Protestantism

» Brian Tubbs - The Hypocritical christian Right

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right posted by pink101:

Blaming the Christian Right for the war in Iraq is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard said in these threads. Of course, it's not the first time I've heard it here.

» pink101 - The Hypocritical christian Right

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Blaming the Christian Right for the war in Iraq is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard said in these threads.
.
Ridiculous? It is quite well accepted. Who supports Bush and the war more than the Cristian Right?
.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - The Hypocritical christian Right

.
Thing is, America belongs to the people and not to one class or another.
.
America belongs to the rich (bankers), thanks to Wilson and the Federal Reserve Act.
.
Who supports Bush and the war more than the Cristian Right?
.
US and international corporate vultures and oil barons. Follow the money.

-- posted by Migisi

» Roger Saunders - The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right posted by Migisi:

Wow!

Hypocritical christian right:

Name one Christian you know that ISN'T a hypocrite. On the other hand, name one Atheist, Agnostic, Baptist, Presbyterian, Catholic,Muslim, Episcopal, Anglican, Pentecostal, Evangelical, Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Libertarian, or Communist that ISN'T a Hypocrite. Neither Wilson's bankers, Falwell's faithful, Osama's thugs, nor even Hilary's socialists have enough power and influence to stifle the freedom of the human spirit. The problem is not who is in charge of the government, the problem is whether or not the people of ANY nation are willing to BE free or if they are willing to sacrifice their freedom for some other priority.

Which brings me to school vouchers. I happen to be FOR them because I DON'T believe ANY government knows how to educate a child better than a parent. That does NOT mean that I am a homeschooling Nazi. (In fact my 4 kids were never home schooled) BUT ... public education IS dominated by the religion of Secularism. Let's call it what it is! The first amendment guarantees that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". There has been so much emphasis on "no establishment" that we forget that the Constitution also guarantees with the same weight to protect "free exercise" of religion. I am NOT against public education. I am not against my property taxes helping to pay for it (even though my youngest just graduated from a public school and now I am not directly receiving any service for those tax payments). However, I do not believe that government has the ability OR the right to FORCE my child to be educated by a system that may directly opposes the "free exercise" of religion (ANY religion, not just the "fundamental right"). If I choose to educate my child at a parochial school, or any school that may be more suited to my child's educational need, styles, or yes even religious values, the government should let the PARENT decide where to spend those education dollars and since they have appropriated money for that purpose, a voucher or tax credit is the only way to preserve that freedom of choice. Many will say that it is a mistake because if everyone pulls their kid out of public school there won't be any left. I say, (even though that is not even remotely likely) SO WHAT! Haven't 100's of thousands of men and women died, been maimed beyond recognition, mentally as well as physically to preserve a freedom that has never before been seen in ANY political or social structure in the history of the world? Why do we disrespect that sacrifice made to eliminate tyranny? Why do we think that the Federal (or ANY other state of local government) has the RESPONSibility much less the ABILITY to insure our individual freedoms. Whether it is education, healthcare, welfare, or EVEN Social Security, HAS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EVER, EVER, EVER, been able to manage ANYTHING that pertains to a person's free choice well? If you want an example, look at that "GREATEST gift ever", social security. First of all let me say that I am not saying that the government should not follow through on the promises it has made with regard to social security just because it has proven to be an incompetent (no surprise) manager of this massive fund. What I am saying is that it HAS BEEN GROSSLY INCOMPETENT AND EVEN CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT in its handling of this public trust. BUT ... this is what the founding fathers knew when they were writing the constitution. Those first words ... that wonderful preamble that we learned as kids, whether by some diligent school master or from "School House Rock" on Saturday mornings says what they intend government to do. They knew that when government went beyond those objectives that it would become tyrannical. We need to put this into perspective. If even the most "High Federalist" at the constitutional convention were alive today, he would be smoldering with patriotic zeal to foment another Revolution! He would tell us all that we were slaves of the most repressive government on the face of the earth! Take just one issue into consideration ... taxes. In 1774 (yes 1774, we can go into that later) the first shots were fired in a war that lasted almost an entire decade and the biggest issue that caused the rebellion was taxes. Do you remember what the tax rate per person; that precipitated that World War; that spawned the greatest nation ever to exist in the history of the planet? IT WAS UNDER 2%. The lowest tax rate on income alone in this country is what 10-15%? In ANYONE's eyes from 1776, WE ARE SLAVES! Why? Because we have chosen to be. Those first words of the Constitution were all the founders ever meant for our government to handle:

