A call to arms

[Acies]

http://www.livejournal.com/community/bu ... 11318.html

Above is a livejournal link to a heavy support Bush site. I was cruising around and bothering to review popular opinion about the President when I came across such gems as this:

Hello children of God!
My name is Dora Mae (McMahon). I'm 67 and a loving grandmother from Boca Raton, Florida. I thank God I can cast my vote for George W. Bush in this key state. ((FOUR MORE YEARS!!)) LOL! People say he is incompetent. But I trust him because he is a Christian man of faith. That is truly inspiring. Besides his values, I don't agree with any of his policies. But I stand by him 100% because I know a Godly man will bring a nation to richness and glory!

Even if you don't agree with Bush's policies, I'm thrilled that you trust in his reliance on God. I believe it's the most important aspect of deciding a President.

and of course...

Hi! I'm glad to see that you are a Christian and that you support Bush because he has God on his side. People say he's "incompetent" or "stupid" etc. but I think this is one of the many reasons he reminds me of my grandpa....(not saying that he IS stupid) you can be the most ignorant person in the world when it comes to book smarts and common sense, but if you have God on your side...ANYTHING is possible and he will always lead you in the right direction. That's why I support President Bush!

In short, I am requesting some of you very snappy people to hit this site with verbage which would make their heads spin. The first to make a post under that link (with a copy of a VV name or something similar, so I know it is you) that makes them cry like the ignorant bitches they are gets 500 VV's.

Thanks.

[Akaran_D]

And again, it's cool to hate people because of their belief in Christianity.
You know what? They may not be "educated", but they have their beliefs and stand by them. What makes them less of a person than you?

You go Acies. You are truly the superior person here.

[Kelshara]

Actually, it frightens me to see people say things like "I don't support any of his political beliefs but he believes in God so he gets my vote!" etc. People like that shouldn't be allowed to vote.

[Akaran_D]

If you were torn between two candiates whom I didn't agree with their stances on anything, I think its safe to say that if canidate B belonged to a religious / social group that you belonged to or supported, you would probably vote for B instead of A.

[Niffoni]

The problem with good flaming is that you need people stupid enough to be worth flaming, but aware enough of their surroundings to notice that they're being flamed. I think I'll take a pass here, but thanks for the chuckle.

[Krimson Klaw]

Well saying you don't think people that disagree with your cosmic viewpoint should not be allowed to vote is totally ridiculous. Americans need no ones stamp of approval to cast votes for their candidate of choice, not even if they vote solely on a religious platform. A total irresponsible thing to say, regardless of what someone sees in a candidate.

[Kelshara]

If you were torn between two candiates whom I didn't agree with their stances on anything, I think its safe to say that if canidate B belonged to a religious / social group that you belonged to or supported, you would probably vote for B instead of A.

No if I did not agree with somebody's political stand and there was nobody I agreed with, I would vote blank. That way I would show that I have an interest, that I am involved yet I would also show my dislike for both candidates. I would never vote for somebody I did not support politically no matter if they are the same race/sex/religion/you name it. I find that ridiculous.

Well saying you don't think people that disagree with your cosmic viewpoint should not be allowed to vote is totally ridiculous.

Has nothing to do with them not agreeing with my cosmic viewpoint. I don't care if you're a muslim, buddhist, worshipper of Satan or whatever floats your boat, but for goodness sake vote for somebody you actually agree with politically. Not to mention I am 100% against mixing politics and religion, it leads to nothing but trouble.

[Canelek]

I am not religious in the least, but if folks want to be Christians, it is their RIGHT AS A US CITIZEN to do so. People believe all sorts of silly things and will continue to do so no matter who sits in the oval office getting head from a 13 year old.

