How Sick Do You Have To Be... [Archive] - Ron Paul Forums / Liberty Forest

Kade

08-12-2008, 01:12 PM

Kade, I doubt the organizers of this event believe that they will call down a torrential rain on Obama. More likely is they are using this as a way of creating a community out of their supporters. Prayer is a simple action that anyone can take, but it is emotionally significant for believers. My suspicion is that Focus on the Family is just trying to cultivate some loyalty and passion amongst their supporters and the similarly devout. No big deal.

As far as the people doing the praying goes... cut them some slack. Yeah, it's silly and shallow to pray for God to take sides in partisan politics. Honestly, it's pretty dumb. But I'm not going to condemn them for being a bit daft.

I'm looking towards the future... if it does rain, this won't be ignored... if it doesn't it will. The godbots win no matter what, simply because they are the ignorant majority.

yongrel

08-12-2008, 01:12 PM

"If people took it seriously, we regret it," Minnery said Monday.

Rule #1 : Know your audience.

Haha, I missed that bit. :D

acptulsa

08-12-2008, 01:13 PM

It appears they were poking fun at their own religious selves to me--perhaps in the hopes of causing their own ranks to lighten up. I would think you'd approve, Kade. I know I do.

LibertyEagle

08-12-2008, 01:16 PM

I'm looking towards the future... if it does rain, this won't be ignored... if it doesn't it will. The godbots win no matter what, simply because they are the ignorant majority.

I am not saying this as a Moderator, but I have to tell you, that you are REALLY TICKING ME OFF, with this continued insulting of Christians!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: We get it, you HATE Christians.

familydog

08-12-2008, 01:16 PM

There is a car I see each day that has a bumper sticker that says "Jesus Was A Liberal."

Unfortunately people of all political philosophies abuse religion.

In any case, it looks all in jest despite some people taking it seriously.

Kade

08-12-2008, 01:30 PM

I am not saying this as a Moderator, but I have to tell you, that you are REALLY TICKING ME OFF, with this continued insulting of Christians!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: We get it, you HATE Christians.

I get it twice in return with the sheer number of personal insults.

You have shown the same malcontent and level of insults in regards to "liberals" secularists and the like... actually, there is a much higher level.. .and direct personal attacks (not to mention threats). I endure both the group attack and the high level of personal attacks...

I never said "I hate Christians". That is a lie.

Besides, godbots =/= Christians. You made that assumption, not me.

I've said it before, say to me "You are not welcome here" and I'll leave.

yongrel

08-12-2008, 01:34 PM

Kade, I like ya around RPF personally. Just simmer down a little.

LibertyEagle

08-12-2008, 01:35 PM

You have shown the same malcontent and level of insults in regards to "liberals" secularists and the like... actually, there is a much higher level.. .and direct personal attacks (not to mention threads). I endure both the group attack and the high level of personal attacks...

Actually, Kade, I have stood up for you more than once.

I never said "I hate Christians". That is a lie.
Ok. Who are you referring to when you say, "godbots"?

Besides, godbots =/= Christians. You made that assumption, not me.
See above.

I've said it before, say to me "You are not welcome here" and I'll leave.
I did not say that, Kade. What I said, had nothing to do with you leaving. I commented on your derogatory statement about those who believe in God.

Kludge

08-12-2008, 01:35 PM

Danged emos takin' offense to everything.

Wendi

08-12-2008, 01:37 PM

Kade

08-12-2008, 01:40 PM

Ok. Who are you referring to when you say, "godbots"?

GODBOT: (noun) someone programmed from birth to follow religious leaders' every wish; often indoctrinated in Christian fellowships closed off to free thinkers. Extremely dangerous when church leaders use the GodBots to harm other non-GodBots. GODBOTIC (verb) used to describe the hateful actions perpetuated by Christian people who won't listen to reason or logic.

Focus on the Family are Godbots. Jerry Falwell, and his ilk, and Theocrat, and other dominionists, purists, professional moralists, are GODBOTS... very simple to define, and not far from the truth.

Try this with Liberal. I'm not going to simmer down... every other thread on this forum is propoganda, you guys are suppose to be smarter than this... I mean holy crap, World Governments? Tin Foil Hats, Gold Currency.... go READ A BOOK..

You can start with The Postman, by David Brin... a very nice anti-everything-you-folks-hold-as-sacred book... See how nice a block of gold is compared to some medicine, a cigarette, or even a loaf of bread.

So much pouring of nonsense on here... I mean, there were people here that think there is no such thing as civil liberties or a right to privacy... how to you combat that level of ignorance?

*sigh*

acptulsa

08-12-2008, 01:41 PM

Not all Christians are ignorant supporters of tyranny - just like not all Ron Paul supporters are truthers, for example. We don't like stereotypes - so we do we try so hard to stereotype others sometimes?

Yeah. Well, to talk about a phenomenon it needs a name. What is in a name? Would not a rose, by any other name, smell as sweet? Sure. But if they didn't have seperate names, how could we differentiate between the smell of a rose and the aroma of a tulip? People fall into types, and what works in educating or swaying the opinion of one of the type will generally at least prove a useful direction from which to approach another. Yet this tool is indeed a trap, and can break more than it fixes.

