My will to fight evangelicals will never collapse.

7of7: My will to fight evangelicals will never collapse.

Why? We need them. We need atheists too. And everything in between.

Bollocks. That's utter bollocks. Jesus H Cheetos, sort it out, you guys used to be cool.

7of7: My will to fight evangelicals will never collapse.

What he said.

Nor will mine. I hope I live to see the day that their efforts to undermine America's secular government are neutralized. I need to know that my country is in good hands, or I cannot die a happy man.

nekom: Why? We need them. We need atheists too. And everything in between.

Now that's an attitude I can get behind. It's not evangelicals that are the problem anyway, it's greedy sons of biatches who happen to be (or pretend to be more to the point) evangelicals. It's easy to blame religion for things but it's people who are the problem.

...and the gheys would be kissin'.

Thank you, Evangelicals!

Onward Christian Soldiers!

They need to change the title of the website. Any article that would link 9/11 to the War in Iraq was not written by a thinker.

nekom: "Why? We need them."

For an alternative fuel source, perhaps.

/I keed!

Why? Are the zoos out of lion food?

//I keed!

Yeah, because if stem cells take off, how will we keep cripples in their place?

///I keeeed!

AaaPha: Bollocks. That's utter bollocks. Jesus H Cheetos, sort it out, you guys used to be cool.

LOLVERRULED

nekom: Why? We need them.

Oh,no we don't.

jbc: They need to change the title of the website.

Yes. To "American Wanker".

aaaPha: "Now that's an attitude I can get behind. It's not evangelicals that are the problem anyway, it's greedy sons of biatches who happen to be (or pretend to be more to the point) evangelicals. It's easy to blame religion for things but it's people who are the problem."

At some point you've got to lay some blame on the ideology. Was it the people who failed Naziism? [obvious example but it holds up] At some point you have to scrutinize their actual teachings and recognize how such teachings might influence the decisions of someone who sincerely believed in them. Beliefs, after all, do not exist in a vacuum; they actively inform our decisions.

At least in the Christian west, people have a choice to follow whatever religion they like or not at all. In the Islamic world, you don't have a choice. You either convert to Islam or die. Or if your extremely lucky, pay a heavy tax to survive.

So, either get rid of all religions or quit your biatching.

GaryPDX: "So, either get rid of all religions or quit your biatching."

I don't follow your thinking here. I for one wouldn't erase all religion from the world even if I could; Pick a religion at random. Even stripped of the music, the paintings, the sculptures and all the other resulting artwork inspired by that religion, the practice of the religion itself is still a form of art that we would be culturally poorer for having lost.

I see secular governance as the best of both worlds. All religions (as well as irreligiosity) are preserved and prevented from killing one another, and (ideally) their hand is slapped away every time they try to stick their fingers in medical research, social/sexual rights, the education of children too young to belong to any religion, and of course what gets taught in science classrooms.

It is my sincere hope that religious practice one day becomes a form of theater; that those with an interest in the history and culture of any given religion can attend a scrupulously accurate reenactment of any religious ceremony from just about any time period. This applies only to "Dead" religions of course. These centers could be used during part of the week for services held by contemporary religions, and if they're willing, they might allow people to come observe their services as well.

GaryPDX: At least in the Christian west, people have a choice to follow whatever religion they like or not at all. In the Islamic world, you don't have a choice. You either convert to Islam or die. Or if your extremely lucky, pay a heavy tax to survive.

So, either get rid of all religions or quit your biatching.

All I know is that the Scientologists scare me. bible thumpers? not so much.

Weaver95: So, either get rid of all religions or quit your biatching.

All I know is that the Scientologists scare me. bible thumpers? not so much.

They don't scare me...lol. If it bleeds, it can be killed...lol

Zamboro: At some point you've got to lay some blame on the ideology. Was it the people who failed Naziism? [obvious example but it holds up] At some point you have to scrutinize their actual teachings and recognize how such teachings might influence the decisions of someone who sincerely believed in them. Beliefs, after all, do not exist in a vacuum; they actively inform our decisions.