As far as Bush, well yeah, he has many Christian (and non-christian) supporters, who gives a fuck? Vote your conscience in the upcoming election. Vote for Scooby Doo as a write-in if you are so inclined. If I spent my life worrying about how others view the world or how they are going to vote.... heh

There are too many people that get all hot and fancy about the upcoming poll, such as:

OMG! Bush is responsible for 9/11 or
OMG! John Kerry is a fucking pussy! or
OMGDZ0R! People still practice religion or
HOLY CRAP! Kerry is a silly little liberal deuche pussy? or
OM!MG!! Bush is a war-monger!!
! Vote for Perot!*

* Paid for by the foundation to support H. Ross Perot in the 2004 Presidential election

[Krimson Klaw]

Well you can be against it all you want, that's fine. I disagree with you, but that does not mean I would go so far as to say you should not be able to vote just because of that. The right to vote is the most precious thing Americans have, you can't take that right away just because someone chooses to vote on a religious platform. Every backwoods redneck, ghetto ass negro, white collar asshole, inbred texas mofo has the right to vote for whatever candidate they choose, and for whatever reason they desire, period.

[Kelshara]

Well I agree taking away their right to vote would be extreme, but the mixture of near-fanatical religion and high-end politics frighten me.

Then again what can I say, I don't have the right to vote here

[Canelek]

The thing is, fanatical religious folks are diminishing in numbers by the second due to primary education. Republicans that are running for office throw in the religion card to get more votes, just like the Democrats throw in the "Republicans are evil" card. It is politics, it is mudslinging and it is indeed bandwagoneering.

We live in this country, we deal with all the bullshit. We have the right to protest and bear arms. We generally don't get along with our neighbors and we all have our own view of how things should be. We are Americans, we disagree, and we like it that way!

[Sionistic]

You know, Hitler was a christian

[Akaran_D]

And not all Chrstians will make it into Heaven.
Saying you are does not necessarily make you one.

[Krimson Klaw]

Good then he knew he was going straight to hell before he committed suicide.

[Canelek]

You know, Hitler was a christian

Catholic, I believe, but that is beside the point. We can all agree that Christianity is the reason for many horrible crimes such as the Crusades, the 700 Club and the Spanish Inquisition. But, the foundation of Christianity is loving thy neighbor and being a good person. Do not forget that. Whackjobs, religious zelots and The Vatican are unfortunate bastardizations.

Those crimes against humanity, as well as the fact that Earth was indeed NOT formed just 4000 years ago, led me to reject religion as a whole many many years ago.

[Xzion]

And not all Chrstians will make it into Heaven.
Saying you are does not necessarily make you one.

Thats why i hate christianity, fuck any egotistic humanlike emporer-god who is judgemental enough to banish someone to an ETERNITY of torture for not believeing in him, despite living a good life...The christian god is far worse then Saddam Hussein or Hitler for that matter

[Xzion]

The thing is, fanatical religious folks are diminishing in numbers by the second due to primary education. Republicans that are running for office throw in the religion card to get more votes, just like the Democrats throw in the "Republicans are evil" card. It is politics, it is mudslinging and it is indeed bandwagoneering.

We live in this country, we deal with all the bullshit. We have the right to protest and bear arms. We generally don't get along with our neighbors and we all have our own view of how things should be. We are Americans, we disagree, and we like it that way!

and you really want a president who does that? Who is able to rally and strengthen the blind religious masses by portraying himself as one...although GW most likely is, being that he isnt all that bright himself

[Akaran_D]

That wasn't what I meant, Xzion.
I could go my entire life proclaiming to everyone that I am a Christian and spout the tenants of my belief every fifteen seconds to anyone within earshot.
And in my spare time I could be sodomizing little boys and girls before carving them up like little preschool jack-o-lanterns.

Want to take odds that I'll score Heaven doing that?


You can CLAIM to be anything you like. Cartlass can claim Kyu is a man, Midnyte can claim he's sane, Kerry can claim he's going to do a better job than Bush, Bush can claim he's not a moron, I can claim that I'm 500lbs and 6'8 of mad mad computer muscle. What the reality of it is...


As for what you said though. Our entire religion is built based on tolerance. There are places that the Word will never be heard on this Earth; there are places where even whisphering it will get you gutted like a pig and left in the sewer. I do not believe that my God would do what you said based on just that - tolerance. Every major religion follows the same basic tennents. They are all way too much alike to not be linked in some way. I mean, come on - we're dealing with well over 2000 years worth of storytelling and translations, I don't discount the posibility that the message may have been garbled at some point in time.