Kade

08-12-2008, 01:41 PM

Aratus

08-12-2008, 01:48 PM

Kade... this August has been wetter than usual...

I'm starting to think the whammy from this group
hit us in the Baystate. the wetness sorta hinting
at Noah found us all several weeks EARLY and
jumped across half the continent. God is like that...
at times... if i go "forrest gump" on people, spare me!

Aratus

08-12-2008, 01:49 PM

Kade does have a point.
most liberals are not
exactly like eugene debs...

Aratus

08-12-2008, 01:51 PM

to my way of thinking EUGENE DEBS was quite a socialist!

Kade

08-12-2008, 01:53 PM

Kade does have a point.
most liberals are not
exactly like eugene debs...

I will most likely remain in full disagreement with the policies of Debs, but I will NEVER advocate the imprisonment of political dissidents in this country, regardless of how popular they are... the Espionage Act is a black eye for this country, no different than the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, Seditions Acts, and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.

That we have people on this forum who wish to "try for treason" people with differing views is a shock I can't recover from... what has this country become... I don't know, but I tear in real life over it...

I work too hard, and I have too many people who respect me and look up to me, to allow idiots to solidify themselves into a corner of ignorance. I'll not ever stand for it...

Aratus

08-12-2008, 01:54 PM

ralph reed = godbot
rev wright = preacherman
bob barr = dude on maine's ballot and ohio's
billy graham = well traveled preacherman who is sometimes correct.

Kludge

08-12-2008, 01:55 PM

ralph reed = godbot
rev wright = preacherman
bob barr = dude on maine's ballot and ohio's
billy graham = well traveled preacherman who is sometimes correct.

Four life mysteries solved in a five-second read.

Aratus

08-12-2008, 01:57 PM

did you know that the Democratic Party did pre-empt MANY of norman thomas's
and eugene debs's ideas yet TECHNICALLY they are NOT socialists, nor are
liberal republicans??? the reformers all, whether FDR new deal or teddy roosevelt era progressive
SOMETIMES would borrow ideas from fringe movements trying to go mainstream...

Cowlesy

08-12-2008, 01:57 PM

Four life mysteries solved in a five-second read.

i'm still waiting for godot

yongrel

08-12-2008, 01:58 PM

i'm still waiting for godot

:D

Kludge

08-12-2008, 01:59 PM

:D

This.

Kade

08-12-2008, 02:01 PM

did you know that the Democratic Party did pre-empt MANY of norman thomas
and eugene debs's ideas yet TECHNICALLY they are NOT socialists, nor are
liberal republicans??? the reformers all, whether FDR new deal or teddy roosevelt era progressive
SOMETIMES would borrow ideas from fringe movements trying to go mainstream...

Yes, indeed... who else Aratus marched with the communists and socialists after Debs' Speech of Sedition and his arrest? A group that predates any libertarian group... but of similar mold!

I'll make an easy prediction... 90% of the people here have no idea what I'm talking about...

Debs received 5.99% of the popular vote in 1912.

Aratus

08-12-2008, 02:06 PM

Aratus

08-12-2008, 02:09 PM

mckinley clearly was the small business "big money' candidate in 1896...
william jennings bryan had a fervor like huey long and huckabee's scruples...
that sorta left the socialists as the also ran in that election... as well as later on...

Kade

08-12-2008, 02:10 PM

i had read a book once that theorized that william jennings bryan
had killed the populist movement by pre-empting it whilst agreeing
with it. greenbackers, grangers and populists sometimes could join
up in a cause. in a way, FDR perhaps does a likewise to the progressive
movement Henry Wallace was once a REPUBLICAN PROGRESSIVE inside...

I have been influenced by Eastman, someone who I feel has more authority on the failures of implemented socialism. People on the forums invoke Hayek here, without invoking his love of liberal thought, especially in regards to his closet friend and mentor, Karl Popper...

The only real descendant of these thinkers is George Soros.

Demonized by all the real powers in this world... forget the Bilderbergs!

Aratus

08-12-2008, 02:11 PM

bush is leaving office after almost lettin' cheney drag us into a border war
with russia only to leave the next guy with one big debt for three years...
bill clinton's parallelism to grover cleveland is uncanny... save for the gold standard.

Aratus

08-12-2008, 02:12 PM

I have been influenced by Eastman, someone who I feel has more authority on the failures of implemented socialism. People on the forums invoke Hayek here, without invoking his love of liberal thought, especially in regards to his closet friend and mentor, Karl Popper...

The only real descendant of these thinkers is George Soros.

Demonized by all the real powers in this world... forget the Bilderbergs!

i have a quiet respect for mr. soros, yes... and john maynard keynes
even though i have no idea how we ever got out of the great depression...

Aratus

08-12-2008, 02:14 PM

Aratus

08-12-2008, 02:15 PM

bill clinton harshly balances a budget.
george bush goes war on terror and
evaporates the surplus. go figure...

acptulsa

08-12-2008, 02:16 PM

i'm still waiting for godot

I think Ibsen's sequel was cancelled on account of death. Sorry.

