Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

William Barr: Religion is Under Attack

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • jgarden
    replied
    The fact remains that no matter how many Supreme Court Justices are appointed by Republicans, young women in America will never leave their decision to proceed with a full term pregnancy to a bunch of white, conservative, elderly males wearing expensive suits in Washington!

    The nation already favors the "prochoice" option, and would be unwilling to stand by if millions of young women were to defy the repeal of Roe v Wade and be incarcerated!

    Leave a comment:


  • JudgeRightly
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Truth doesn't wear out from use.



    So it comes down to a question: "Did Jesus advocate His followers take charge of the government and make favor themselves?"



    As St. Francis of Assisi noted, one does most of one's preaching without words. Well done.



    Yep.



    I'm deeply unhappy that so many people assume that the worst of us, represent our faith. But if we enable them, that is what happens.



    I know how sampling differences skew results. I know who calls back if no one picks up the phone the first time. I know who will ask for a specific person, not just whoever picks up the phone. I know all of that matters. When possible, I use RCP averages of polls to smooth out sampling error. The reason Rasmussen got gobsmacked in the last few elections is that they depend on land lines to call people. Guess how that skews.



    Pew is better for public as a whole. Barna is a lot more sophisticated in sussing out evangelical attitudes.



    That's what it does. You may have noticed that minorities often use it to thwart those who would abuse them. Majorities tend to see the Constitution as a nuisance or an impediment.



    Sort of like right now?



    In a world where even communists aren't communists, I kinda doubt it.



    Most of the founders thought so, even those who wanted a wall of separation between church and state. They thought church and state did much better when neither was involved with the other, and they made sure that was the case to protect both the church and the state.






    , thus "In God We Trust."[ /QUOTE ]
    Fix your formatting

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by Lon View Post
    Not when it actually 'represents.' Haven't you argued this one enough that it is just opinionating any more without resolve or gained ground?
    Truth doesn't wear out from use.

    I don't do politics often because of this. Voting and initiatives work or not and then I try not to get too hung up, but briefly: Nobody can eliminate who they are and they bring their values to whatever job they do else we'd not have the command to 'work as to the Lord.'
    So it comes down to a question: "Did Jesus advocate His followers take charge of the government and favor themselves?"

    Most children knew I was a Christian teacher.
    As St. Francis of Assisi noted, one does most of one's preaching without words. Well done.

    Likewise, any politician that loves God will be known for his/her works.
    Yep.

    Are you happy about it?
    I'm deeply unhappy that so many people assume that the worst of us, represent our faith. But if we enable them, that is what happens.

    More: do you take all stats sight-unseen or do you do research.
    I know how sampling differences skew results. I know who calls back if no one picks up the phone the first time. I know who will ask for a specific person, not just whoever picks up the phone. I know all of that matters. When possible, I use RCP averages of polls to smooth out sampling error. The reason Rasmussen got gobsmacked in the last few elections is that they depend on land lines to call people. Guess how that skews.

    I have problems with Pew and Barna.
    Pew is better for public as a whole. Barna is a lot more sophisticated in sussing out evangelical attitudes.

    You are under the false impression that "the Constitution" will save me, at that point.
    That's what it does. You may have noticed that minorities often use it to thwart those who would abuse them. Majorities tend to see the Constitution as a nuisance or an impediment.

    Don't make that mistake, if atheists ever run these United States, the United States 1) will not be united and 2) will no longer be these United States but something quite different.
    Sort of like right now?

    I doubt the Constitution will even stand for what it used to stand for at that time either (likely oligarchy communist at that point).
    In a world where even communists aren't communists, I kinda doubt it.

    It just isn't possible to remove God without removing values in America
    Most of the founders agreed with you, even those who wanted a wall of separation between church and state. They thought church and state did much better when neither was involved with the other, and they made sure that was the case to protect both the church and the state.
    Last edited by The Barbarian; October 27th, 2019, 06:32 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ok doser
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post

    By definition, established religion is tyranny.
    barbie's retarded idea of "tyranny":

    Leave a comment:


  • Lon
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    So it must be frustrating living in a Constitutional representative democracy.
    Not when it actually 'represents.' Haven't you argued this one enough that it is just opinionating any more without resolve or gained ground? I don't do politics often because of this. Voting and initiatives work or not and then I try not to get too hung up, but briefly: Nobody can eliminate who they are and they bring their values to whatever job they do else we'd not have the command to 'work as to the Lord.' Most children knew I was a Christian teacher. I didn't have to vocalize for them to grasp that. They just knew. Likewise, any politician that loves God will be known for his/her works.


