 'Mom' and 'Dad' banished by California

Schwarzenegger signs law outlawing terms perceived as negative to 'gays'
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...

"CCF noted that now on a banned list will be any text, reference or teaching aid that portrays marriage as only between a man and woman, materials that say people are born male or female (and not in between), sources that fail to include a variety of transsexual, bisexual and homosexual historical figures, and sex education materials that fail to offer the option of sex changes."

-- posted by _Boanerges_