Kade

08-12-2008, 02:18 PM

since i think its to be a 3 year recession, do we
coolidge era belt tighten short of high tariffs or
do we set up a NEW DEAL set of WPA projects
and go DEEPER into debt? the economic paradox
of the 1930s. we do not need a war, now. we may
be letting our jingoists go into an overdrive...

Technology is our only saving grace... I believe this... America is dying and we need industry... it is the only thing that will balance the high government spending...ironically, spending on a boom!

It is faux pas now to question the legitimacy of Rothbard... especially among the minarchists, but the Keynesian model proved correct in estimating that high government spending would create economic growth and jobs... It did... IT DOES NOT mean that it was the correct response...

Spending money during a major depression is one thing... spending the same amount of money when our economy was strong...starting in 2002... BAD BAD BAD economic policy... this spending will be our destruction... we cannot make up for it without a technological miracle.

Kade

08-12-2008, 02:20 PM

i'm still waiting for godot

I once played Vladimir in a major production at my University.

Always admired Beckett.

acptulsa

08-12-2008, 02:21 PM

I was discussing this with my eighty year old uncle not long ago. When we went into the Great Depression we were debt free. This gave us a lot of room to maneuver. Whether we zigged when we should have zagged or not, at least we had room to do it because we hadn't already hocked the nation.

Where are we now? What room to maneuver do we have today?

The_Orlonater

08-12-2008, 06:46 PM

I get it twice in return with the sheer number of personal insults.

You have shown the same malcontent and level of insults in regards to "liberals" secularists and the like... actually, there is a much higher level.. .and direct personal attacks (not to mention threats). I endure both the group attack and the high level of personal attacks...

I never said "I hate Christians". That is a lie.

Besides, godbots =/= Christians. You made that assumption, not me.

I've said it before, say to me "You are not welcome here" and I'll leave.

Didn't you start the thread a about that guy in Tennessee shooting people in a church for their "liberal" views?You've bashed Christianity using some mean examples. Just admit it, Kade. :D

I don't like religion either, but bash them in the correct context. And I quote.

"The Christian faith is a model of excellence."

Kludge

08-12-2008, 06:54 PM

Mean examples?

I suppose we must censor ourselves and history less we dare tempt Him to rain fire down upon us for exposing such violent bigotry.

LittleLightShining

08-12-2008, 07:03 PM

Kade, I like ya around RPF personally. Just simmer down a little.Me, too. But it does get tiring, you and your insults that are clearly aimed at Christians. Maybe you don't mean all Christians when you use collectivist terms like "godbots" but it's very insulting. And who knows, maybe you consider me a godbot, too, and I should be insulted. I think everyone here gets it that you are a militant atheist with a really big chip on your shoulder against Christians, but for the love of <science> give us a break. We're all on the same team here.

LittleLightShining

08-12-2008, 07:08 PM

since i think its to be a 3 year recession, do we
coolidge era belt tighten short of high tariffs This is what we should do but I'm afraid this is what we will do
or
do we set up a NEW DEAL set of WPA projects
and go DEEPER into debt? the economic paradox
of the 1930s. we do not need a war, now. we may
be letting our jingoists go into an overdrive...

LibertyOfOne

08-12-2008, 08:07 PM

http://www.gazette.com/articles/focus_39213___article.html/video_action.html

Problem 1: Being Christians does not mean you have to vote Republican.
Problem 2: Assuming a god exists is one thing, assuming he sides with a party of tyranny is a whole other...
Problem 3: This is actually really twisted... I mean, REALLY twisted.

Other problems as I suspect will be discussed later...

Tyranny from the left.
Tyranny from the right.

What is the difference? You still lose in the end.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 11:04 AM

I will most likely remain in full disagreement with the policies of Debs, but I will NEVER advocate the imprisonment of political dissidents in this country, regardless of how popular they are... the Espionage Act is a black eye for this country, no different than the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, Seditions Acts, and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.

That we have people on this forum who wish to "try for treason" people with differing views is a shock I can't recover from... what has this country become... I don't know, but I tear in real life over it...

I work too hard, and I have too many people who respect me and look up to me, to allow idiots to solidify themselves into a corner of ignorance. I'll not ever stand for it...

Kade, I've been ghosting on this forum for over a year now, and I have to say that I don't understand any of your insults towards members of this forum.

I saw your quotation of someone saying that people should be tried for treason for voting for unconstitutional candidates, and I agree that it's an asinine comment, but I notice that you overreact to anything someone says. One guy says something silly, and you make it seem like the entire forum is like that.

This forum attracts people with many different ideas, and I love it as I get to explore alternate ideas, like anarchism. I'm still a small-government conservative, but I have a better understanding of anarchism thanks to this forum. Appreciate the intellectual diversity on this forum, instead of raging over the "ignorance" on this thread.

I'm a Christian and I respect the views of atheists, but anytime I read any of your threads on religion, I see nothing but venom directed towards believers like me.
If you want to convert people to your way of thinking, then know that being rude and arrogant will only turn off people.

