A post from "Jesusland"

[estranged4life]

Originally Posted by golddustwoman77

Gay marriage is an issue that the republican purposely brought up for election time, because they knew they could get many Christians up in arms about that. George W. Bush tried to bring up a consitutional amendment on this topic, and it didn't pass even with a Republican Congress and a Republican President supporting it.

"Hey...Let's toss the Gay Marriage issue into the upcoming election to toss people off the bad economy & the SNAFU known as Iraq...The "truly" religious will eat it up and we'll have a great shot at 4 more years"

"Sounds good to me..."

Democrats are supposed to be the anti-Christ, but most of them didn't support this war.

Why is everyone after my job? Man, I called dibs on the Anti-Christ a long time ago

In conclusion, the point is people shouldn't vote based on religion.

Amen, oops...Uh meant to say I agree

Brian j.

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by JamieSPC

Hey Blue Staters!

Here's a Fleetwood Mac fan, Alabamian, Christian, Republican and overall basic lover of humanity who dropped in on Chit Chat, knowing what he would find, but dismayed by it all the same.

Dismayed because:
--vitriol is vitriol no matter what side it comes from
--in the process of accusing others of intolerance, many resort to intolerance themselves
--the same outpouring of hatred many of you accuse "Red Staters" of seems to go unchecked and practically unnoticed in your own ranks
--the same type of lashing out against homosexuals, African-Americans or other minority group would likely result in the offending parties being banned from this board (i.e., some brash, misguided individual posting a map branding New York state "Gayville")

It hurts when someone disagrees with you, and it hurts to lose a tough fight. But it also hurts to be openly ridiculed and beat to the dust by people who have absolutely no respect or understanding for what you believe, yet hate you for it without even asking.

None of you here know me, and thereby have no business making assumptions about me personally. But rest easy in the knowledge that you have made me feel most unwelcome at The Ledge.

Thanks, and congratulations for your "tolerance" ... and feel free to flame me into oblivion.

So true, Jamie, especially the part about the "Gayville" map. But for some reason it is OK to do that to Christians.

[estranged4life]

Originally Posted by JamieSPC

Yikes...

Strike a match, Brian. Where would you like to start?

I think that does it for me here...

just these zealots/idiots "TV self-claimed messiahs" that have finally gotten under my skin since the elections ended...

When did Pat "Walkin' bobble head" Robert-SIN's opinion matter in the real world? He should go back to the CBN and stay put...An leave the world to the OPEN MINDED.

Brian j.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Sighes - once again, the First Amendment of the Const. says:

That wasn't my question. Go back and read it again.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

So true, Jamie, especially the part about the "Gayville" map. But for some reason it is OK to do that to Christians.

But that is not a fair assessment; you are lumping all Christians together, which I do not think anyone here is doing. I think few mind nice, live and let live Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc.

I think people, myself certainly included, object to the Christians or any other religion that want it their way or no way and anyone who opposes them is a goddless heathen who deserves to be a second class but full tax paying citizen. These people exist - just look at Falwell and Robertson and they minister to tens of millions. I do not think anyone is arguing ALL Christians feel this way I mean look at all of the posts where people have declared themselves to be Christians and then declare themselves opposed to the far religious right

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

That wasn't my question. Go back and read it again.

You mean the part where you said "object to our right of free speech"

There is no free speech on The Ledge, unless of couse Marty and Lis really are the Atty General as formerly alleged

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by amber

i don't like people to feel bad, but some like you DO argue with others on here. Which you're free to do.
And you notice how a lot of the liberal Dems post news articles supporting thier points? You could do that as well.

I don't know about you, but reading these threads, then finding a bunch of articles, would take me HOURS. Hours for what? To get a bunch of angry replies and repetitions of talking points? I'm not tough or patient enough for that. More power to those who are. But it's easy when you're a member of the "club," isn't it?

Briefly I did try to engage in political discourse here a while back. I actually did take the time to explain all my points. Did it convince anyone of anything? No. Did it get me a lot of negative, hostile, upsetting replies? Yes. Therefore, I quit, because I come to the Ledge to enjoy myself. I probably take things too personally, I admit. I let it get to me when people slap me with bigots and make fun of my religion. That's my own problem. But don't assume it's because we have no reason for our beliefs.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

You mean the part where you said "object to our right of free speech"

No the other part.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

I don't know about you, but reading these threads, then finding a bunch of articles, would take me HOURS. Hours for what? To get a bunch of angry replies and repetitions of talking points? I'm not tough or patient enough for that. More power to those who are. But it's easy when you're a member of the "club," isn't it?

Briefly I did try to engage in political discourse here a while back. I actually did take the time to explain all my points. Did it convince anyone of anything? No. Did it get me a lot of negative, hostile, upsetting replies? Yes. Therefore, I quit, because I come to the Ledge to enjoy myself. I probably take things too personally, I admit. I let it get to me when people slap me with bigots and make fun of my religion. That's my own problem. But don't assume it's because we have no reason for our beliefs.

But, Nancy, with all due respect, your points about Iraq and almost all of W's term have been proven to be factually incorrect in those articles from all sources. So, I am unsure people are attacking you for having for opinion as much as they are saying you are factually incorrect, which is different

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

No the other part.

I got that and agree!!!!!!!!!!!

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

So true, Jamie, especially the part about the "Gayville" map. But for some reason it is OK to do that to Christians.

Not Christians, Nancy... religious extremists.

[amber]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

I don't know about you, but reading these threads, then finding a bunch of articles, would take me HOURS. Hours for what? To get a bunch of angry replies and repetitions of talking points? I'm not tough or patient enough for that. More power to those who are. But it's easy when you're a member of the "club," isn't it?

