Church and State

What do you think about the world?
Post Reply
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Church and State

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

Many people have exclamed a disgust with Bush's willingness to discuss his faith as being part of his decision making and part of his life, period.

Gosh. I wonder if they will be consistent. Or will they just make their disgust noticeable if it hurts Bush.

Faith Increasingly Part of Kerry's Campaign

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 18, 2004; Page A01


COLUMBUS, Ohio, Oct. 17 -- John F. Kerry is evolving from a reserved Catholic reluctant to discuss faith in the public square into a Democratic preacher of sorts who speaks freely and sometimes forcefully about religion on the hustings.

From the pulpit to the pastures, Kerry is increasingly spreading a more spiritual message and visiting local churches, as he did the past two days in Ohio, to expound on the political lessons of the Bible's James and Saint Paul.

"Through many dangers, toils and snares I have already come," Kerry intoned Sunday morning at Mt. Olivet Baptist Church. " 'Tis grace that brought me safe thus far, and grace will lead me home." He told the crowd of 1,500 he wasn't there to preach but went on to, well, preach about the Good Samaritan, the emptiness of a faith devoid of deeds and God's high calling to love one another -- before criticizing from the pulpit President Bush over Social Security and jobs.

A few hours later, Kerry borrowed from the Book of James to condemn the president for failing to help the suffering people of Darfur, Sudan. "Words without deeds are meaningless -- especially when people are dying every day," Kerry said in a statement issued by his campaign.

Tens of millions of Americans were introduced to the candidate's spirituality during the final debate, in which Kerry talked at some length about the Catholicism he says guides his ideology and life.

"My faith affects everything that I do, in truth," Kerry said during the debate last week in Tempe, Ariz. The candidate is planning to further elaborate on faith, family and values in a speech this week, aides said.

It wasn't always this way. For much of the campaign, Kerry resisted pressure from some Democrats, including aides, to discuss his faith more widely and mostly touched on the topic only before African American audiences on Sundays.

In an interview with The Washington Post during the Democratic primaries, Kerry appeared hesitant to discuss religion. He steered the conversation toward his belief that Bush was blurring the lines between church and state in dangerous ways.

In July, Tad Devine, a longtime Kerry friend and strategist, said the candidate clings to a tradition of keeping religion a "private matter."

So what prompted the change? A top aide said Kerry has simply grown more comfortable publicly "opening up" about God and faith, as the campaign has progressed and opportunities have arisen (such as the third and final debate, when several questions about faith were posed). It is part of a broader effort by an introverted Kerry to share more about his life and experiences, the aide said. One of Kerry's new lines is how there are three great teachers in life: parents, schoolteachers and God.

But some friends say that Kerry also has gained a deeper appreciation of how voters in many of the battleground states -- from Hispanic Catholics in New Mexico to evangelical Christians in rural Ohio -- seek candidates of faith, or at least desire reassurance that their president shares most of their values.

In some ways, it is unavoidable. In Ohio last week, Kerry was greeted by a large billboard screaming "Vote the Bible" and by signs reading "Christians for Kerry." At a town-hall meeting in Xenia, a Democrat in the audience pulled Kerry into the debate over faith in politics with a pointed faith-based question. A few hours later, a Roman Catholic priest in nearby Chillicothe praised his religious beliefs at a Saturday afternoon service arranged for the traveling candidate.

"If dare we say by the grace of God the brother should be the one chosen to lead, it is our hope he will one day come back to us and celebrate with us as president of the United States, not in this small room, but in the church where we will do it openly, publicly, proudly," the Rev. Lawrence L. Hummer of St. Mary's said on Saturday.

A few hours later at a family-owned farm, Kerry talked about "God's blessing" of the mountains, sky and lands around him. "You get a sense of how blessed we are," he said at an event, where he also was given a rifle and told supporters he would be hunting in these parts next week.

Stanley Greenberg, Kerry's pollster, said a higher percentage of voters has to come to view Kerry as a man of character and truth -- attributes some Democrats say are strengthened by the candidate's public embrace of God and by his display of moral values such as personal opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage.

To be sure, Bush speaks more frequently and often with more passion about religion, and enjoys a huge advantage among white evangelical Christians. In 2000, Bush won more than two of every three votes from people who said they attended church at least once a week, according to a post-election study by the University of Akron.

Some call this the "God gap": The less frequently people attended church, the more likely they are to vote Democratic. Greenberg said that, if anything, Bush is doing even better with evangelicals this time.

But political scientists say a large number of more casual Christians and Roman Catholics are considered important swing voters. Catholics, in particular, are being targeted by both candidates in the final days of this campaign.

As he expounds on faith and politics, Kerry draws a sharp contrast with Bush on how the Bible instructs government leaders, as well as with many Catholics over fealty to church doctrine.

The religious divide, not unlike the political one, comes down to siding with liberals in the church over the more orthodox conservatives. Kerry, for example, has broken with some Catholic leaders who say it is a sin for a politician to support abortion rights. In the final debate, the Democratic candidate made it clear he opposes abortion as an "article of his faith," but would never appoint a Supreme Court justice who favors overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision establishing a woman's right to an abortion.