And about the liberal = socialist debate, understand that it's just a stupid label. Who cares how people define liberal? Its definition has changed over the last two centuries, just like conservative. Do you know how many debates I used to get into over the meaning of conservative back when such labels mattered to me?

Basically the gist of this response is that while I appreciate your desire to make us all think the way you do, I've found it very hard to sympathize with any of your actual points since they are so hostile and arrogant. Yes Kade, you are very smart person, there's a lot of wit in your posts; I've seen that since the day you first posted. But mockery and satire only goes so far, and sooner or later, it becomes a one-trick pony.

Hold back on the rage and stop overreacting. Then maybe you'll save more of us from this "corner of ignorance". :)

Kludge

08-13-2008, 11:10 AM

Kade, I've been ghosting on this forum for over a year now

You're a bad ghost :p

acptulsa

08-13-2008, 11:12 AM

Kade, I've been ghosting on this forum for over a year now... This forum attracts people with many different ideas, and I love it as I get to explore alternate ideas, like anarchism. I'm still a small-government conservative, but I have a better understanding of anarchism thanks to this forum. Appreciate the intellectual diversity on this forum, instead of raging over the "ignorance" on this thread.

Thank you. Thank you for your reasonable words. Thank you for your confirmation that we really are doing more and reaching a wider audience than it feels like we are from time to time. It is an honor to play to a house with you in the crowd.

And feel free to be less "ghostlike" and more vocal any old time you want! :)

Kade

08-13-2008, 11:23 AM

I saw your quotation of someone saying that people should be tried for treason for voting for unconstitutional candidates, and I agree that it's an asinine comment, but I notice that you overreact to anything someone says. One guy says something silly, and you make it seem like the entire forum is like that.

This forum attracts people with many different ideas, and I love it as I get to explore alternate ideas, like anarchism. I'm still a small-government conservative, but I have a better understanding of anarchism thanks to this forum. Appreciate the intellectual diversity on this forum, instead of raging over the "ignorance" on this thread.

I'm a Christian and I respect the views of atheists, but anytime I read any of your threads on religion, I see nothing but venom directed towards believers like me.
If you want to convert people to your way of thinking, then know that being rude and arrogant will only turn off people.

And about the liberal = socialist debate, understand that it's just a stupid label. Who cares how people define liberal? Its definition has changed over the last two centuries, just like conservative. Do you know how many debates I used to get into over the meaning of conservative back when such labels mattered to me?

Basically the gist of this response is that while I appreciate your desire to make us all think the way you do, I've found it very hard to sympathize with any of your actual points since they are so hostile and arrogant. Yes Kade, you are very smart person, there's a lot of wit in your posts; I've seen that since the day you first posted. But mockery and satire only goes so far, and sooner or later, it becomes a one-trick pony.

Hold back on the rage and stop overreacting. Then maybe you'll save more of us from this "corner of ignorance". :)

I'll work on it. Although I don't particularly find the Christian critique valid... If more members spoke out against the likes of Theocrat and Truth Warrior, you would have a much stronger point.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 11:33 AM

You're a bad ghost :p

BOO!

Thank you. Thank you for your reasonable words. Thank you for your confirmation that we really are doing more and reaching a wider audience than it feels like we are from time to time. It is an honor to play to a house with you in the crowd.

And feel free to be less "ghostlike" and more vocal any old time you want! :)

^_^

I vowed a long time ago to never get involved in forums since they always seem to lead to flame wars. However, immigration is a big issue for me and a recent immigration thread attracted me like a fly to a light bulb.

That being said, I must say that the flame wars on this forum is pretty mild in comparison to all the videogame forums I used to hang out in, considering how politics (in theory) is a always a much more volatile topic than a "Are night elves underpowered" thread. And don't get me started on FreeRepublic. >_<

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 11:35 AM

I'll work on it. Although I don't particularly find the Christian critique valid... If more members spoke out against the likes of Theocrat and Truth Warrior, you would have a much stronger point.

What's the problem with Theocrat and TruthWarrior?

I don't always agree with their point of view (I disagree with aspects of Theocrat's theology especially), but why do people need to speak out against them?

I'm much more content that crazy Stormfront-wannabee trolls are taken out by the moderators rather than Calvinists and/or anarchists.

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:00 PM

What's the problem with Theocrat and TruthWarrior?

I don't always agree with their point of view (I disagree with aspects of Theocrat's theology especially), but why do people need to speak out against them?

I'm much more content that crazy Stormfront-wannabee trolls are taken out by the moderators rather than Calvinists and/or anarchists.

The same reason you speak out against me. I don't ask that they be taken out, I'm against all forms of censorship personally, I'm asking that a few people stand up, especially the one's who go out of their way to find anything at fault with what I have to say.

I'm fairly reasonable, albeit aggressive. This is an issue of hypocrisy. If I am to be called out for an aggressive stance, specifically in calling the majority hypocrites, it is because they allow (as in without peer pressure or rebuttal) Truth Warrior and the like to spout of nonsense continually... this is a good enough reason to suppose that these people support the nonsense...