[Canelek]

The thing is, fanatical religious folks are diminishing in numbers by the second due to primary education. Republicans that are running for office throw in the religion card to get more votes, just like the Democrats throw in the "Republicans are evil" card. It is politics, it is mudslinging and it is indeed bandwagoneering.

We live in this country, we deal with all the bullshit. We have the right to protest and bear arms. We generally don't get along with our neighbors and we all have our own view of how things should be. We are Americans, we disagree, and we like it that way!

and you really want a president who does that? Who is able to rally and strengthen the blind religious masses by portraying himself as one...although GW most likely is, being that he isnt all that bright himself

You misinterpret my post a bit. I am saying that when all is said and done, religion has very little to do with an election. Not all Republicans are snake-wielding fanatics and not all Democrats are crying pussies. Both sides of the coin have very good things about them and very bad things.

Do I think that a church-run government is a bad thing? HELL YES, THAT WOULD SUCK SOME SERIOUS BALLS.

Do I think that a church-run government is a possibility, regardless of the outcome of the November election? Nope. It is not practical and the people would revolt. Yay! right to protest!

[Akaran_D]

I'll agree - I don't want a church run government either.
Why? Holy Roman Empire.

No thanks!

[Canelek]

I'll agree - I don't want a church run government either.
Why? Holy Roman Empire.

No thanks!

Yep! Although this may diverge from the main point of this thread a tad, it does hit on a fine point.

The United States can never become a nation truly ruled by god because the majority of her people would simply state something like this:

"Why does God talk to some asshole politician in a tie instead of me?"

As free-thinking individuals, we must all remember that there are a good number of Christians and many other religious types in this country. It is not our place to judge them. If a politician wants votes from people that share his/her beliefs, then by all means, go for it! It is this freedom that we all inherited from those that came before us.

[Kylere]

Umm Acies what you want people to do makes as much sense as running into a ;

1. Gay bar and screaming, "Fags!"
2. Straight Bar and screaming, "Breeders!"
3. Biker Bar and screaming, "Racists!"

and running out.

If you would not say something to someone to their face than why do it online?

[Kelshara]

"Why does God talk to some asshole politician in a tie instead of me?"

Nobody seemed to say that when Bush claimed he did God's work, got guidance from God etc. Nor do anyone say that about those TV evangelists...

[Akaran_D]

I say it all the time, Kel (at least about the evans).

[Pherr the Dorf]

Akaran I want your opinion on this, it was a friend of mine's thesis for our comparative religion degree's. He took the stance that the old testament has no relevance to the message of Jesus and that if you remove it then most of the contradictions in the religion disappear. Eliminate eye for an eye, passover, all the old stuff that does NOT in any way teach tolerance and just read the word of Jesus and you'd actually have a religion not dragged down by it's own dogma but one that could transcend. He, and after thinking about it and rereading the Bible for the upteenth time I as well, thinks that, heck is convinced that the old testament actually in more places then you can count, contradicts the word of Jesus and the picture of God he paints

[Xzion]

Akaran I want your opinion on this, it was a friend of mine's thesis for our comparative religion degree's. He took the stance that the old testament has no relevance to the message of Jesus and that if you remove it then most of the contradictions in the religion disappear. Eliminate eye for an eye, passover, all the old stuff that does NOT in any way teach tolerance and just read the word of Jesus and you'd actually have a religion not dragged down by it's own dogma but one that could transcend. He, and after thinking about it and rereading the Bible for the upteenth time I as well, thinks that, heck is convinced that the old testament actually in more places then you can count, contradicts the word of Jesus and the picture of God he paints

Not to be too steryotipical, but then why are most religios and non-religious jews more reasonable then most christians?