Kerry instead seeks to broaden the discussion to the Catholic Church's teachings against war and the death penalty and for helping the poor, hungry and homeless. That is why the candidate frequently quotes from the New Testament's James, who wrote about how faith without works is dead.

"I see deeds and I see a whole lot of things that when you add them up, make you wonder about the public words about values versus the public deeds and works that show values," Kerry said at the Baptist church here.

This, aides say, is Kerry's way of calling into question Bush's commitment to the teachings of the New Testament. In what has become a familiar refrain of Kerry's sermons, he told the story of the Good Samaritan to illustrate God's calling to help the least of America's people.

"This," he said, "is how you reach the kingdom of Heaven."
User avatar
Lohrno
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2416
Joined: July 6, 2002, 4:58 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Lohrno »

Duh. It's campaign material still. Just like Bush does. He's trying to not seem like teh @+#312+! The difference is that Kerry doesn't let his personal beliefs impose on other people's rights.

When Kerry uses faith though he is trying to spread a positive message most of the time.

When Bush uses it, he uses it to push a constitutional ammendment to ban gay marriage, or to stop the supreme court from hearing cases related to the pledge. He uses it to combine state and church.

-=Lohrno
User avatar
archeiron
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1289
Joined: April 14, 2003, 5:39 am

Post by archeiron »

Kerry is guilty of pandering. It appears that someone has done their homework on the 2000 election and determined that Kerry should be very vocal about his personal beliefs if he wants to draw Christian voters to his cause. I have no doubt that both Kerry and Bush have strong religious feelings, but I would rather that both of them kept that out of their decision making process as government leaders.

I would prefer to see logical reasoning made rather than religious convictions used to run this nation: incidentally, this is probably the sentiment that would cause many posters on VV to refer to me as liberal. If their definition of liberal is "one who uses reason over morals to craft decisions and opinions as often as possible", then I am most certainly a liberal.
[65 Storm Warden] Archeiron Leafstalker (Wood Elf) <Sovereign>RETIRED
User avatar
Lohrno
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2416
Joined: July 6, 2002, 4:58 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Lohrno »

Yup he's a pander bear! =D

Oh I just also wanted to say that Midnyte has a huge misconception of the meaning and purpose of the separation of Church and State if he thinks that it means that public officials can not share their beliefs or say anything related to religion. That's fine.

To explain: It's not fine to force people to make statements that might be against their religion. For example: Under God. If you're Atheist, or Polytheist, this goes against the grain. Religion also has no place in or near courtrooms which are neutral.

To clarify --

Government endorses religion: Bad.

Individual endorses religion: Okay. (I might get annoyed with it but that's freedom.) I don't have a right to not be offended/annoyed. =P

-=Lohrno
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Post by Sueven »

I'm confident that Kerry's increased discussion of his faith is a political strategy designed to win over undecided voters who might support Kerry's politics but trust Bush's religion.

That said, I'm still very disappointed by it. Realistically, I would like an agnostic president. I don't mind a religious president, but I would prefer that he generally not speak about his faith publicly, and I would definitely prefer that his actions not be guided by religion. Kerry is not an agnostic and he speaks about his faith publicly. On the other hand, Bush is not an agnostic, he speaks about his faith publicly, and he makes policy decisions guided by religion. I'm not going to claim that the war in Iraq is a religiously motivated crusade or anything like that. Bush has, however:

1. Refused to support foreign family planning programs that discuss alternatives to abstinence or that support abortion,
2. Has promoted government sponsorship of faith-based charitable initiatives.

So neither Kerry or Bush offers what I want in a candidate from a religious perspective. However, Kerry, by virtue of the fact that he has not legislated his religion to the extent Bush has, is still the preferable candidate in this issue area.

I guarantee that if Kerry is elected and he turns out to be a religious zealot, I won't vote for him in 2008.
User avatar
Lohrno
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2416
Joined: July 6, 2002, 4:58 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Lohrno »

Sueven wrote: I guarantee that if Kerry is elected and he turns out to be a religious zealot, I won't vote for him in 2008.
Aye me too. Unless Bush decides to run against him. Lesser of two evils...

-=Lohrno
User avatar
Dregor Thule
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5994
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Xathlak
PSN ID: dregor77
Location: Oakville, Ontario

Post by Dregor Thule »

Agnosticism is worse than being religious. Living your life on a philosophy of uncertainty is no way to live.
Image
User avatar
noel
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 10003
Joined: August 22, 2002, 1:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Calabasas, CA

Post by noel »

Kerry is doing it also, and I hate it just as much. You see, our president's religion is a minor, minor issue for me. As long as his religion doesn't interfere with doing the job of President, I really don't care.

The root of the problem is that we have a group of right-wing idiots that make it a HUGE campaign issue when religion has NOTHING to do with how well the President handles the economy, presents and implements his foreign policy, gives proper attention to the environment, addresses poverty, focuses on education...

