The Right's claim of religious persecution "ridiculous & embarassing"

Cpicturetaker: "Of course, ask any ACTUALLY persecuted--by religion, color or gender!"

That's libspeak for any liberal-approved victim. For liberal-approved victim just think of Al Sharpton, Dan Savage, and Sandra Fluke.

 

You merely re-state the tactic. Doing so neither proves your case nor any courage. Running? Coward? What part of you running from YOUR record, amply documented, was unclear?

 

Actually, I'm kinda waiting too. Like, I responded to this from you earlier:

I assume you have some examples of this?

I did feel it made my point and there was no response from you. I don't mind reasonable inquires, nor responding to them, but if I do, I prefer not to be ignored. I also note that you're now playing the same game with someone else. Bit of a waste of everyone's time, in'it?

 

I completely agree with this basic assertion. They always whine oppression whenever the law doesn't agree with them and then turn around and blame atheists. But this is just a bunch of asshatery.

However, the rest of the article just another liberal rag trashing and bashing conservatives, as usual.

It's really liberals who use this as an excuse and they've made it into an art form.

 

this is true, Judism was top dog one, then two subgroups started, Christian-ism and Muslim-ism, they were the underdogs of their day....


.

 

The so-called "Christian Right" already has Right on its side when it asserts that they are OK to not become homosexuals themselves, and we ALL applaud them.

The so-called "Christian Right" is WRONG when they assert they have Right on their side to tell OTHER PEOPLE to not be allowed to be homosexuals!

That is why the Right's claim of religious persecution is "ridiculous & embarrassing".

 

Well given that your entire sentence structure is ridiculous and embarrassing and that in the main Homosexual rights aren't what Christians in this country are talking about your argument lacks knowledge and substance as well as a certain amount of coherence.

 

Your need to argue about my sentence structure while ignoring the clear point of the story is one way to avoid the fact that it is you who is the one "lacks knowledge and substance".

From the OP:

 

That is what those in the logic biz call a straw man. Again when we are talking about the persecution of the church homosexual marriage.isn't it,

 

If this is the angle you want to play, then I expect you to condemn all of the victimhood nonsense promoted by gays, minorities, women, etc., etc., etc. Because all of those other groups are protected classes in American society. So if American Christians aren't oppressed, then those others sure as hell aren't oppressed either. Understand?

I don't care which way you play this. I just ask you to be consistent.

 

According to the conservatives and neoconservatives, the white Christian right is under attack from all sides. The liberals are trying to take religion out of government, the Muslims are trying to impose Sharia Law on the right wing, the LGBT are destroying Christian marriage, Christmas is under attack, the government is going to kick in the doors of right wing gun owners and confiscate their guns any day, and a host of other paranoid claims.

Anyone paying attention to the many goofy right wing claims understands why conservatives and neoconservatives are drawn to the increasingly wacko candidates that feed their anti-government/anti-worker/anti-minority/anti-poor people/anti-children/ and anti-everything-else paranoia. And crazier days for the right wing are yet to come.

 

My apologies. I was busy batting it with junius, fils and your reply slipped past me. Reply on its way.

 

Christians don’t want Creationism to be taught ‘in place of scientific theory’; they want it in addition to. The ‘Darwinists’ that believe evolution is THE ONLY explanation for our species (heck, all species) existence; well, aren't they doing the same thing you’re accusing Christians of doing? Are you not open to alternative explanations for our existence? So it is actually people like you that are doing what you accuse Christians of trying to do.

 

Well, I tentatively agree that when Christians whine about oppression it is wrong, pure and simple

But to use the word the Christian right is just another trash and bash.

I feel that they truly don't understand what real oppression is, they just have a persecution complex.

 

Meh, there are different levels of everything.
Just because someone is dying on the other side of the world, doesn't mean that we don't have our own "first world problems". You can compare, and certainly find that we are on the lower end of the scale, but there are still issues that are "on the scale". If you have an issue "on the scale" at all, then they can be quite big to you. Deal with both in turn.

So if persecution isn't the correct definition, then find the correct definition, but still address it.

We have plenty of home grown problems; murder, poverty, starvation, corruption. We try to tackle that AND foreign issues too, but IS in Iraq is no reason to completely ignore our murder rate in the US. This is a similar scenario, albeit not as hardcore an issue.

