Evangelical right admits it does not want compromise

Err, should say evangelical right

In short these Evangelicals will not be satisfied until they have imposed their will on every American.

That's because their book of faith tells them to. 

Err, should say evangelical right

You can edit, you know. 

what is interesting....the left isn't really jumping up and down asking to be called on to compromise.....

This time, it is just the Christians that have the ball....and they are running with it.

That's because their book of faith tells them to.

I have the same book they do. It mentions compromise quite a bit, doesn't say anything about forcing people to believe something they don't.

You can edit, you know.

For some reason I don't have the edit button anymore

I have the same book they do. It mentions compromise quite a bit, doesn't say anything about forcing people to believe something they don't.

I have the exact same book.  I didn't see it in their either, but apparently evangelicals have a different version than we do, because they swear theirs tells them to convert as many as they can.

For some reason I don't have the edit button anymore

I can help with that.  log out, then log back in.  The edit button should re-appear.  You might have to do it a couple of times, but it will come back.

 

So? the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, NoW, or any other organization that opposes these folks won't compromise a bit on their vision of the nation, and we have had to live with their imposed moral values. Poor lefties, shocked that their values aren't universal...

I think the evangelicals feel they have already compromised as far as they can go.  Now they can't even turn network TV at 8pm without seeing gay-oriented sit-coms, adultry, and casual sex.  From their vantage point, the minority left has already imposed their will on the culture and they are now trying to get it back.

Draginol....that is exactly how i feel.....to a perfect "T"

now, the two (or three) that said that the Bible says that Christians are supposed to be lapdogs to society, and take the scraps from tyrants....show me.....1 verse from the OT, and 2 from the NT.....

I can show you where the Bible says to be strong in your faith, to walk worthy of the Lord, to not live in sin, to be strong in the power of His might....The Bible also says that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church....

Just what are Christians "called" to compromise????? Sin???? Are we supposed to compromise our beliefs (just because the liberal anti-God group wants and demands we do?) Are Christians supposed to just stand by and let the Christian-haters of the world devour them?

Perhaps you need to read your "Book" again....God says to be faithful....strong....how can a Christian be faithful to what they believe in if they just sit idly by and let their values be trampled on like pearls before swine? After all, the Bible DOES say to go into ALL the world, and teach the everlasting Gospel to every creature, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost....TEACHING them to observe ALL THINGS whatsoever I have commanded you.....

now, in case you cant find where in the Bible it says that.....let me give you a hint...it is in the back of Matthew.....but, you have to believe the Bible before you can really accept that.

I think the evangelicals feel they have already compromised as far as they can go. Now they can't even turn network TV at 8pm without seeing gay-oriented sit-coms, adultry, and casual sex. From their vantage point, the minority left has already imposed their will on the culture and they are now trying to get it back.

That isn't a political compromise, that's the market place deciding. In those instances the right has staged boycotts. They are not saying I don't like this show so I will not watch. They state I don't like this show so I will not allow anyone to watch it. That's called imposing your will. The evangelicals are actually in the minority in this country.

I can show you where the Bible says to be strong in your faith, to walk worthy of the Lord, to not live in sin, to be strong in the power of His might....The Bible also says that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church.... Just what are Christians "called" to compromise????? Sin???? Are we supposed to compromise our beliefs (just because the liberal anti-God group wants and demands we do?) Are Christians supposed to just stand by and let the Christian-haters of the world devour them?

That's where the evangelicals go to propaganda. If you don't like what they have to say you are a "Christian-hater". They come up with propoganda that Democrats will ban the bible. I know that lying is not a Christian virtue. You can go out into the world and preach the gospel. That is entirely different than trying to legislate belief. This country was founded upon religious freedom. When you try to make the Bible the law of the land you are ignoring that freedom. When you impose prayer in the schoolroom you set up those who do not follow Christian beliefs to become ridiculed. Schools should be secular, for teaching students what they need to know about the secular world. Parents and the church are for teaching about religion.

That isn't a political compromise, that's the market place deciding. In those instances the right has staged boycotts. They are not saying I don't like this show so I will not watch. They state I don't like this show so I will not allow anyone to watch it. That's called imposing your will. The evangelicals are actually in the minority in this country.

Their boycots would accomplish without the support of many. As you said, that is the market place deciding. Evangelicals may be in the minority, but Christians are not.

Evil prevails when good men do nothing.

I have the exact same book. I didn't see it in their either, but apparently evangelicals have a different version than we do, because they swear theirs tells them to convert as many as they can.

I think the break down comes in the interpretation, not the contents of the book.

now, the two (or three) that said that the Bible says that Christians are supposed to be lapdogs to society,

Where did I say that christians are supposed to be lapdogs to society?