    The founders pointed out that in a free nation, one's rights are not subject to the approval of the majority. But there's an issue with your number...

    America is still a "Christian nation," if the term simply means a majority of the population will claim the label when a pollster calls. But, as a new Pew Research report unsparingly explains, the decline of Christianity in the United States "continues at a rapid pace." A bare 65 percent of Americans now say they're Christians, down from 78 percent as recently as 2007. The deconverted are mostly moving away from religion altogether, and the ranks of the religiously unaffiliated — the "nones" — have swelled from 16 to 26 percent over the same period. If this rate of change continues, the U.S. will be majority non-Christian by about 2035, with the nones representing well over one third of the population.
    https://theweek.com/articles-amp/872...istian-america
    Are you happy about it? More: do you take all stats sight-unseen or do you do research. I have problems with Pew and Barna. Not that they don't try nor that some give them good rating for stats.

    Should this trend continue, would you be O.K. with "There is no God", if atheists became the majority?

    (Jesus says to render to Caesar what is Caesar's)
    You are under the false impression that "the Constitution" will save me, at that point. Don't make that mistake, if atheists ever run these United States, the United States 1) will not be united and 2) will no longer be these United States but something quite different. I doubt the Constitution will even stand for what it used to stand for at that time either (likely oligarchy communist at that point).






    By definition, established religion is tyranny. No government has the right to declare what religion is right, or how people should worship. Our earliest Christian brothers and sisters died by the thousands, denying such an evil idea.
    God's government will declare that one day. Not only that, if any of us champion what is right, then we'll be dealing with truth instead of platitudes. People who believe this are dealing with a false premise (as are most government officials). It just isn't possible to remove God without removing values in America, thus "In God We Trust."

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by Lon View Post
    We disagree. Surprise? I don't believe in a secular society or government.
    So it must be frustrating living in a Constitutional representative democracy.

    There is no representation without representing those who belong to a society. Christians are still about 70% of the population.
    The founders pointed out that in a free nation, one's rights are not subject to the approval of the majority. But there's an issue with your number...

    America is still a "Christian nation," if the term simply means a majority of the population will claim the label when a pollster calls. But, as a new Pew Research report unsparingly explains, the decline of Christianity in the United States "continues at a rapid pace." A bare 65 percent of Americans now say they're Christians, down from 78 percent as recently as 2007. The deconverted are mostly moving away from religion altogether, and the ranks of the religiously unaffiliated — the "nones" — have swelled from 16 to 26 percent over the same period. If this rate of change continues, the U.S. will be majority non-Christian by about 2035, with the nones representing well over one third of the population.
    https://theweek.com/articles-amp/872...istian-america

    "In God We Trust" belongs.
    Should this trend continue, would you be O.K. with "There is no God", if atheists became the majority?

    (Jesus says to render to Caesar what is Caesar's)

    Apples/Oranges. Caesar was a conqueror.
    Whereas, we gained all of our territory by donations?

    We have to be careful in applying political/historic commentary without filter.

    "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
    James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments

    Apples/Oranges: It doesn't mean a rejection of Christianity.
    Right. It's a rejection of "legally established religion."

    It means a rejection of tyrannical government,
    By definition, established religion is tyranny. No government has the right to declare what religion is right, or how people should worship. Our earliest Christian brothers and sisters died by the thousands, denying such an evil idea.

    which the U.S. is not.
    Not since the Bill of Rights.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lon
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    State-sponsored religion was removed in some places, and rightfully so. God neither needs nor wants a government handout. I'm always astonished that people who will tell you that government messes up whatever it touches, who want the state involved in religion.
    We disagree. Surprise? I don't believe in a secular society or government. There is no representation without representing those who belong to a society. Christians are still about 70% of the population. "In God We Trust" belongs.
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    On the other hand, students carry Bibles and read from them, meet and pray with their fellow Christians, and continue to keep God in the public schools, without government control. I think He approves:

    Mark 12:17 And Jesus answering, said to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.
    Apples/Oranges. Caesar was a conqueror. We have to be careful in applying biblical commentary without filter.


    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Good point. They are most certainly not...



    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
    James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments
    Apples/Oranges: It doesn't mean a rejection of Christianity. It means a rejection of tyrannical government, which the U.S. is not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lon
    replied
    Originally posted by quip View Post
    Just to even things out concerning me with abortion, I'm all for the latter...and its good to see rationality regarding it
    A bit optimistic, I believe. No Christian will ever change on this matter. James 1:27

    Leave a comment:


  • Lon
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Other than who has been doing it, where it's going on, reasons for it, economic issues in it, religious and ethical beliefs for and against it, statistical and demographic data changes over time, and so on. What history normally does.
    Are we facing it head on, or spin-doctoring? Because there is no winners at this time, the history is obscured. We can beat this dead horse as long as you like, but I'm about done and said my piece/peace.