In other words, if you are writing against me, in disagreement, you should be applying the same principles to others you disagree with... this does not happen, therefore, you must be in agreement...

Simple logic.

Kludge

08-13-2008, 12:03 PM

I try to fit in the mocking of Truth Warrior as often I can. I gave up on Theocrat after a couple discussions.

Didn't you earlier say "willful ignorance" was your scapegoat, Kade? :p

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:04 PM

I try to fit in the mocking of Truth Warrior as often I can. I gave up on Theocrat after a couple discussions.

Didn't you earlier say "willful ignorance" was your scapegoat, Kade? :p

Indeed. It is. I suppose it must exist, or I have nothing to bitch about...

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 12:07 PM

The same reason you speak out against me. I don't ask that they be taken out, I'm against all forms of censorship personally, I'm asking that a few people stand up, especially the one's who go out of their way to find anything at fault with what I have to say.

I'm fairly reasonable, albeit aggressive. This is an issue of hypocrisy. If I am to be called out for an aggressive stance, specifically in calling the majority hypocrites, it is because they allow (as in without peer pressure or rebuttal) Truth Warrior and the like to spout of nonsense continually... this is a good enough reason to suppose that these people support the nonsense...

In other words, if you are writing against me, in disagreement, you should be applying the same principles to others you disagree with... this does not happen, therefore, you must be in agreement...

Simple logic.

Eh?

You're starting to sound like George W. Bush ;p

But in all seriousness, stop viewing people as being either with you or against you. Just because I choose to not get involved in religion threads is not because I'm a closet ally of Theocrat, I just simply view arguments on religion to be a pure waste of time and so I don't get involved.

And my reasons for criticizing you (I'm not against you) is based on the fact that your aggressive style is turning a lot of people off. I think you're a smart, educated person, and it would be a shame to see you leave because you disagree with so many of us. Thats why I'm trying to tell you to stop feeling so defensive. Lower your shields. Take things in stride.

And I'm not criticizing theocrat or truthwarrior because their posts are not hostile or arrogant. Theocrat seems very well-mannered and truthwarrior seems to write often in jest.

micahnelson

08-13-2008, 12:09 PM

I don't fight with Kade much on here because I do it enough IRL.

I don't fight with other members on the forum because I tend to go crosseyed within a few minutes. The last debate I was in I actually got a headache trying to maneuver my mind through the rabbit holes that brought my opponent to his flawed conclusions.

I'm mostly here to find news links I would not ordinarily see, and hoping from some sort of national or regional program with which to involve myself.

angelatc

08-13-2008, 12:14 PM

I am not saying this as a Moderator, but I have to tell you, that you are REALLY TICKING ME OFF, with this continued insulting of Christians!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: We get it, you HATE Christians.

Which is sillier - believing in a God that will act to benefit all of humanity, or believing in a government that will act to benefit all of humanity?

God has a much better track record, IMHO, and I'm an athiest.

acptulsa

08-13-2008, 12:17 PM

Which is sillier - believing in a God that will act to benefit all of humanity, or believing in a government that will act to benefit all of humanity?

God has a much better track record, IMHO, and I'm an athiest.

My vote for post of the day.

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:18 PM

God has a much better track record, IMHO, and I'm an athiest.

I kinda find some fault with this... respectfully... do we consider Katrina a one-two punch from both?

How does that work... are we going by death toll?

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:19 PM

Kludge

08-13-2008, 12:20 PM

I agree with Kade. Because God created all life (or so the argument goes), he in turn took all life (for some reason, we're only here for temporary glory).

No one thing takes more life then God.

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:23 PM

Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You do exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

micahnelson

08-13-2008, 12:25 PM

I called in to Helen Glover again this morning... I got a few really good hits in..

But c'mon, I'm not bad irl. :)

I'm sorry I missed that.

Psht, Helen Glover.

I find most people easier to talk to in person. What is that Penny-Arcade comic that explains the internet?

http://tcritic.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/greaterdickwad.jpg

Truth Warrior

08-13-2008, 12:26 PM

I try to fit in the mocking of Truth Warrior as often I can. I gave up on Theocrat after a couple discussions.

Didn't you earlier say "willful ignorance" was your scapegoat, Kade? :p Yep, just to bad that you aren't any good at it. :rolleyes:

I have very low expectations of a kludge. You never disappoint me in your inability to even meet them. ;)

:D

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 12:26 PM

All I know is that God has done good things for me while the government has been responsible for nothing but doom for my country and misery for my children and grandchildren.

rightwinghour

08-13-2008, 12:33 PM

I am not saying this as a Moderator, but I have to tell you, that you are REALLY TICKING ME OFF, with this continued insulting of Christians!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: We get it, you HATE Christians.

Yeah, but Christians (and I am one) typically are some of the more ignorant, mis- and un-informed voters out there. They can't see past the Republican party, and they miss the fact that their freedom is under attack.

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:36 PM

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 12:36 PM

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:39 PM

Couldn't the same be said for Jews who vote for Democrats?

Guilt-by-association doesn't work.