When i say religious Jews you compare the extremes, being hassidic to Jerry Falwell religious-right morons
But the common Jew seems to be more socially accepting and open to progress then the common christian

I dont think the Jews (who pretty much follow the old testament) believe in hell
so thats a big plus

add hell into the mix and you have an asshole/fucked up god,regardless of religion, regardless of who hell is for
Any god who has a hell is in my view "evil"

[Pherr the Dorf]

Akaran I want your opinion on this, it was a friend of mine's thesis for our comparative religion degree's. He took the stance that the old testament has no relevance to the message of Jesus and that if you remove it then most of the contradictions in the religion disappear. Eliminate eye for an eye, passover, all the old stuff that does NOT in any way teach tolerance and just read the word of Jesus and you'd actually have a religion not dragged down by it's own dogma but one that could transcend. He, and after thinking about it and rereading the Bible for the upteenth time I as well, thinks that, heck is convinced that the old testament actually in more places then you can count, contradicts the word of Jesus and the picture of God he paints

Not to be too steryotipical, but then why are most religios and non-religious jews more reasonable then most christians?

When i say religious Jews you compare the extremes, being hassidic to Jerry Falwell religious-right morons
But the common Jew seems to be more socially accepting and open to progress then the common christian

I dont think the Jews (who pretty much follow the old testament) believe in hell
so thats a big plus

add hell into the mix and you have an asshole/fucked up god,regardless of religion, regardless of who hell is for
Any god who has a hell is in my view "evil"

You are looking at the picture backwards, it's not apples and oranges it's a smoothie or an apple. Catholics have a lot of contradiction, more then any other major religion in their holy book, and those contradictions are mostly between old and new, if you eliminate the old and just follow jesus you would find that a lot of the bass ackward justifications that the radical right use are no longer there... instead all they can do is embrace the whore so to speak

[Mak]

Nice job, Acies, for wanting to harass on a 67 year old woman that believes differently than you do. Do you pick on little children for believing in Santa Claus too?

Oh, and thanks for proving once again that neither "side" has an exclusive when it comes to intolerance and the desire to ridicule and abuse that which you don't believe in.

[Krimson Klaw]

Don't bash on him too hard. It's the in thing to slam Christians these days, he's just trying to look cool. Well, you succeeded Acies, you look very cool.

[Akaran_D]

Pherr:
The Old Testament, to me, is a guideline. When Jesus came to us, he changed the rules - no more sacrafices, you don't have to do fifteen different things to absolve yourself, ect. So yes, I agree with your friend.

And when I say guidline, I mean there are a few things in it that are good ideas - 10 Commandments is the first and foremost example. Jesus never really laid down many hard and fast rules that said "don't do this". Adultry was one, purposedly harming a child was another. Honor your parents, ect.

That's my thought on it, anywho.

[Xzion]

Im sorry but the people on those trhead are just asking to be flamed.

People go out of there way to flame eachother on VV thinking the party in question is a "dumbass" if you want to flame a dumbass...then go to that site!

did anyone do anything yet? Would be fun as fuck to see

[Krimson Klaw]

Well why don't you go flame them and awe me with your mental superiority because you obviously have the meaning of life all figured out. Oh man I can't wait, this is going to be so cool!

[Marbus]

Amen Pherr and Akaran!

I got in an arguement on Friday with a friend of mine who just became a minister in regards to the same subject. He said, "The God of the OT is the same God he is today." My point is, yes that is true but according to the NT man's relationship to God TOTALLY changed when Jesus rose again... Of course if you only base your beliefs on the NT you, as you said, don't get the ability to try and shove some arcane rule down someone's throat as easily. Not that my friend would do this, he is a great man, we just see things differently. However I truly believe there are many people who hold on to some of the teachings in the OT, the ones they agree with of course - not those "stupid ones" for that very reason.

Marb

[Drasta]

Amen Pherr and Akaran!

I got in an arguement on Friday with a friend of mine who just became a minister in regards to the same subject. He said, "The God of the OT is the same God he is today." My point is, yes that is true but according to the NT man's relationship to God TOTALLY changed when Jesus rose again... Of course if you only base your beliefs on the NT you, as you said, don't get the ability to try and shove some arcane rule down someone's throat as easily. Not that my friend would do this, he is a great man, we just see things differently. However I truly believe there are many people who hold on to some of the teachings in the OT, the ones they agree with of course - not those "stupid ones" for that very reason.