    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    No. When there are periods of little change, that is of considerable interest to historians, who examine such cases to find out why things remained constant for so long. There are entire books written on that.

    "Stasis" has another technical meaning in history, but there's always been interest in stable periods for all sorts of reasons.

    And when it decreases markedly, as it has. The interesting fact that non-governmental action has been far more effective than the law in reducing abortion has a number of lessons for us in history.
    Doser addressed some of the influences. Statistical interpretation is always the difficult part but again, this gets back to commentary and 'history.' I'm still of the opinion that in the middle of the storm, it is hard to write a summary paragraph, just ' as it is so far.'

    Again, I find less meaning in such. It is merely an 'end of chapter' summary in my estimation. At this point, kicking horse entrails imho.



    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    My wife just had to arrange for her father, who served in the Coast Guard in WWII. The plot, the burial, and the tombstone are all provided for veterans free of charge. One may submit a short epitaph; the family gets to choose, but at least some of them respect wishes of the veteran.


    We all do that:
    Thanks, thanks to thee, my worthy friend,
    For the lesson thou hast taught!
    Thus at the flaming forge of life
    Our fortunes must be wrought;
    Thus on its sounding anvil shaped
    Each burning deed and thought.

    Longfellow
    Yet odd for me but its just a comparison to something else in thread so we are a bit lost in details...

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by Lon View Post
    Not sure how you can say this with a straight face. We have definitely lost ground. You are probably way too young to realize what was in our public schools and what was removed
    State-sponsored religion was removed in some places, and rightfully so. God neither needs nor wants a government handout. I'm always astonished that people who will tell you that government messes up whatever it touches, who want the state involved in religion.

    On the other hand, students carry Bibles and read from them, meet and pray with their fellow Christians, and continue to keep God in the public schools, without government control. I think He approves:

    Mark 12:17 And Jesus answering, said to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.

    but ignorance and naivety are not virtues.
    Good point. They are most certainly not...


    "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

    James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments

    Leave a comment:


  • quip
    replied
    Originally posted by Lon View Post
    We still don't learn a great deal concerning abortion. For 'history' to be made, something meaningful has to happen, either its end, or the absolute change in values of those against it. History will be when the Lord removes it forever.
    Just to even things out concerning me with abortion, I'm all for the latter...and its good to see rationality regarding it

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by Lon View Post
    We still don't learn a great deal concerning abortion.
    Other than who has been doing it, where it's going on, reasons for it, economic issues in it, religious and ethical beliefs for and against it, statistical and demographic data changes over time, and so on. What history normally does.

    For 'history' to be made, something meaningful has to happen, either its end, or the absolute change in values of those against it.
    No. When there are periods of little change, that is of considerable interest to historians, who examine such cases to find out why things remained constant for so long. There are entire books written on that.

    "Stasis" has another technical meaning in history, but there's always been interest in stable periods for all sorts of reasons.

    History will be when the Lord removes it forever.
    And when it decreases markedly, as it has. The interesting fact that non-governmental action has been far more effective than the law in reducing abortion has a number of lessons for us in history.

    As far as epithet, it seems the military contacts you for arrangements. It'd also make sense that one who sets about their own affairs before death may also purchase their own tombstones.
    My wife just had to arrange for her father, who served in the Coast Guard in WWII. The plot, the burial, and the tombstone are all provided for veterans free of charge. One may submit a short epitaph; the family gets to choose, but at least some of them respect wishes of the veteran.

    An important point for me, is they still don't get to write the sum of their lives.
    We all do that:
    Thanks, thanks to thee, my worthy friend,
    For the lesson thou hast taught!
    Thus at the flaming forge of life
    Our fortunes must be wrought;
    Thus on its sounding anvil shaped
    Each burning deed and thought.

    Longfellow

    Leave a comment:


  • Lon
    replied
    Originally posted by The Horn View Post
    Religion is not "under attack" in America and never has been .
    Not sure how you can say this with a straight face. We have definitely lost ground. You are probably way too young to realize what was in our public schools and what was removed, but ignorance and naivety are not virtues. Do so research before you spout this again?
    Originally posted by The Horn View Post
    ... president who is a phony Christian if there ever was one and who lives a life which makes a mockery of morality, virtue self, control, decency , compassion , etc - everything Christians claim to stand for .
    He generally refers to us as 'them.' I'm not sure he's ever tried to be cast as a Christian, just a friend to them.