Said it better than I could have. Evangelical Christianity has a corrosive effect on the intelligence of society. Its emphasis on faith over evidence and tradition over progression will mire the US in dark ages similar to those in countries like Afghanistan where religious dogma is the law. Preventing these people from contaminating future generations should be the utmost imperative of anyone who wishes to see society progress beyond the childish state it's in now where an ad containing a half covered breast is grounds for arrest and where believing in something that has no evidence for existence is considered important in choosing the next leader of the country.

Weaver95: "All I know is that the Scientologists scare me. bible thumpers? not so much."

Honest question, don't you believe in the judeo-christian god? If I'm mistaken don't hesitate to let me know. I ask because if so, you might be "less scared" of bible thumpers mainly because you share ideological ground with them. Anyone paying attention right now can see that there's a concerted evangelical effort to stick their fingers into politics, education, medicine and so forth. Most worrying is their attempt to erode the separation between church and state, the gradually shift America towards a theocracy.

You've doubtless seen Huckabee's speech where he openly comes out and declares such an intention, so I'll spare you the link.

GaryPDX: Weaver95: So, either get rid of all religions or quit your biatching.

All I know is that the Scientologists scare me. bible thumpers? not so much.

They don't scare me...lol. If it bleeds, it can be killed...lol

They're a horde of mindless zombies with effective legal representation and no concept of morality. That's some scary stuff right there.

Weaver95: GaryPDX: Weaver95: So, either get rid of all religions or quit your biatching.

All I know is that the Scientologists scare me. bible thumpers? not so much.

They don't scare me...lol. If it bleeds, it can be killed...lol

They're a horde of mindless zombies with effective legal representation and no concept of morality. That's some scary stuff right there.

We have ways of taking care of "zombies".

Zamboro: Honest question, don't you believe in the judeo-christian god? If I'm mistaken don't hesitate to let me know. I ask because if so, you might be "less scared" of bible thumpers mainly because you share ideological ground with them.

My personal religious beliefs are just that - personal. And not worth discussion on fark. That aside, just because someone might share ideological points with another philosophy doesn't automatically mean that you're in agreement with everyone else who shares those beliefs. Groupthink like that is a common weakness of the intellectually lazy. So i'd be careful of that trap when discussing religion if I were you.

Anyone paying attention right now can see that there's a concerted evangelical effort to stick their fingers into politics, education, medicine and so forth. Most worrying is their attempt to erode the separation between church and state, the gradually shift America towards a theocracy.

True enough. And you're only slightly exaggerating the danger. I think 'Jesus camp' was a good example of why some Christian sects should be cause for concern. But then again, we're also in danger of selling out our freedom to corporate interests as well religious cults. Which is the greater danger?


You've doubtless seen Huckabee's speech where he openly comes out and declares such an intention, so I'll spare you the link.

The huck is effectively out of the race tho, so that's something of a dead issue.

GaryPDX: At least in the Christian west, people have a choice to follow whatever religion they like or not at all. In the Islamic world, you don't have a choice. You either convert to Islam or die. Or if your extremely lucky, pay a heavy tax to survive.

So, either get rid of all religions or quit your biatching.

People have a choice in the West because there are still enough people organized to fight against the indoctrination of Christianity.

Creationism taught in public schools, Bills declaring the US a "Christian Nation", the Ten Commandments displayed in inappropriate public forums, school prayer, Marriage Amendments, legislated 'morality' out the wazoo, et cetera ad nauseam. Don't think for an instant that Evangenlical institutions aren't working every day to take away that choice.

The Middle East has had thousands of years to indoctrinate their populations. Evangelicals have a lot of catching up to do, and they know it.

Weaver95: "They're a horde of mindless zombies with effective legal representation and no concept of morality. That's some scary stuff right there."

As opposed to a horde of mindless zombies with ineffective legal representation and a warped concept of ethics?