Jewish voters tend towards Democrat because of the implied religious freedom of their platform, they are also a rather liberal people.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 12:42 PM

Jewish voters tend towards Democrat because of the implied religious freedom of their platform, they are also a rather liberal people.

And some Christians vote for Republicans because they view them as the best way of defending their religious freedoms. And the Christians who do vote Republican are often conservative as well so that's only more reason for them to vote GOP.

And there are plenty of Christians who vote for Democrats, socialists, libertarians, etc.

It's really futile to paint a religious group as being tied to one political party since it is simply not true.

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:43 PM

And some Christians vote for Republicans because they view them as the best way of defending their religious freedoms. And the Christians who do vote Republican are often conservative as well so that's only more reason for them to vote GOP.

And there are plenty of Christians who vote for Democrats, socialists, libertarians, etc.

It's really futile to paint a religious group as being tied to one political party since it is simply not true.

Which is why I use the qualifier: "Godbots"

georgiaboy

08-13-2008, 12:51 PM

Yeah, but Christians (and I am one) typically are some of the more ignorant, mis- and un-informed voters out there. They can't see past the Republican party, and they miss the fact that their freedom is under attack.

That is all I ever hope to imply...

explain, you two.

Are you implying that voter IQ is based on religious affiliation, as opposed to some other factors? where's the correlation?

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 12:52 PM

Which is why I use the qualifier: "Godbots"

Well I don't think all of them deserve that title. It implies unthinking drones.

I used to be of the classic Religious Right mold pre-9/11, I've changed, but I still respect people who are of that mindset. Many of them have valid reasons for believing in Christianity and have legitimate concerns when it comes to their perception of the State imposing secularism on them. Do I agree with all them? No.

But I wouldn't call them god-bots, just like I wouldn't call atheists "Dawkins-bots".

Kade

08-13-2008, 12:54 PM

Well I don't think all of them deserve that title. It implies unthinking drones.

I used to be of the classic Religious Right mold pre-9/11, I've changed, but I still respect people who are of that mindset. Many of them have valid reasons for believing in Christianity and have legitimate concerns when it comes to their perception of the State imposing secularism on them. Do I agree with all them? No.

But I wouldn't call them god-bots, just like I wouldn't call atheists "Dawkins-bots".

I don't see the similarity. All "godbots" obey their manifestation of their god, many atheists can't stomach Dawkins for his perceived aggression... That some people, myself included, have respect for him, that doesn't make him a god.

If you are interested in other views about the subject: http://www.infidels.org/

You'll find many of my own articles as well. .... but shh. =P

Truth Warrior

08-13-2008, 12:59 PM

I'm still attempting to understand why the atheists vote for the theists and then complain about how things turn out.

My only viable answers so far are cognitive dissonance and / or hypocrisy and / or brain damage.

:p

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 12:59 PM

I don't see the similarity. All "godbots" obey their manifestation of their god, many atheists can't stomach Dawkins for his perceived aggression... That some people, myself included, have respect for him, that doesn't make him a god.

If you are interested in other views about the subject: http://www.infidels.org/

You'll find many of my own articles as well. .... but shh. =P

You prove my point. Dawkin-bots would be a silly title, just like god-bots.

You insist that god-bots obey their "God", which implies that there's no thinking going on, which is untrue. As I said before, I used to be from that camp, and there's plenty of debate on the nature of God, Old Testament law and its validity for today, predestination, etc. There's many conservative Christians who can't stand John Hagee (myself included ;) )

I'll take a look at the link. I presume your articles are under the name Kade?

Kludge

08-13-2008, 12:59 PM

http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/

Do I win?

Kade

08-13-2008, 01:01 PM

http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/

Do I win?

No. =P Although I am partnered with them and a major contributor... I have far more members.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 01:10 PM

Kade, is there any articles that you recommend?

Truth Warrior

08-13-2008, 01:13 PM

Communist Manifesto perhaps?

georgiaboy

08-13-2008, 01:22 PM

BTW, Kade, my two cents, you just go on raging against Christianity and Christians all you want.

Most of us deserve it, myself included.
The faith, many of us, and it's supposed God, can take it (it's weathered more than your internet rantings).
And it's obvious that you need to do this - I suspect it's because you're way down deep still wrestling with the issue, so go ahead, put it out there.
Just be careful you don't get more than you asked for. ;)

Kade

08-13-2008, 01:24 PM

Kade, is there any articles that you recommend?

Actually yes...

I'd rather not give up my real name here...

Let's see.

I prefer some of the more historical viewpoints... very obscure and unknown thinkers like Chapman Cohen, the second chair of the British Secularists...

This article is really good, albeit a bit older:

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/chapman_cohen/deity_and_design.html

There is more from him as well...

Anything Ingersoll is also outstanding: http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/brain_and_bible.html

Truth Warrior

08-13-2008, 01:30 PM

Think I'll just stick with LRC, etc., etc., etc. ;)

:D

rightwinghour

08-13-2008, 02:34 PM

rightwinghour

08-13-2008, 02:36 PM

explain, you two.

