Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Religion & Politics

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-05-2011, 11:13 AM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
Sites pertaining to American Theocracy.

Here are a couple of my favorite sites pertaining to an aspect of the topic of this forum.

Just in case anyone is interested.

http://theocracywatch.org/

http://www.au.org/

Yes, that's right. I believe the "wall of separation" was meant just as it implies, "high and impenetrable". And I believe there are people rising up in the ranks of the GOP who are deluded and potentially dangerous lunatics who must be brought to heel. (Through non-violent measures, of course.)

This is just my personal opinion.

Enjoy,
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-05-2011, 12:09 PM
flacaltenn's Avatar
flacaltenn flacaltenn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,145
Only neurotic paranoid partisians could take a beautiful Bible verse and turn it into something this sinister...

Quote:
This highly politicized concept of dominionism is based on the Bible's text in Genesis 1:26:

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." (King James Version).

"Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'" (New International Version).


The vast majority of Christians read this text and conclude that God has appointed them stewards and caretakers of Earth. As Sara Diamond explains, however, some Christian read the text and believe, "that Christians alone are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns." That, in a nutshell, is the idea of "dominionism."
Seize the DMV -- dominant the National Parks.. GOD commanded it.. Besides Dave -- That Genesis Bible verse belongs to Christians, Jews and even Moslems. With Christians irrefutably being the Late-Comers!!! How can anyone academically credentialed interpret that as "that Christians alone are Biblically mandated"???

I don't get the threat Dave.. If the world is gonna end in an atomic cataclysmic event, I don't need the secularists or the radical Christians to tell me that it's gonna start in the Middle East..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-05-2011, 12:22 PM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by flacaltenn View Post
Only neurotic paranoid partisians could take a beautiful Bible verse and turn it into something this sinister...



Seize the DMV -- dominant the National Parks.. GOD commanded it.. Besides Dave -- That Genesis Bible verse belongs to Christians, Jews and even Moslems. With Christians irrefutably being the Late-Comers!!! How can anyone academically credentialed interpret that as "that Christians alone are Biblically mandated"???

I don't get the threat Dave.. If the world is gonna end in an atomic cataclysmic event, I don't need the secularists or the radical Christians to tell me that it's gonna start in the Middle East..
Being anti-Theocracy is not to be anti-Judeo-Christian, Muslim or even Atheist for that matter. It is to be opposed to allowing anyone, including Atheists to use political office to advance any spiritual or religious agenda.

If you had checked out the AU site, you would have discovered that that organization is run by Clergy who fear that mixing religion and politics corrupts the Church and Deifies politicians. It's membership runs the gamut of the religious spectrum.

They just simply don't want religious figures acquiring and using the muscle of government to "save" people and "help" individuals "choose" their personal spiritual path.

I would think the spirit of this would appeal to the Libertarian mind.

Does that explanation help?

Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa

Last edited by BlueStreak; 07-05-2011 at 12:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-05-2011, 03:10 PM
flacaltenn's Avatar
flacaltenn flacaltenn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,145
It helps a little. What matters is the STAND on issues. Not neccessarily how you arrive at that conviction.. Don't need to be far religious to be Pro-life or even against gays obsconding with the term marraige. Plenty of Dems in Congress have those views.

I have a belief that if an organization OF ANY TYPE can be abused or attacked by Govt, that they ought to be able to defend themselves and their views in the political realm.

That applies to unions, corporations, religious institutions, minorities of any type..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-06-2011, 12:11 AM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
I can see that. However, I would go on to say that none of those organizations should be permitted to force their views on anyone either. Kind of my Ying to your Yang. It completes the circle..........If you catch my drift.

Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-06-2011, 07:04 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
I am sitting here trying to recall an instance of the government attacking any religious organization.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-06-2011, 09:54 AM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
When a local city was redoing a park, they sold brick for donations, you could have them written on.

You could not mention God. Freedom of speech? Wait till the hate crime laws really kick in.

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-06-2011, 11:12 AM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
Yes, Pete, sometimes things do go a bit too far. A city ordering homeowners to remove a cross or a Nativity scene from their yard at Christmastime is bogus. I can see that too. Where is the harm?

But, when (ostensibly) non-profit religious institutions start making political donations, making political speech from the pulpit, endorsing candidates who wave around their religious credentials and refer to America as a "(Insert name of specific religion here) Nation",---------To my mind a line is being crossed. One that I believe the First Amendment was written for, (part of it anyhow). Especially considering these institutions operate tax free.

Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa

Last edited by BlueStreak; 07-06-2011 at 11:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-06-2011, 11:59 AM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
And how can one say they 'own' a piece of property if they have no control over it?

Your second part sounds a lot like the wall is being breached, by the state

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-06-2011, 12:10 PM
flacaltenn's Avatar
flacaltenn flacaltenn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by merrylander View Post
I am sitting here trying to recall an instance of the government attacking any religious organization.
Does Mount Carmel ring a bell? Does the attack on the Boy Scouts of America by cities (denying them access to public facilities because of faith-based elements of their program) ring a bell? C'mon man..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.