GaryPDX: "They don't scare me...lol. If it bleeds, it can be killed...lol" ~ "We have ways of taking care of "zombies"."

I know you're joking but that sort of speech is worrisome. These people aren't going to vanish. One way or another we need to learn to live with them while mitigating their damaging behaviors. If there's some way to give them what they want without compromising scientific standard, retarding medical research, oppressing homosexuals and plunging America into theocracy, I say give it to them. I don't know if you hate them or not but I don't, I simply want them to stop farking around with government, education, science and sexual ethics when they're clearly having deleterious effects on all of these things by doing so.

It should be enough for them to pray in secret, as Jesus asked of them. It should be enough for them to be comforted by the sublime assurances of their religion, without having to seek not only recognization by the state but preferential treatment at the expense of other groups. Huckabee went on record saying that asking Christians to stop injecting Christianity into politics was insulting and that he refused to comply. But isn't that the whole idea of a secular government, that politicians are to leave their creeds at the door when they show up for work each morning? ISn't that precisely how a secular government succeeds at remaining neutral in matters of religion? It seems like this isn't good enough for evangelicals. They want recognition, they want preferential treatment; they want earthly authorities to confirm the primacy of their faith over others, and all that this entails.

Zamboro: As opposed to a horde of mindless zombies with ineffective legal representation and a warped concept of ethics?

I don't see the Church funding groups like 'Sea Org' and running opposition research against prominent opponents.

Weaver95: "My personal religious beliefs are just that - personal. And not worth discussion on fark. That aside, just because someone might share ideological points with another philosophy doesn't automatically mean that you're in agreement with everyone else who shares those beliefs. Groupthink like that is a common weakness of the intellectually lazy. So i'd be careful of that trap when discussing religion if I were you."

You completely ducked the question. I wasn't lumping you in with them, just suggesting that they're less frightening to you because they worship the same God. We subconsciously trust that which is familiar.

Weaver95: "But then again, we're also in danger of selling out our freedom to corporate interests as well religious cults. Which is the greater danger?"

That you still see the two as separate suggests to me that they've made greater headway than most suspect. Christian organizations are run as corporations, albeit with the express goal of leveraging their numbers to overwhelm the courts, the senate/congress, school boards and so on. Organizations like Focus on the Family, The Moral Majority (now thankfully defunct) Liberty U, Bob Jones U, Patrick Henry U (the most alarming, as it's openly stated goal is to train young Christian lawyers to 're-take the nation for Christ')

Weaver95: "The huck is effectively out of the race tho, so that's something of a dead issue."

Whether he's a credible candidate now isn't the issue. That he made it as far as he did and received as much popular support as he has, that's a warning sign. Dismissing such signs because this particular theocratic candidate didn't get elected this time would be folly.

Weaver95: "I don't see the Church funding groups like 'Sea Org' and running opposition research against prominent opponents."

I suspect there's a great deal that you don't see.

Weaver95: The huck is effectively out of the race tho, so that's something of a dead issue.

he could still be a VP candidate.

Zamboro: That you still see the two as separate suggests to me that they've made greater headway than most suspect. Christian organizations are run as corporations, albeit with the express goal of leveraging their numbers to overwhelm the courts, the senate/congress, school boards and so on. Organizations like Focus on the Family, The Moral Majority (now thankfully defunct) Liberty U, Bob Jones U, Patrick Henry U (the most alarming, as it's openly stated goal is to train young Christian lawyers to 're-take the nation for Christ').

Y'know, I looked up 'Godco' on the net and I didn't get a NYSE stock symbol. I'll go see if Jesus is selling stock tho. I might have missed his broker.

Weaver95: "Y'know, I looked up 'Godco' on the net and I didn't get a NYSE stock symbol. I'll go see if Jesus is selling stock tho. I might have missed his broker."

Haha, come on. I gave you a string of organizations to look up. The fact that they're not publically traded companies means precisely jack with respects to their activities.