Are you implying that voter IQ is based on religious affiliation, as opposed to some other factors? where's the correlation?

Bible believing Christians tend to not look at government in terms of the Constitution, they tend to look at it in terms of the Bible. As such, they will usually vote for the candidate who panders to their biblical values, and that's not necessarily the one who will protect their freedoms.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 02:37 PM

It's a fact that the religious right votes overwhelmingly Republican.

Yeah... and liberal Jews vote overwhelming Democrat. What's your point?

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 02:39 PM

Bible believing Christians tend to not look at government in terms of the Constitution, they tend to look at it in terms of the Bible. As such, they will usually vote for the candidate who panders to their biblical values, and that's not necessarily the one who will protect their freedoms.

Not entirely true. Like I said, there's debate within the conservative Christian world. And part of the reason why the Religious Right rose was because of a perception that the government was trampling the Constitution by prohibiting any public expressions of faith was well as shoving abortion and gay marriage down the people's throats.

I know this because I was from this world.

LittleLightShining

08-13-2008, 02:50 PM

Not entirely true. Like I said, there's debate within the conservative Christian world. And part of the reason why the Religious Right rose was because of a perception that the government was trampling the Constitution by prohibiting any public expressions of faith was well as shoving abortion and gay marriage down the people's throats.

I know this because I was from this world.And this is why I detest the church so much. And partly why Kade's attitude (for the most part) doesn't bother me. I completely understand. What bothers me is the constant bashing of Christians as a group HERE.

I don't believe real Bible-believing Christians should ever just follow a human leader like Dobson or Hagee without measuring their words against Jesus'. The problem with folks that do that is not that they are Christians, it is that they are weak and/or lazy and as a result are too trusting in imperfect humans.

The Lord's patience with us is great but the day will come when many will come to Him and He will tell them He never knew them.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 02:53 PM

And this is why I detest the church so much. And partly why Kade's attitude (for the most part) doesn't bother me. I completely understand. What bothers me is the constant bashing of Christians as a group HERE.

I don't believe real Bible-believing Christians should ever just follow a human leader like Dobson or Hagee without measuring their words against Jesus'. The problem with folks that do that is not that they are Christians, it is that they are weak and/or lazy and as a result are too trusting in imperfect humans.

The Lord's patience with us is great but the day will come when many will come to Him and He will tell them He never knew them.

I totally agree.

angelatc

08-13-2008, 04:45 PM

I kinda find some fault with this... respectfully... do we consider Katrina a one-two punch from both?

How does that work... are we going by death toll?

Uh, the government helped how, exactly? Even if I were a Christian, I wouldn't presume to speak for God. I believe the thought process is that everything happens for a reason.

Perhaps the reason was to illustrate the folly of living below sea level. Perhaps one or some of the survivors needed the hurricane for the incentive to relocate as part of some grander scheme that might not play out in our lifetime.

That's what "faith" is. Progressives have "faith" in government. Christians have "faith" in God.

angelatc

08-13-2008, 04:50 PM

Yeah, but Christians (and I am one) typically are some of the more ignorant, mis- and un-informed voters out there. They can't see past the Republican party, and they miss the fact that their freedom is under attack.

You're wrong about that stereotype. Catholics tend to vote Democratic.

In the 80's, there was a movement to turn the Republican party into the Christian party. It failed, and we're seeing the aftermath of that effort now.

How can anybody can be a Ron Paul supporter and yet say such awful things about the followers of the Christian religion is beyond my comprehension.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 04:51 PM

You're wrong about that stereotype. Catholics tend to vote Democratic.

In the 80's, there was a movement to turn the Republican party into the Christian party. It failed, and we're seeing the aftermath of that effort now.

How can anybody can be a Ron Paul supporter and yet say such awful things about the followers of the Christian religion is beyond my comprehension.

+1

People like you make me love atheists. ^_^

rightwinghour

08-13-2008, 05:19 PM

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 05:21 PM

And Catholics aren't the religious right either. The religious right is mostly Protestant, and they do vote mostly Republican.

Why does that matter?

rightwinghour

08-13-2008, 05:22 PM

rightwinghour

08-13-2008, 05:24 PM

Yeah... and liberal Jews vote overwhelming Democrat. What's your point?

Well, you said it was futile to tie a religious group to a political party, and I was pointing out that it wasn't futile. Stereotypes are there for a reason. They aren't just picked out of thin air.

Agent Chameleon

08-13-2008, 05:31 PM

And in their ignorance of the Constitution and freedom, they attempted to trample the the Constitution, too. The only constitutional issues they focused on were the ones that had to do with their faith. They picked and chose like the liberals do.

That isn't entirely true. Some conservative Christians do have a genuine appreciation for the Constitution. Look at Chuck Baldwin. There's growing dissent within the ranks, and stereotyping them doesn't help anything.

georgiaboy

08-14-2008, 07:57 AM

Not entirely true. Like I said, there's debate within the conservative Christian world. And part of the reason why the Religious Right rose was because of a perception that the government was trampling the Constitution by prohibiting any public expressions of faith was well as shoving abortion and gay marriage down the people's throats.

