El_Chupacabra wrote:
First of all, you're judging the whole of the "Christian right" by a few extremists. That's dumb, just like those dumb ultra-conservative hicks I live around who think all Muslims are terrorists.
Though you're correct about the fact that a huge amount of Americans think that all Muslims are terrorists, you're dead wrong about the "Christian Right". He wasn't talking about Christian Republicans, but the extremists themselves. Read a bit more carefully, next time.
El_Chupacabra wrote:
Second, so what if Christians are gaining influence? They just want to make the world a better place. There's no ambition or greed on the Christian's part AS A WHOLE. Most Christians denominations aren't organized enough to be doing this a some sort of "conquest" of the government. Catholics may have the potential, but it's largely the evangelicals that are changing America in the ways that you fear.
I find this amazingly ironic that you just spoke about how stereotyping is bad. Not every Christian wants the best of humanity, just like not every American wants the best for humanity. You can't judge someone by their religion, or their job (referring to you thinking that evangelicals are changing America only).
El_Chupacabra wrote:
Third, TRYING TO CHANGE AMERICA IS NOT THE SAME AS TAKING OVER SOCIETY. Obviously, you don't think America's perfect. If you try to change it so it better suits you and your beliefs, is that wrong? Is that a hostile take-over? I think not! Someone disagreeing with you is NOT the same thing as censorship or suppression. How is it different than from what the Atheist Left is doing? Really, how?
Ugh. Again, stereotyping and judging. First, you saying that these extremists aren't trying to overthrow society is just ignorant. For, if you
actually read some of the articles, you would realize that the first two are about the Christian Zionists trying to trigger
Rapture. Though it's apparent that you're a very zealous Christian and a very conservative person, you don't seem to understand what the Rapture is. If the end of the world isn't changing society, I don't know what is.
El_Chubacabra wrote:
Fourth, you and many others grossly interpret "seperation of church and state". That doesn't mean that Christians must restrict all of their religious practices to private areas (heh heh, I'd like to make a pun but won't). I know that's not what most people want, but some people do. More importantly, it also does not mean they should keep our faith put of teir votes. I say it's a free country, let the Christians vote however they wish! Who are you to tell them how to vote? Who are you to say that the most important thing in some of their lives should simply be put aside when it comes to the "real world"? This involves a misrepresentation of Christianity: it's like saying it's only a make-believe game, not something that anyone takes seriously or that has any merit. Secularism is all great and fine, but you can't force it on anyone!
Yeesh, and you say that
we're misinterpreting "Separation of Church and State"? Try
looking it up. It has absolutely nothing to do with
voting, but the laws that are being made. For example: George Bush authorizing a law based solely on religious purposes would be a violation of
Separation of Church and State. Now, say that a law such as the ban of homosexual marriage was made because it says in the New Testament that "man ought not lay with another man", wouldn't that
too be a violation? In case you missed what I just put, your thinking that "Separation of Church and State" has anything to do with voting is false, as it is just about keeping religious influence from the government. Because this is a diverse nation, and it is
meant to be a diverse nation, this is an excellent law.
El_Chubacabra wrote:
Take Gay marriage, for instance: we're not forcing gays to be straight. We're only trying to live in a world better suited to what we believe is our God.
Read above: American laws should not be meant for God to like, but for the welfare of the country.
El_Chubacabra wrote:
And while we're at it, the right to privacy thing doesn't hold up. First of all, if you're going to say we can't VOTE how we want to, all right to privacy goes straight out the window. After that, it still doesn't work because homosexuality is NOT private. People parade it around. And look at pop culture: It's not only accepted, but glorified and encouraged. We're going to fight that, and if it becomes private, I personally would stop fighting it. (And the "it's natural" argument doesn't hold up either; more on that if you're interested in hearing it)
The point behind the "violation of privacy" issue is that, in order for the law to be enforced, police are going to have to monitor people to make sure that at any moment, they aren't going to to get married with their gender. As you can see, this has nothing to do with what media is doing with homosexuality. You want to see things paraded around? Look at heterosexual sex. It's everywhere: On most television shows, there is at least a reference to it, in most movies, there is almost always a sex scene, and on the internet--pornography! Wow, if I were to say anything, I'd say that it's
heterosexual sex that needs to be cut down in public media. As for your comment about homosexuality not being natural, I only point to the
Wikipedia article on it, and in particular, the section about
Homosexuality in nature. Now, if
animals experience homosexuality, and they are not tainted by today's standards, thoughts, opinions in the media, and all of our artificial ideas on the subject, how could it
not be natural? Like you said, more on this please.
El_Chubacabra wrote:
Another issue I assume you're thinking about is abortion. That's also a misinterpretation. When I cast a vote against abortion in any form, a presidential or congressional vote, I'm not forcing those women to be Christian. (I am forcing them to be responsible for their actions, but that has nothing to do with religion) I'm saving the lives of those children! That's what I'm trying to do. It has nothing to do with a takeover, it's just to save the children!
Refer to the
Abortion thread to further discuss this. My point is clearly stated
here, and the entire thread debates your theory.
Log in
Wiki
FAQ
Search
QUIT STEREOTYPING!!!