Zamboro: I know you're joking but that sort of speech is worrisome. These people aren't going to vanish. One way or another we need to learn to live with them while mitigating their damaging behaviors. If there's some way to give them what they want without compromising scientific standard, retarding medical research, oppressing homosexuals and plunging America into theocracy, I say give it to them. I don't know if you hate them or not but I don't, I simply want them to stop farking around with government, education, science and sexual ethics when they're clearly having deleterious effects on all of these things by doing so.

Such as perhaps... letting them live in their own neighborhoods where they happen to impose their religious rules on top of the secular law, by community agreement?

Everyone constantly has their panties in a twist over the supposed Muslim takeover of Europe, but that's essentially what it is - segregated neighborhoods with people following their own religious codes.

Other than in the specific cases where the laws conflict (namely, the "honor killing" business, though that isn't restricted to Muslim areas only) when obviously if those people aren't prosecuted it's a problem, is it really a dire thing that a group of people decides to live by extra rules? Obviously it's not okay if there is killing going on. But what about groups of people who insist that they choose their kids' future spouses, don't want them mingling boys and girls from a very young age, send their kids to sex-segregated religious schools with little or no science content (or secular content period), insist on various "weird" clothing rules, no pants for girls, no cutting of hair from birth, must cover the hair, etc etc?

Because there are other groups doing that, in the US too. There's Jewish groups who do it, and Christian groups who do it, some of which really stand out like the Amish or people living in Kiryas Yoel and places like that, or the Hutterites. Think of it as "secular laws all apply, but then we do extra." Then you get your various immigrant groups which still practice various cultural rules that aren't specifically religious.

Just saying - is it the separation, or the degree? I absolutely think the government needs to remain secular (and yes, it's obvious that certain religious groups in the US want to undermine that while saying it's okay since it's THEIR religion they want to impose) and where there are conflicts with civil law, civil law must prevail. But some degree of choice in living in various "special" neighborhoods, private schools, all that, I think the country is big enough, even if I personally find them nutters.

The dominionists who have the explicit "take back the country for Christ" ideology, I'm not okay with that (any more than I'd be okay with imposing any other religion's codes on non-members).

Zamboro: I don't follow your thinking here. I for one wouldn't erase all religion from the world even if I could; Pick a religion at random. Even stripped of the music, the paintings, the sculptures and all the other resulting artwork inspired by that religion, the practice of the religion itself is still a form of art that we would be culturally poorer for having lost.

THIS.

Zamboro: It should be enough for them to pray in secret, as Jesus asked of them.

Jesus didn't say to pray in secret. His message on that was that prayer is private, and shouldn't be a public spectacle. Private doesn't mean secret.

Will to fight each other, that is.

.

Zamboro: Weaver95: "Y'know, I looked up 'Godco' on the net and I didn't get a NYSE stock symbol. I'll go see if Jesus is selling stock tho. I might have missed his broker."

Haha, come on. I gave you a string of organizations to look up. The fact that they're not publically traded companies means precisely jack with respects to their activities.

The fact that they're not publicly traded means they're not the same entities as corporate america. Hence my reasons for treating them differently.

Again - you lump all religious organizations into the same catagory without even bothering to understand thier differences. You even conflated corporate america with your fears of religious organizations when there are some pretty glaring differences between the two organizations.

And that's not even touching on your implied 'you might be one of THEM' comments earlier up the thread. I'm not seeing anything from you other than the standard issue 'OMGTEHCHRISTIANS' ranting that's so common to sunday afternoon fark threads.

itazurakko: I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say. You've already argued my side for me by citing great examples of why insular sharia communities don't work out; they don't simply live by 'extra' laws, they often don't follow secular law or follow laws which directly conflict with secular law.

Then there's the matter of whether it's really good for little pockets of sharia-ruled Islamic culture to form within a country that's supposed to be culturally diverse, but legally consistent.

itazurakko: "there are other groups doing that, in the US too. There's Jewish groups who do it, and Christian groups who do it, some of which really stand out like the Amish or people living in Kiryas Yoel and places like that, or the Hutterites. Think of it as "secular laws all apply, but then we do extra." Then you get your various immigrant groups which still practice various cultural rules that aren't specifically religious."