Briefly I did try to engage in political discourse here a while back. I actually did take the time to explain all my points. Did it convince anyone of anything? No. Did it get me a lot of negative, hostile, upsetting replies? Yes. Therefore, I quit, because I come to the Ledge to enjoy myself. I probably take things too personally, I admit. I let it get to me when people slap me with bigots and make fun of my religion. That's my own problem. But don't assume it's because we have no reason for our beliefs.

I didn't assume that. yeah, i don't want to post a bunch of articles either. But i might want to if i disagreed with the people who post them. And who knows, maybe someone would back you up? And yes, it is easier when you're part of the "club", I suppose. But in this instance, you were not complaining about the political posts, and Jamie was, so I offered some suggestions of what she could do to give herself and her beliefs equal time, if she wanted. No biggie. It just struck me that she could post whatever she wants, too...

Amber

[Johnny Stew]

Something I meant to comment on earlier... the accusation that liberals are "just as intolerant" as the people they complain about.

To me... and I don't feel this is a case of rationalization... but there's a difference between being intolerant of an opinion that can be changed (ie: negative attitudes towards gays, blacks, hispanics, etc.), and being intolerant towards people for something that can't be changed (ie: BEING gay, black, hispanic, etc.).

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by DeeGeMe

Yet, the warfare, and it is indeed warfare, that Republicans have engaged in against Democrats would have you believe that casting a vote for the Democrats is the same as voting for Satan. This is just beyond ridiculous.
.....
Let me ask you this--do you really think that the Anti-Christ would appear and proclaim himself the Anti-Christ? Of course not, he (or she) will put the most attractive, genial face on their evil as they possibly can. The Bible's pretty clear on this--it says that "many shall arise in my name." Just something to think about there for you today.

Yes, it is. Kerry is not Satan. But the implication that Bush is the Anti-Christ is just as ludicrous. Or did I misread you and you were not intending to seriously imply that?

Does it not bother any of you who voted for this man that the very places that were attacked on 9/11 voted AGAINST this president?

No, because I don't base my political decisions on how others vote, I make my own decisions.

Does it bother you that he was warned that we were going to be attacked and did NOTHING about it? That he ignored the warnings?

Hindsight is 20/20. It's so easy to say he should've done this, should've done that. Those attacks did not happen because of George W. Bush, any more than they happened because of Clinton or anyone else who did not take more action against Osama Bin Laden (Here is an example of "Missed Opportunity" at this link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/ ).

Does it not bother you that there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein had a direct involvement in 9/11 or with Osama Bin Laden?

Bush was careful to make the distinction and NOT assert that Saddam was partially behind 9/11, although he certainly asserts there is a relationship between the two, he did NOT include that. http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/inq...connection.txt

or that there have been NO Weapons of Mass Destruction found in Iraq?

Everyone knows he had them at one time. He said he destroyed them, but did not allow the UN to observe this destruction, which is a violation of the UN's requirements. Here's a link for you guys: http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/ir...ade/sect2.html . Here's another link that gives the history of Iraq's continued defiance of the UN. http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/iraq/timeline.htm . And yet it was unreasonable to doubt him? We sure gave him enough time to get rid of them if he did have them, BTW.

That over 100,000 innocent civilians have been murdered in Iraq by our troops? And for what? Why are we there? This has not kept us safer and has instead, enabled Osama Bin Laden and the other terrorist groups to recruit hundreds if not thousands of fighters for their cause, against us.

Of course it's terrible that civilians have killed. But more died under Hussein. Everyone acknowledges his atrocities. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...ets-usat_x.htm And those guys choose their own paths; we didn't make them do anything.

Does it not bother you that the World thinks that we have lost our damned minds for electing this man for a second term? That we are now viewed as religious extremists who are pursuing an aggressive policy against other countries? That we have appointed ourselves the policemen of the world (*only applies to countries with rich oil reserves)?

I don't wait to find out what other countries believe before I form an opinion. It's a shame they feel that way, of course, but it doesn't change my mind.

The truth is that you can't defend these positions and you know it or else you'd be making multiple posts like the liberals on this board do. But you can't because there's no there--there.

I hope my post has answered this somewhat.

And you know, or you should know, in your heart of hearts that discriminating against the poor, and homosexuals, and other minorities is WRONG.

Yes, it is.

Please explain to me how Republicans and Conservatives came to be a protected minority when you control the White House, both Houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court? That's not a minority-it's a majority and I don't believe that special protection extends to majority groups, either here or in the "real world".

We're a minority here, but certainly not overall, no. And there's a reason for that. Can you really write off the majority of Americans who not only voted for a Republican President but increased their senate majority? It would be more profitable to examine yourselves and figure out how you lost them, than further alienate them with elitist attitudes, if you ever want to win a presidential election.

And on edit---if you have articles proving your positions or that support your view, by all means, post them. See, being liberal means having an open mind and I'm not afraid to read "the other side's" viewpoints. But they had better be grounded in firm fact or I'm going to pick them apart because that's something else liberals are good at--questioning the status quo and not drinking the kool-aid.

OK, I did. It took my slow self over an hour. We'll see what happens.

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

Furthermore - I think the problem is - like it or not - Christianitly SHOULD NOT be ruling our country - I am a Christian and a believer - but I recognize that not everyone is that way - and I have to (and gladly) accept that because what is right for me is not right for everyone.

Not everyone who voted for Bush is a Christian. Christians aren't ruling. The majority is. And that's democracy.