After all, the Bible DOES say to go into ALL the world, and teach the everlasting Gospel to every creature, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Even those who don't want to be baptized?  Even those who don't want to be a part of your faith?

now, in case you cant find where in the Bible it says that.....let me give you a hint...it is in the back of Matthew.....but, you have to believe the Bible before you can really accept that.

And I don't. accept that, that is.  I used to be christian.  I used to teach sunday school, i used to be very active in my church.  'used to' being the operative phrase.  not everyone who isn't christian is ignorant.  there are some of us who have made what we consider to be informed decisions.

I can understand the evangelical right's point of view.  I can understand why they would feel that the left's policies and points of view are tearing apart what the right feels to be the moral fabric of society.  i can also understand the frustration that the left feels.  but, there has to be some tolerance and compromise.  on both sides.

 

You can twist this around and talk about it for ages, but what whoman or anyone else CAN'T validate, is the idea that Planned Parenthood, the ACLU or any other organization can refuse to concede any points at all, and yet Christians who are politically active are expected to.

The time to whine and point fingers is when people do something illegal. Right now, all I see is activism, political participation, and VOTING. Apparently it is just too dangerous for Christians to take part in these things. When Social Liberals dictate the national agenda for 30 years it is business as usual. When they lose one election, it is armageddon, it seems...

Talk about being unable to compromise...

now, the two (or three) that said that the Bible says that Christians are supposed to be lapdogs to society, Where did I say that christians are supposed to be lapdogs to society?

Compromise, Compromise, COMPROMISE.....As a Christian, I must compromise my beliefs, compromise my political standing which is based in what I belief, compromise what makes me....well, me.

I have NEVER forced anyone to believe the same way I do.....and all the Christians I personally know, don't try to force ppl to believe the same way.....but, as a Christian, I am going to fight for the morals that I believe in, just as you will stand and fight for the morals you believe in. Why are you different than me? Why should I have to be the one to compromise my standing? Why can't you for once?

Why should my morals that say homosexuality is wrong, be cast aside, while yours that says homosexuality is right be pushed to the moon? Why SHOULD i just sit by and let more of my rights be stripped away just because I am white and Christian? I know another guy, he is Indian and Christian....does that make him partially right? Oh yeah, he doesn't practice his beliefs with the fervor as many, he is a minority as far as race.....he works at the same walmart as I do, and makes less than I do (i have been there about 2 years longer).....and, he voted for Bush.....

Again, you say that the Bible doesn't say what I am showing you....that is fine....believe what you want.....but let me believe what I want....you throw around freedom of religion, and the separation of church and state.....Show me in the Constitution that it says "Separation of Church and State"....interesting that ppl will use that to try to hold Christian beliefs down (or things that tend to be believed by mainstream Christians), will spout out "Separation of Church and State!!!!" like the exact phrase is in the constitution.....

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. "

There is the exact wording....now....if there are athiests who think that homosexuality is wrong....or abortion is wrong.....and they don't even believe in a God.....how is a law banning that stuff considered respecting a religion?

I think the evangelicals feel they have already compromised as far as they can go. Now they can't even turn network TV at 8pm without seeing gay-oriented sit-coms, adultry, and casual sex. From their vantage point, the minority left has already imposed their will on the culture and they are now trying to get it back

..yeah, this is a problem. But re-electing Bush and an army of republicans for the senate and house still won't deter our out-of-control media and culture. Either people are stupid or they are simply paying lip service to voting for "morals" if those morals do not include only the topics of abortion and gay marriage. Nobody's going to pull back the loose media because the public, despite their complaints, are still tuning in. Electing a politician, even a conservative one, does NOTHING. So don't blame the political left, keep the blame where it belongs - on the American people who continually tune in and encourage the programming.

Why are you different than me? Why should I have to be the one to compromise my standing? Why can't you for once?

I do.  Everyday.

You still didn't show me where I said that christians have to be lapdogs to society.  I said that both sides have to compromise, not just one.

Again, you say that the Bible doesn't say what I am showing you....that is fine....believe what you want.....but let me believe what I want

How am I not letting you believe what you want?  What have I done to you?  Nothing. I simply stated that I do not believe what you believe.  That's all.

Take a chill pill, dude.

 

Reply #15 By: Deference - 11/21/2004 8:37:21 PM I think the evangelicals feel they have already compromised as far as they can go. Now they can't even turn network TV at 8pm without seeing gay-oriented sit-coms, adultry, and casual sex. From their vantage point, the minority left has already imposed their will on the culture and they are now trying to get it back ..yeah, this is a problem. But re-electing Bush and an army of republicans for the senate and house still won't deter our out-of-control media and culture. Either people are stupid or they are simply paying lip service to voting for "morals" if those morals do not include only the topics of abortion and gay marriage. Nobody's going to pull back the loose media because the public, despite their complaints, are still tuning in. Electing a politician, even a conservative one, does NOTHING. So don't blame the political left, keep the blame where it belongs - on the American people who continually tune in and encourage the programming

Please don't tell me that you think John Kerry is more moral than Bush.