Yes, and these aren't exactly great examples to pick if you want to support the practice. Insular ethnic communities are already extremely controversial because they retard the process of integration and harm the prospects of the children living within them. The insular Jewish and Christian communities comply fully with secular law and are prosecuted when they do not, as with Christian scientists allowing their children to die by medical negligence, or the underage polygamy of Mormon sects in recent memory. Even laws resulting from the Civil Rights movement affected officially racist churches, with the Mormon Church conveniently receiving a divine revelation that removed its racist policies just as the civil rights act passed.

What I'm saying is that these are not examples of good practices; they're examples of how arbitrary religious distinctions segregate people from one another, even dividing children into sectarian schools according to the religious labels that are applied to them long before they could possibly understand the significance of those labels.

Weaver95: "Again - you lump all religious organizations into the same catagory without even bothering to understand thier differences. You even conflated corporate america with your fears of religious organizations when there are some pretty glaring differences between the two organizations."

What am I lumping together, exactly? If you're tying this into your previous statement, that was completely unrelated and I already explained how I wasn't lumping you together with anybody.

I understand full well the differences between the organizations I listed, but those differences don't change the fact that I object to their publicly declared goals. Whether it's a Muslim legal school, a Jewish council for the insertion of Young Earth Creationism into school texts or a Christian doctor's league for the banning of abortion, the differences between their religious creeds doesn't factor into my objection to their stated goals. I didn't mean to imply some sort of vast religiocorporate conspiracy if that's what you're imagning; I meant to briefly touch on the role of dominionism in the defense industry in particular, although that's a whole different can of worms.

Weaver95: "And that's not even touching on your implied 'you might be one of THEM' comments earlier up the thread. I'm not seeing anything from you other than the standard issue 'OMGTEHCHRISTIANS' ranting that's so common to sunday afternoon fark threads."

That you will only see dissenters as caricatures is not something I can help you with. I didn't say "You might be one of THEM!" Here is how I actually asked:

Zamboro: "Honest question, don't you believe in the judeo-christian god? If I'm mistaken don't hesitate to let me know."

Oh yes, I was so unreasonable, so vicious, so scared, so 'OMGTEHCHRISTIANS'. Please, can we be civil about this? Try reading and considering what I've said. We don't actually disagree on much.

But not all sharia-law communities are in conflict with civil law. Where they ARE, yes, those practices need to end.

I guess my issue is more one that people always seem to freak out about the Muslims, but not recognize that there is a range among them, and that there are similar insular communities of other religions, again with a range. TFA seems to be taking the common "if Christians do it it's okay, but if the Muslims try it, it's threatening and dangerous" tack.

It does bear asking, though, how much control should parents have over their kids' upbringing? Cross this with the homeschooling threads, or the various threads that complain about public schools - in those threads, the sentiment that there should be a national curriculum or that homeschooling parents should be monitored is often viewed with hostility.

...and I'm certainly in agreement that any movements of "let's make the law of the land our religious creed" are not okay.

Er, meaning the national law would be replaced by religious law.

/my writing, it sucks

nekom: Why? We need them. We need atheists too. And everything in between.

It takes all kinds to make a world, but sometimes ya gotta wonder about the ratios of 'em.

We're throwing $600+ billion a year into defense related expenditures, but only the evangeligals can save us?

From what?

itazurakko: "But not all sharia-law communities are in conflict with civil law. Where they ARE, yes, those practices need to end."

But what about my explanation as to why such insular communities are a bad idea, regardless of sharia law?

itazurakko: "I guess my issue is more one that people always seem to freak out about the Muslims, but not recognize that there is a range among them, and that there are similar insular communities of other religions, again with a range. TFA seems to be taking the common "if Christians do it it's okay, but if the Muslims try it, it's threatening and dangerous" tack."