    Originally posted by The Horn View Post
    Criticizing these extremist christians harshly and condemning them for their narrow-mindedness, intolerance , self-righteousness and hypocrisy is not an "attack on Christianity ". It is the right thing to do .
    No, it's just entering into a banter contest. Rising above it would be 'the right thing to do." If you are not a part of a solution, you are the problem. How 'we' respond to wrong things is ever as important. If you respond 'wrongly' then you are still wrong, not better, and maybe worse. Introspection and a higher aim is never a bad use of time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lon
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    So there's no such thing as American history?
    Spoiler
    America's still here, after all. No, that doesn't make any sense to me. Abortion has a long history...

    Book II Elegy XIV: Against Abortion; by Publius Ovidius Naso

    Where’s the joy in a girl being free from fighting wars,
    unwilling to follow the army and their shields,
    if without battle she suffers wounds from her own weapons,
    and arms unsure hands to her own doom?

    Whoever first taught the destruction of a tender foetus,
    deserved to die by her own warlike methods.
    No doubt you’d chance your arm in that dismal arena
    just to keep your belly free of wrinkles with your crime?

    If the same practice had pleased mothers of old,
    Humanity would have been destroyed by that violation.
    and we’d need a creator again for each of our peoples
    to throw the stones that made us onto the empty earth.

    Who would have shattered the wealth of Priam, if Thetis,
    the sea goddess, had refused to carry her rightful burden?
    If Ilia had murdered the twins in her swollen womb,
    the founder of my mistress’s City would have been lost.

    If Venus had desecrated her belly, pregnant with Aeneas,
    Earth would have been bereft of future Caesars.
    You too, with your beauty still to be born, would have died,
    if your mother had tried what you have done.

    I myself would be better to die making love
    than have been denied the light of day by my mother.
    Why rob the loaded vine of burgeoning grapes,
    or pluck the unripe apple with cruel hand?

    Let things mature themselves – grow without being forced:
    life is a prize that’s worth a little waiting.
    Why submit your womb to probing instruments,
    or give lethal poison to what is not yet born?

    Medea is blamed for sprinkling the blood of her children,
    and Itys, slain by his mother, is lamented with tears:
    both cruel parents, yet both had bitter reason
    to shed blood, revenge on a husband.

    Say, what Tereus, what Jason incites you
    to pierce your troubled body with your hand?
    No tiger in its Armenian lair would do it,
    no lioness would dare destroy her foetus.

    But tender girls do it, though not un-punished:
    often she who kills her child, dies herself.
    She dies, and is carried to the pyre with loosened hair,
    and whoever looks on cries out: ‘She deserved it!’

    But let these words vanish on the ethereal breeze,
    and let my imprecations have no weight!
    You gods, prosper her: let her first sin go, in safety,
    and be satisfied: you can punish her second crime!


    Ovid ca. 10 BC




    Go to a national cemetery and walk among graves of Vietnam veterans. There's a lot of it. Lots of conventional epitaphs too, but still a lot of humor.



    Supposedly W.C. Field's says "All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
    We still don't learn a great deal concerning abortion. For 'history' to be made, something meaningful has to happen, either its end, or the absolute change in values of those against it. History will be when the Lord removes it forever.

    As far as epithet, it seems the military contacts you for arrangements. It'd also make sense that one who sets about their own affairs before death may also purchase their own tombstones. An important point for me, is they still don't get to write the sum of their lives. The memory is what they did, more than anything said. I pray my life-writing is evident to those who will indeed write my tombstone. The one writing their own robs their child and extended family imho. They are the ones living and remembering.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arthur Brain
    replied
    Originally posted by The Horn View Post
    Religion is not "under attack" in America and never has been . But unfortunately, certain extremist Christians are out to bring America, the most religiously divers nation which has ever existed, closer and closer to becoming what the very thing founders were utterly opposed to -a Christian theocracy .
    Barr is one of these unfortunately . The Trump administration is positively infested with these extremist Christians who have no tolerance for anyone who is not heterosexual evangelical Christian and delude themselves into believing the founders shared their rigid evangelical Christian beliefs and wanted to impose a Christian theocracy on this country .
    And Barr's self-righteous blather is utterly hypocritical , because he is a toady of a president who is a phony Christian if there ever was one and who lives a life which makes a mockery of morality, virtue self, control, decency , compassion , etc - everything Christians claim to stand for .
    Criticizing these extremist christians harshly and condemning them for their narrow-mindedness, intolerance , self-righteousness and hypocrisy is not an "attack on Christianity ". It is the right thing to do .
    Well, at least there's no chance of a zealous, religious state coming about - in the West at least.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X