1. We the people

in order to

2. Form a more perfect union
3. Establish justice
4. Insure domestic tranquility
5. Provide for the common defense
6. Promote the general welfare
7. Secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity

We have gotten into trouble because we have jumbled some of those words around. As an example, The United States Government is insuring, and providing welfare rather than promoting it. The government has gotten into the business of trying to secure liberty to ourselves and our posterity AND to the rest of the world. Which brings me to Iraq.

When I first saw that statue of Hussein being torn down I immediately recalled that lead statue of King George that was torn down in New York on the day the Declaration of Independence was first publicly read there. I was ecstatic! Here was a repressive government being torn down and replaced by a government of the people. I was so proud! I am STILL very proud of what we provided those desperately oppressed people. BUT ... I have come to realize something of fundamental importance. The price of freedom is blood, but that blood only covers the cost when it is paid either in reality or through the desperate realization of its worth of the people for whom it is shed. If the culture, pervasive human condition and mindset is not willing to either pay itself in blood or to decide to intrinsically value the cost of others blood shed for it, it is like "giving a pearl necklace to a pig" and hoping it will appreciate it. This does NOT make that blood shed for freedoms price a waste or ANY less valuable; because that blood spilt will in some way provide freedom to someone other than the ones for which it may have been purposed. The other conclusion that I have come to is that America can only "export" freedom to those who are willing, able, and are desperate enough to lay down their own lives for it.

In conclusion, we need to observe that lesson. Unless we are willing to value the blood that has been shed on our account for freedom , WE WILL LOSE IT. If we blandly set back and believe its is the government job to "secure our liberty" then we have forgotten that even the constitution did not say that it was the government's job to secure liberty. It was "We The People", who gave themselves that responsibility. The constitution was only a document that declared the peoples right to do so. If "We The People" give up our responsibility to ANY government then we will have chosen the same tyranny and slavery by which those poor repressed people in the Muslim world seem to be mesmerized.

There is a simple solution, a tool that our founding fathers and patriots have fought for and even enhance greatly in the last 231 years, 4 months and 9 days.

The Vote!

We are only tyrannized in any way (even the great percentage of taxes we pay and even if the founders would stand aghast) if we do not voice our opinion of how we should govern ourselves in this great republic. We can only be under the yoke of tyranny...

... if we do not vote.

Roger

» pink101 - What I Call A Response

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ posted by rogerws76:
.
Okay.
.

.
Now! That was what I call a response!
.
I'm going to have to print it out and to read it more carefully.
.
There's a lot there to discuss and with which to take some issue.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ posted by rogerws76:
.
Hmm... where to begin? I'm going to reply in more than one post, for brevity's sake.
.
Name one Christian you know that ISN'T a hypocrite.
.
If, by 'hypocrite', we mean "a person who acts in contradiction to his/her stated beliefs or feelings" (dictionary.com), I don't know anyone (of faith or none) who isn't one on occasion. You're right. Nobody's perfect. Christians shouldn't pretend to be.
.
Christian hypocrisy is easy to observe because their beliefs and rules are specific and well known. For example, Christian doctrines require 'thou shalt not kill', and 'love they neighbor'. Isn't it hypocrisy to murder abortion doctors in the name of 'thou shalt not kill'? Isn't it hypocrisy to protest capital punishment but support war? Isn't it hypocrisy to deny human rights to illegal aliens while preaching 'love they neighbor'? Isn't it hypocrisy for a TVangelist to embezzle money and avoid taxes while preaching 'do not steal' and 'give unto Caesar'? Isn't it hypocrisy to build multi-million dollar churches, campuses, and monuments erected to Jesus, when Jesus commanded that his people clothe the naked and feed the poor? To the outsider, these are observable and chargable group hypocrisies.
.
...have enough power and influence to stifle the freedom of the human spirit.
.
What ~does~ stifle the human spirit? If we can create a list - to what extend do those named individuals and parties exert power over those things listed? For example, if hunger is listed, what power does, say, the Republican party have over hunger - to inflict or eliminate it?
.
the problem is whether or not the people of ANY nation are willing to BE free or if they are willing to sacrifice their freedom for some other priority.
.
Sacrifice freedom for 'some other priority' like.... um, "national security"??? Indeed, we 'free' Americans have sacrificed many freedoms for a false sense of security.
.
I'll respond to your school vouchers in another post, when time allows.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ posted by rogerws76:

.
I enjoyed reading your post. THIS is the kind of post I would like to see more often--it defines a broad sweep of your thoughts.
.
Regarding the idea of stifling the human spirit, we do it to ourselves--we sell our spirit for a mess of pottage.
.
You wrote, The problem is not who is in charge of the government, the problem is whether or not the people of ANY nation are willing to BE free or if they are willing to sacrifice their freedom for some other priority.
.
Yes, I agree; but, the important question you bring to the surface has to do with whose freedom it is that we are addressing. There ARE different ideas of freedom and I know you know that.
.
Sorry to say, I think you are missing the point of why we have public schools. We do not pay taxes so YOUR or MY or ANYONE ELSE'S children can get an individual education. Public education is institutionalized in our American society for the purposes of our greater community. So, giving vouchers to schools that work at odds AGAINST our GREATER COMMIUNITY should NEVER be allowed.
.
Our problems with Social Security is an example of how we allow ideologies to get in the way of our purposes. SS is a great idea and has done much for our nation and its growth.
.
Yup, taxation without representation--or--taxation with OUR representation is tyranny. Our public education is failing us here. And, we need to develop our personal knowledge.
.
And, as to your remarks about welfare, what do you think is the final purpose of so-called welfare? Think of food stamps and social assistance for the poor and unemployed. What would we have it they were left to fend for themselves? How much does the food industry and the rental business benefit indirectly from welfare. Every time food stamps are used, a profit is made. Every time a rent payment is made by the state, a profit is made. Every time clothing is purchased by welfare funds, a profit is made. Welfare supports industry.
.
As far as voting is concerned. I'm all for it and I think it is extremely important. But, guess what? Follow the money in politics. Big business invests in both side to ensure it gets what it wants. We live in a corporacracy. We need to know that. We must understand what is at stake before we make a mark on our ballots.
.
Thanks for your good post.
.
I enjoyed reading it.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ posted by rogerws76:
.
Which brings me to school vouchers. I happen to be FOR them because I DON'T believe ANY government knows how to educate a child better than a parent. That does NOT mean that I am a homeschooling Nazi.
.
I'm not getting the connection between subsidizing private and/or home schools and who is a better teacher. We're discussing government credits = subsidies = $$$, aren't we? But to who's better - parent or professional teacher - doesn't that depend on the education level and teaching abilities of the individual?
.
(In fact my 4 kids were never home schooled) BUT ... public education IS dominated by the religion of Secularism. Let's call it what it is!
.
I call that poppy cock.
.
The first amendment guarantees that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". There has been so much emphasis on "no establishment" that we forget that the Constitution also guarantees with the same weight to protect "free exercise" of religion.
.
You do have the right to exercise your education and religious choices. No one has taken those rights away from you.
.
I am NOT against public education. I am not against my property taxes helping to pay for it (even though my youngest just graduated from a public school and now I am not directly receiving any service for those tax payments).
.
Congrats on getting your last through school. Sigh of relief, ay? Who ever thinks public school is free hasn't enrolled a kid in years. I'd like a tax voucher for the $480 in fees I paid to my public school district for my senior. What's good for the private schooler should be good for the public schooler, no?
.
However, I do not believe that government has the ability OR the right to FORCE my child to be educated by a system that may directly opposes the "free exercise" of religion (ANY religion, not just the "fundamental right"). If I choose to educate my child at a parochial school, or any school that may be more suited to my child's educational need, styles, or yes even religious values, the government should let the PARENT decide where to spend those education dollars and since they have appropriated money for that purpose, a voucher or tax credit is the only way to preserve that freedom of choice.
.
The choice always rests with the parents. Nothing's changed, Ron. Nobody's forcing anyone to send their kids to any school which offends their sensitivities. I'm NOT against alternative education. My neice is successfully completing her senior year at home through a state-recognized and college-accredited correspondence school. Her parents aren't demanding government vouchers. (When she attends a private university next year, I'll mention vouchers to her parents.) I and my four siblings attended parochial elementary school. My parents paid the tuition willingly, and never expected the government to subsidize their decision. My daughter's girl is attending a private preschool. I should tell her - and every preschool parent - to demand a voucher. And there's this Islamic school in Chicago. I think I'll suggest to them that they lobby for the voucher system too. What's fair for one is fair for all, right?
.
Many will say that it is a mistake because if everyone pulls their kid out of public school there won't be any left. I say, (even though that is not even remotely likely) SO WHAT!
.
So what? Where will the middle to low income kids get their education? They can't be home-schooled because their parents are working. They can't pay private school tuition. Shall we just ignore their needs?
.
Haven't 100's of thousands of men and women died, been maimed beyond recognition, mentally as well as physically to preserve a freedom that has never before been seen in ANY political or social structure in the history of the world? Why do we disrespect that sacrifice made to eliminate tyranny? Why do we think that the Federal (or ANY other state of local government) has the RESPONSibility much less the ABILITY to insure our individual freedoms.
.
Well, that's all very nice super patriot rhetoric, but what does it have to do with education and vouchers?
.
I'll post later on the other issues you addressed.