 

You can try to strip away what Christians feel is happening to their faith in this country – and in the world for that matter – if you want, it will not change what they feel. I prefer to use ‘assault’ rather than ‘oppression’. Whether you folks want to believe it or not, this country was founded on the traditions of Christianity. I am not saying our constitution and law are rooted in Christian tenets; I am saying that traditionally this WAS a Christian nation. The first settlers (Christians) came here to escape religious persecution and Catholic dominance and oppression. All they wanted was to be FREE to practice their Christian beliefs without a religious statehood. The constitution was written on THAT premise; that government would not intrude on your freedom to practice whatever faith you wanted, or no faith at all, and no one would be limited by government to that end. Well, government has seen fit to place limits on peoples’ liberty to ‘THE FREE PRACTICE THEREOF’. The yearly erosion of ‘THE FREE PRACTICE THEREOF’ is what Christians are battling. Not to exclude anything or anyone, but to just be able to freely practice our faith.

Placing a narrow definition of ‘oppression’ in order to fit your agenda to marginalize the Christian movement only serves to show your intent to oppress those that believe differently than you.

 

Ah yes - creation "science" and biological evolution side by side in the classroom. Yet, when they can't have both, they are perfectly willing to eliminate evolution from the textbooks. Except that "creation science" isn't science but a religious belief.

First, biological evolution is not a "belief". That would place it in the same category as religion (or creation science), which it is not. Second, until a better explanation for the facts we have comes along, all evidence points to evolution. Find an explanation (other than divine intervention or magic) that is better, and science will change. Has to change, actually. Now, here are some comparisons of creation science and evolution:

That particular case also noted the following:

I'm most certainly open to alternative explanations so long as they are scientific. Otherwise, they are religious, fantasies, or both. Certainly interesting to look at or study but not to be taught as science in the classroom.

 

I'd love to unpack all of this, but it's gonna take some time, so it will have to wait until later.


P.S. - I don't agree with hardly anything you posted but I suppose that's not really a surprise.

 

The facts are there for all to see. How you wish to interpret the facts is something else again. It is quite possible to look at the same facts you zealously believe support evolution and believe with equal zealotry that they do not.

 

Thomas Jefferson disagrees with you.

This America is a Christian nation nonsense has only been around for about ten to fifteen years, at least as far as I know, and it is aprimarily a christian belief.

When one does the research you'll find that American is not based on the Bible. While there may be some Christian influence, the Founding Fathers knew what being based on one religion would bring, nothing more than a religious tyranny, and they wanted to avoid that.

There is plenty of evidence that shows that America is not based on Christianity.

And if you really think it is then you have to go through the entire Constitution and show wat Bible verse was used as the basis for each section and each enumerated right.

The onus is on you to prove the claim.

Otherwise, if America was truly based on Christianity, there would be no such thing as the Bill of Rights because there is no such thing as rights in Christianity, and we'd have a very different country than we have today.

 

I wouldn't expect you to.

 

Just like you’re perfectly willing to eliminate any possibility that our universe could have been created. Do you even realize what you’re doing here? You’re exercising the exact same thing you’re claiming Christians want to do (which they really don’t).

Creationism goes beyond just the explanation of how the species got here; it explains how the universe got here. Something science can on explain in theory… You do realize that a belief in a theory is nothing more than what Christians hold in a belief in God – it’s a BELIEF. Not too far removed from religion.

 

Yes, it is. There is absolutely no demonstrable proof we evolved in any way defined by Darwin. That’s why they call it a ‘theory’. I happen to think a lot of what science does and what they BELIEVE has religious behavior to it. But you talk about ‘divine intervention’ or ‘magic’ – please provide the demonstrable evidence of how this universe got here. All this stuff in our universe just MAGICALLY appeared? Your FAITH in science… well there’s the very definition of religion.

 

I didn’t say this country was a Christian nation. See you folks are seeing what you want to see rather than what I really posted.

PLEASE READ VERY CAREFULLY: I said this country was founded on the tenets of RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, that you should be FREE FROM GOVERNMENT intervening IN YOUR FREE PRACTICE OF RELIGION OR TO NOT PRACTICE ANY RELIGION AT ALL. That is opposite of claiming we are a Christian nation. A Christian nation would be a government that has defined Christianity as THE official religion of this country. I believe in the 1st amendment which states that the government will not establish any religion as an official religion that we all have to recognize, and that same government will not PROHIBIT the free practice of whatever religion you choose or no religion at all.

 

okay, you're right, I did misread your post. Sorry about that.