I know this because I was from this world.

Yes, yes, and yes.

I am a practicing conservative Christian who voted Republican for years for reasons you state above, combined with my zeal for limited government. Now that I've seen that Reps can't be trusted to limit/decrease size of gov't, I've been awakened to the libertarian message within classic liberalism and true Republicanism, and I've come to realize that the social and religious freedoms issues can be adequately dealt with under a libertarian/constitutional/states rights banner quite nicely. I'll be looking for these principles in candidates I vote for, regardless of party (hoping Republicans will do the same), for the rest of my life.

And, I also think there are many, many Christians just like me who are awakening to the same message.

Kade

08-14-2008, 08:03 AM

Uh, the government helped how, exactly? Even if I were a Christian, I wouldn't presume to speak for God. I believe the thought process is that everything happens for a reason.

Perhaps the reason was to illustrate the folly of living below sea level. Perhaps one or some of the survivors needed the hurricane for the incentive to relocate as part of some grander scheme that might not play out in our lifetime.

That's what "faith" is. Progressives have "faith" in government. Christians have "faith" in God.

They both hurt...was my point

The_Orlonater

08-14-2008, 11:15 AM

Mean examples?

I suppose we must censor ourselves and history less we dare tempt Him to rain fire down upon us for exposing such violent bigotry.

Yes they were rather mean examples towards Christianity. Stop, the insults.

I sware sometimes this forum acts like a bunch of school children who fight each other over a carton of milk.

acptulsa

08-14-2008, 11:18 AM

Yes they were rather mean examples towards Christianity. Stop, the insults.

I sware sometimes this forum acts like a bunch of school children who fight each other of a carton of milk.

Ah, but virtual food fights are so much easier to clean up!

Kludge

08-14-2008, 11:18 AM

100th post here!

Weeeeee!

The_Orlonater

08-14-2008, 11:21 AM

Ah, but virtual food fights are so much easier to clean up!

Maybe. The insult usually stays with you for a while. Like a stain on your shirt, you have to wait until it's washed. :p

rightwinghour

08-15-2008, 06:41 AM

That isn't entirely true. Some conservative Christians do have a genuine appreciation for the Constitution. Look at Chuck Baldwin. There's growing dissent within the ranks, and stereotyping them doesn't help anything.

I think you're missing the reality of what a stereotype is. Stereotypes exist because for the majority of a group, x is true. Yes, Chuck Baldwin understands the Constitution, but he is the exception to the rule, and this does not invalidate the stereotype. The definition of a stereotype allows for exceptions, since because it refers to a majority of a group, a minority must exist that go against the rule.

Agent Chameleon

08-15-2008, 10:49 AM

I think you're missing the reality of what a stereotype is. Stereotypes exist because for the majority of a group, x is true. Yes, Chuck Baldwin understands the Constitution, but he is the exception to the rule, and this does not invalidate the stereotype. The definition of a stereotype allows for exceptions, since because it refers to a majority of a group, a minority must exist that go against the rule.

And I'm disputing your claim that it's a reality. There's more Christians besides myself and Chuck Baldwin.

Hell, even Pat Robertson's CBN was covering Ron Paul in a very positive manner. And a while back Ron Paul spoke at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, at the invitation of Falwell's son, and a lot of people there were interested in what Ron Paul had to say. More and more Christians are waking up. I think the failure of the Huckabee campaign is proof of that.

rightwinghour

08-18-2008, 04:45 PM

And I'm disputing your claim that it's a reality. There's more Christians besides myself and Chuck Baldwin.

Hell, even Pat Robertson's CBN was covering Ron Paul in a very positive manner. And a while back Ron Paul spoke at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, at the invitation of Falwell's son, and a lot of people there were interested in what Ron Paul had to say. More and more Christians are waking up. I think the failure of the Huckabee campaign is proof of that.

I was at a small group Bible study last Tuesday night and we talked a little about politics and one woman said she wished Huckabee was the nominee because she'd feel better voting for a Christian pastor. Everybody else was cool with McCain, but I piped up and said I was glad Huckabee was out of it because in my experience when a pastor gets full of himself and gets his hands on some power, it corrupts him and the church splits. I asked her if she was comfortable with that possibility and her eyes got big and she said "No, you're absolutely right, I wasn't thinking". I am the only person in our small group of fourteen people who isn't voting for McCain. I am the only person in my Sunday school class of ten people who isn't voting for McCain. My car is the only one in the parking lot on Sunday mornings that has a Ron Paul bumper sticker on it. I'm not doubting that there are Christians who are waking up, I'm just saying that on the whole, the vast majority are uninformed, don't understand the Constitution or are totally ignorant of it, and they will be voting for McCain. Pat Robertson only gives Paul good coverage up to the point when you talk about foreign policy. Pat is a big warmonger, and would argue with Paul all day long about it. Maybe you have alot of Christian Ron Paul supporters in your area, I don't know. I live in the Bible Belt and he didn't get alot of support from evangelicals here. Anyway, the stereotype is a reality, and until we see something substantial happen at the polls, it will stay a reality.