"Please don't tell me that you think John Kerry is more moral than Bush."

That's the crux of the situation. He isn't more moral, but he is just as moral. People who oppose religious values refuse to accept that what they have are also "values". They see them as "truths" I guess. Then some uppity Christians come along and try to insert their values into society and it is so unfair to them, since they see THEIR society as value-less and totally unbiased.

It's a load of crap. Any secularist is as steeped in biased, personal values as the next person. Sure, they didn't get them from religion, but they are just as subjective, and just as imposed when they force others to live by them.

Now, after 30 years of these secularist, liberal values being used as a slide rule for government, people are seeing that it might be possible to alter the moral makeup. They've enjoyed 30 years of laughing at those who disagree with them having to deal with their political superiority. Now, maybe, they may have to start dealing with a few things themselves.

Please don't tell me that you think John Kerry is more moral than Bush

I didn't think that had anything to do with it. The vote for John K. was about a change in policy regarding Iraq, home security, fiscal direction, healthcare, and alternative energy. Let's also not forget about Ashcroft pitching the Patriot Act (and yes, I know everybody signed off on it, but who introduced it?). These issues are my main concerns, but really, it was just about changing leadership - if another Republican had been running against Bush, I'd probably voted for him.

The point I was making above is that if people were concerned about "morals" and if that wasn't defined strictly as being Bush's posit on abortion and gay marriage (both of which I agree with) they shouldn't be looking to the government to do something about it. Many con-christies, however, wanted this country to walk back to more traditional values, and acted in the only way they felt would garner them some representation against a morally vacant culture - voting for the guy pandering to the Christian base.

Let's face it folks, the christian right is all about control. They feel as if they have been ignored the past few years and have had others morality rammed down their throats, Now turnabout is fair play i guess.

Reply #19 By: Deference - 11/22/2004 1:33:31 PM Many con-christies, however, wanted this country to walk back to more traditional values, and acted in the only way they felt would garner them some representation against a morally vacant culture - voting for the guy pandering to the Christian base.

You say he was pandering. How do you know for a fact he was not following his heart? I don't honestly think ANYONE can know that for sure. Not the left, nor the right, or the liberals. So unless you've talked to him personally, to say which way he thinks is just plain arrogant! The proof is in what he *does*, not what he says.

Just because exit polls showed that people who thought moral values were important were more likely to vote for Bush, does not prove that Bush is more moral.

After all, those who said Intelligence was the most important voted overwhelmingly for Kerry, so under that logic it would be proof that Bush is stupid.

Reply #22 By: nyvelion - 11/22/2004 2:53:49 PM Just because exit polls showed that people who thought moral values were important were more likely to vote for Bush, does not prove that Bush is more moral.

I never said I thought Bush was more moral than Kerry. That said at least GW has never been accused of treason.

You say he was pandering. How do you know for a fact he was not following his heart?

"Pandering", in that he has been appealing to the conservative christian right throughout his two campaigns and presidency. I'm not saying this is a terrible thing, just that he has cultivated a bumper crop of people voting for him by positioning himself as someone who has a firm christian belief and has made abundently clear his postitions on abortion and gay marriage in a way that is very favorable to con-christies.

I don't know if he really is following his heart. If you ever read Fyodor Dostoyevsky's book "The Fool", the main character (Aysha, I believe - man it's been a while) is referred to as such because he only follows his heart, as opposed to following his mind, where most people feel is the armory of intellect. I don't know if Bush fits this, as his campaigns have followed the designs of the "architect" Karl Rove. I'm a bit cynical and fail to believe that there is no calculated political planning by Rove to bring out the Christian vote in their favor, and critical of Bush because I don't believe that this term will realize any of the hopes of the con-christies. The only whisper I've heard is that there may be a second attempt at some sort of amendment defining marriage as a man and woman only venture. I've heard of privatization of S.S., a restructuring of the tax code, and ....well, little else.

The most important thing to remember, with respect to this post is:

The evangelicals are actually in the minority in this country.

It's important to make the distinction between Christians and evangelicals. I'm not exactly Christian, but I'm not afraid of the Christian belief system influencing our society or politics; it always has. That is to say that the most basic Christian beliefs are generally in alignment with the beliefs of many other religions as well: don't murder, love your brother, honor your parents, etc. These are good rules to live by.

I wish Christians would understand that non-Christians are not without moral values, and I wish people would stop feeling like they have the need to legislate morality. I mean, if you don't like what's on prime-time TV, what's that got to do with the President? Turn it off. Call the TV station, boycott the network, write a letter...

So I agree that:

You can go out into the world and preach the gospel. That is entirely different than trying to legislate belief. This country was founded upon religious freedom. When you try to make the Bible the law of the land you are ignoring that freedom.

Even our founding fathers had to contend with evangelicals. They were called Puritans.