I understad, but the fact that there are plenty of kind, reasonable Muslims out there should not make it possible to identify and counteract the caliphate-establishing aspirations of others.

itazurakko: "It does bear asking, though, how much control should parents have over their kids' upbringing? Cross this with the homeschooling threads, or the various threads that complain about public schools - in those threads, the sentiment that there should be a national curriculum or that homeschooling parents should be monitored is often viewed with hostility."

I don't see it as an education issue. I see it as an issue of the child's rights. Just as parent's haven't the right to handle the child physically in a way that violates the child sexually, I feel that it's possible for them to be mentally violated as well. I believe that deliberately separating children from secular information in order to raise them in an echo chamber of religious notions is an act of psychological and ideological conditioning that is ethically questionable when applied to animals, let alone human children.

Even if it's impossible to enforce any moratorium on childhood indoctrination (and let's face it, without gross imposition upon our civil rights, it is) it's entirely possible to de-segregate religious schools. We cannot ban religiously founded private schools, as that would be a violation of separation of church and state; even though it would be a blanket ban rather than a discriminating one, it would still inarguably be an act of prohibition. Instead we can do away with the practice of separating children by creed, instead ensuring that they mingle with children from a wide variety of religious and nonreligious homes, popping the information bubble that up until then they had been held within.

Marcus Aurelius: From what?

The Muslims. It's the new Crusades, you know. Clash of Civilizations, and all that. The hordes are at the gates, and Europe is being lost from Christendom, being stolen by the Muslims of course but there is also blame due to the secularists who were so careless as to not see this happening and fight back, they lost religion and really, they are to blame.

.....should not make it impossible. My bad.

itazurakko: "The hordes are at the gates"

The hordes are at the gates, it's just that there's another horde on the other side. The secularists are the ones holding the gates shut while trying to disarm both sides, so that if the gates ever burst open, the fewest numbers will be hurt.

Of course the act of disarming is seen by both sides as an attack. But that's what you can expect when you're stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Zamboro: I don't see it as an education issue. I see it as an issue of the child's rights. Just as parent's haven't the right to handle the child physically in a way that violates the child sexually, I feel that it's possible for them to be mentally violated as well.

Yeah, I can see that argument too. I'm just tossing out devil's advocate, pointing out that in the US generally there's a strong streak of "the parents get to raise the kids how they see fit," they are free to indoctrinate their kids with their worldview, that's a fundamental right of the parent. They, of course, view it as sheltering their kids from the dangers of the secular corrupted world.

So the people who insist on raising kids with strict gender separation, requiring girls to live at home (no college for them, obviously) under their father's dominion until they leave to get married and go under the husband's dominion (these are Christians), they homeschool, pretty much. Young earth creationism all the way.

itazurakko: "Yeah, I can see that argument too. I'm just tossing out devil's advocate, pointing out that in the US generally there's a strong streak of "the parents get to raise the kids how they see fit," they are free to indoctrinate their kids with their worldview, that's a fundamental right of the parent. They, of course, view it as sheltering their kids from the dangers of the secular corrupted world."

What about the rest of my post? RE: de-segregating sectarian schools?

Zamboro: The hordes are at the gates, it's just that there's another horde on the other side. The secularists are the ones holding the gates shut while trying to disarm both sides, so that if the gates ever burst open, the fewest numbers will be hurt.

Oh yeah. I'm just giving the increasingly (alas) common meme that informs a lot of writing like TFA.

The idea is that the US is the chosen country, it's still strongly Christian, but Europe is lost, because they went secular (and liberal/socialist), and so it's up to the Christians to hold off the Muslim onslaught. This ties into the "Culture War" too, and a lot of anti-immigrant (not only Muslim) sentiments common in those circles as well.

So the guy in TFA is happy to welcome Hitchens' comments about the dangers of Muslim separation, but rejects Hitchens' complaints about Christianity similarly desiring influence, and he mentions how the US is the last bastion, etc.

There's avalanches of this kinda stuff out there.