Marb

and that is why religion is used to control and self promotion

[Pherr the Dorf]

Pherr:
The Old Testament, to me, is a guideline. When Jesus came to us, he changed the rules - no more sacrafices, you don't have to do fifteen different things to absolve yourself, ect. So yes, I agree with your friend.

And when I say guidline, I mean there are a few things in it that are good ideas - 10 Commandments is the first and foremost example. Jesus never really laid down many hard and fast rules that said "don't do this". Adultry was one, purposedly harming a child was another. Honor your parents, ect.

That's my thought on it, anywho.

True he never gave the people 10 basic rules, instead he made them think, which empowers them.

'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these.

"A Jew going on a trip from Jerusalem to Jericho was attacked by bandits. They stripped him of his clothes and money, and beat him up and left him lying half dead beside the road. "By chance a Jewish priest came along; and when he saw the man lying there, he crossed to the other side of the road and passed him by. A Jewish Temple-assistant walked over and looked at him lying there, but then went on. "But a despised Samaritan came along, and when he saw him, he felt deep pity. Kneeling beside him the Samaritan soothed his wounds with medicine and bandaged them. Then he put the man on his donkey and walked along beside him till they came to an inn, where he nursed him through the night. The next day he handed the innkeeper two twenty-dollar bills and told him to take care of the man. 'If his bill runs higher than that,' he said, 'I'll pay the difference the next time I am here.' "Now which of these three would you say was a neighbor to the bandits' victim?" The man replied, "The one who showed him some pity." Then Jesus said, "Yes, now go and do the same."

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' "But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye

Just because he didn't list them in an easy 1-10 format... he still gave some very simple rules...[/quote]

[Acies]

Umm Acies what you want people to do makes as much sense as running into a ;

1. Gay bar and screaming, "Fags!"
2. Straight Bar and screaming, "Breeders!"
3. Biker Bar and screaming, "Racists!"

and running out.

If you would not say something to someone to their face than why do it online?

Actually man, I was hoping for a post that calls upon the seperation of church and state, something so well-written that quite literally people will have to sit there and think about it instead of deleting the post and banning the user. About why Bush calling himself a Christian is laughable and frankly an affront to the religion. Perhaps to educate these people that faith in god is everything, unless you pay it only lip service as you go to war for money.

Still, I would not give 500 vv's for someone hoping onto those boards, typing "fag" and walking away. I want something that will make then sad, not something that will make them angry.

Sorry, I perhaps should not have called on anyone here. This was not designed to offend you. I think the quotes above in my initial post covered those bases anyway.

Arakan: If I offended you man, I am truly sorry. You are one of three people who come to mind as very strongly Christian and I did not intend to landblast your faith. If it came out that way then I appoligize sincerely.

[Sabek]

The other thing folks seem to overlook is that catholicism != all of christianity.

Please do not paint with broad brush and state that everything the catholics do/have done applies to all Christians.

[Kylere]

Hell I would be Christian if it were not for Christians


But seriously Acies, you should do it yourself, people like that will ignore you, but there is nothing wrong with making an passionate statement about the things you believe.

[Acies]

Hell I would be Christian if it were not for Christians


But seriously Acies, you should do it yourself, people like that will ignore you, but there is nothing wrong with making an passionate statement about the things you believe.

Tried man. My post was deleted no less than a minute after posting, which sort of upset me. I had restrained myself considerably (I believe) to post that and tried to be very polite to all parties involved. I do not scoff upon Christians, only fake ones or those who would blindly follow someone who says he is a man of god, but is not.

Anyway, again I hope it is clear that I am not intending to insult anyone or their religion.

[Akaran_D]

While I accept your apology, Acies, I'm going to go on a limb and say that probably wasn't the best way to get someone intersted in a seperation of church and state argument.

[Rekaar.]

Separation of church and state was designed to keep government out of religion, it is impossible and foolish to even pretend that religion is not a part of government. If we can loosely define religion as a belief system, is not atheism/secular humanism also a religion?