-- posted by Migisi

» redback - The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ

In response to The Hypocritical christian Right, School Vouchers, IRAQ posted by Migisi:

"Name one Christian you know that ISN'T a hypocrite."

Ah...the weight of anecdotal evidence. I have a profound hope I will NOT know ALL who irk me for all reasons but I keep getting told just because I don't know it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Who is or isn't a hypocrite is an interesting test. Who is or isn't a real Christian is equally challenging. But more challenging is to link it all to a...school voucher, Iraq et al. Christians are given too much 'credit', perhaps?

And this power of the vote thingo. Maybe voting impotently releases tensions like yelling out the window: "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" but the true power of the vote is related to who pays the biggest price for buying it...or selling it for that matter. The 'price' of compromise. (Actually, my local pollie is Roger Price who is embedded these last decades)

This year my voting cynicism increases. The billions that could have been spent alleviating many ills are instead going in promised tax cuts by both parties.

-- posted by redback

» GodChsr - Thought

I supported and still do support our decision to entire into war with the Hussein regime. I support the war on terror as well. We are not exposed to much here by means of terror, so I think it is our duty to help when we can.
ON THE SAME NOTE: I also agree that the government has strategically chosen who to fight and who not to fight... who to help and who not to help. Not always the best decision when given the options. I know I am less likely to support a war against China (although they are equally as oppressive as Iraq was) because that is more likely to cause a massive world war 3. Iraq was a strategic decision based on the prospect of future wars. A good basic setup.
It's like a cutoff man in baseball... rather than flying across the world to fight a war just send a smaller group of guys to Iraq, get in alot of planes and bomb.
We achieved the first of these strategic point back in the 50s after WW2, that was Alaska and Hawaii.
Africa is docile and weak, Europe is friend or docile, Middle East is lacking the means to fight... Only Asia/Russia is a possibility. If we control the Middle East we neutralize them. If we don't control the Middle East, then those guys would eventually.

-- posted by GodChsr