Everyone has a belief system. It will always be a part of humanity. Who are you to judge whether anyone's belief system is acceptable for someone in office or isn't? You get your chance in the voting booth and that's about it. As it should be.

Beware your slanted views don't turn you into a bigot.

[Silvarel Mistmoon]

You might also want to consider the fact that some people like to go to different boards and post nonsense for fun.

Don't believe everything you read in a post.

[Adex_Xeda]

There's one element to this OT vs. NT thing that you guys haven't hammered.

Consider this, Let's say your on top of a burning building about to fall and there's a helicopter up on the roof. God throws you a instruction manual for the helicopter and says "Save yourself!" Most of us even armed with the helicopter manual would fail to operate the helicopter to safety.

God sees our failure to save ourselves by personal action and "logs in" to earth playing a character named Jesus. As Jesus he parachutes down to the roof, gets in the helicopter and yells at you. "Hop in and I'll fly us out of here."

The OT is like that helicopter manual. God provided it as a ticket to freedom, a thing's to do list for salvation. But he also knew that it was a tough standard. He wanted people to recognise that our actions alone fall way short. With the OT he was setting the stage for Jesus.

The NT chronicles Jesus. The OT is still a valid. It does much to reveal the character likes and dislikes of God as well as provide guidelines to a good life.

The fine point is Jesus didn't come along to throw out the OT. He came along to fullfill the point of the OT.

Like the helicopter analogy, Jesus came to save us from the burning building by operating the helicopter. The helicopter manual still has validity despite our personal inability to read and apply it. It's just hat the helicopter manual isn't exactly necessary anymore considering we have a trained pilot sitting next to us.


One more thing, the point of the OT was the idea that you had to sacrifice something innocent to take the punishment for your screwups before God. If you sinned, the OT dictated that you had to sacrifice an innocent animal to take the punishment for your sin. There were all types of rules for avoiding sin and all types of rule for what to sacrifice if you screwed up. When God came down as Jesus he used his own perfect and blameless self as the sacrifice to compensate for our screwups. It was such an overwhelming sacrifice that *every* screwup from past to present is now covered by the act. As Christains, it is no long necessary for us to follow specific sacrifice rules outlined in the OT because Jesus' self sacrifice pays for all of our screwups.

Jesus didn't the rewrite the OT. He fullfilled it. Because of this the OT and NT are partners in agreement with each other. Chapter one and chapter two of the same story. It's not a good idea to cut the book in half and throw out the first chapter by focusing exclusively on the second. You loose something by doing that.

[Kargyle]

I find it more likely that if there is a God, he looked down and saw just how badly we had mangled his message in the OT and said, "Chuck it all. They fucked it up so bad we're just going to throw all of that away and start over fresh. Send in the Jesus!!!"

I'm not a christian, so you could easily argue that I'm in no way qualified to make that judgment, and you would be correct. That however is my opinion, because to me it seems more likely given the amount of disagreement between the OT and the NT.

[Adex_Xeda]

I've bumped into things that seem like disagreements but when I studied them they always worked out into agreement.


Sometimes biblical writers assume you know something of their culture at the time and omit what to them was obvious. Educating yourself to their culture removes this stumbling block and brings out agreement between things that are at first look in disagreement.

[Animale]

Of course there aren't any major disagreements between the old and new testaments... the new testament was carefully written to avoid such issues as well as "fulfill" the promises of the old testament. For instance, the gospels carefully back up their writings of Jesus's life with old testament prophecies. These were largely written by Jews, for Jews... so throwing out the old testament was not in the cards so to speak. If you want to convert someone, the best way to do it is to make your new religion as much like the old one as possible, as a evolution rather than a revolution of thought.

Animale

[Neost]

I want some of what Adex was smoking when he thought up the "Jesus parachutes down from heaven to fly us off a burning building in a helicopter" scenario.

[Chidoro]

Thank god I'm a Heb, this is NT stuff making my head spin

[Adex_Xeda]

Bah I thought it was an entertaining and relevant analogy!

[Kelshara]

I liked it.. it made me chuckle a bit.