It would appear that for the most part we all agreed with John Stewart's message on Crossfire (though perhaps not his presentation). THIS is exactly the kind of thing that bothers him, and bothers me. Instead of talking about real issues that affect each and every one of us, the candidates have to spend this inordinant amount of time focusing on their personal religion, and their military service when each of those will mean jack and shit if they're elected.

Both of the candidates are making these statements because no matter how good or bad their intentions as a candidate, if they don't play the political game, they'll lose the election. To me that's fucking sad. I have no doubt that Bush's religion is very important to him and I think that's fantastic FOR HIM. I have coworkers who have religious interests that are very important to them... I really don't care about that. I care about how well they do their job. It should be the same for the President.
Last edited by noel on October 21, 2004, 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Oh, my God; I care so little, I almost passed out.
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Post by Sueven »

I don't view it as a philosophy of uncertainty. I view it as:

"Clearly I do not possess the faculties to divine for myself the true architecture of the universe and all that exists. Rather than jumping to a faulty and unknowable conclusion about the existence or nonexistence of any deities or spiritual systems, I will happily admit that there are some things I am not capable of knowing."

I don't believe in God. If I had to choose what I think is the strongest position, I would be an atheist. But considering the degree by which the complexity of the universe outweights my ability to understand complexity, I'm not going to go out making any definitive statements about that.

I don't feel uncertain or confused in my religious and spiritual beliefs whatsoever. I am fully certain that I do not know, and fully confident that I never will.
Last edited by Sueven on October 21, 2004, 2:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sylvos
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1828
Joined: July 7, 2002, 2:55 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Post by Sylvos »

but Kerry is Catholic.
We Catholics are all hypocrits and child molestors.
We Catholics all eat babies and give our money to the Pope.
How can you vote for Kerry? HE iS CAThOLIc!??!?!?!?!
LOok AT wHAt HaPPEneD to JFK!??!?!?!

OH NOZ THE CATHOLICS ARE GOING TO GIVE THE WHITE HOUSE TO THE POPE!!!!!


OH NOZZZZZ!!!!!!

Atheists FLEE!!!!!!!!
Image
User avatar
Lohrno
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2416
Joined: July 6, 2002, 4:58 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Lohrno »

Dregor Thule wrote:Agnosticism is worse than being religious. Living your life on a philosophy of uncertainty is no way to live.
I'm Agnostic. I guess for you it would be horrible, but I'm comfortable not knowing. It doesn't change much. I'm not going to play Pascal's wager either.

-=Lohrno
User avatar
Lohrno
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2416
Joined: July 6, 2002, 4:58 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Lohrno »

Or put more elegantly.
Sueven wrote: "Clearly I do not possess the faculties to divine for myself the true architecture of the universe and all that exists. Rather than jumping to a faulty and unknowable conclusion about the existence or nonexistence of any deities or spiritual systems, I will happily admit that there are some things I am not capable of knowing."
Thanks! =D

-=Lohrno
Homercles
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 628
Joined: July 8, 2002, 3:52 pm

Post by Homercles »

but Kerry is Catholic.
We Catholics are all hypocrits and child molestors.
We Catholics all eat babies and give our money to the Pope.
How can you vote for Kerry? HE iS CAThOLIc!??!?!?!?!
LOok AT wHAt HaPPEneD to JFK!??!?!?!

OH NOZ THE CATHOLICS ARE GOING TO GIVE THE WHITE HOUSE TO THE POPE!!!!!


OH NOZZZZZ!!!!!!

Atheists FLEE!!!!!!!!
And dont forget being a Catholic also makes him a Christian. Therefore, by rule, hes a HATEFUL BIGOT
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by miir »

And dont forget being a Catholic also makes him a Christian. Therefore, by rule, hes a HATEFUL BIGOT
I thought being a politician covered that.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
Homercles
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 628
Joined: July 8, 2002, 3:52 pm

Post by Homercles »

Good point Miir. Good point
User avatar
Jice Virago
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1644
Joined: July 4, 2002, 5:47 pm
Gender: Male
PSN ID: quyrean
Location: Orange County

Post by Jice Virago »

The problem I have with Bush's whole faith thing are things like:

Federally funded "Faith Based Initiatives" that will surely only involve christian faiths.

Proclaiming to other world leaders that God told him to do something or made him president.

Gay marriage ban for strictly religious reasons.

Reffering to the war on terrorism as a "Crusade".

And so on.... All these comments set a scary precident, in my mind.

Any time you Jesus nuts get the mistaken feeling that the deck is somehow stacked against you, just remember no president has ever been elected without at least proffessing to be christian, and even being catholic is dubious. No openly known Jew, Muslim, Bhudist, Daoist, Zoarastian, Hindu, or Atheist has ever even run for the presidency.

Also, what makes GW different is I think he actually believes his own bullshit, which is normally the case for people who switch from cocaine to Jesus as their drug of choice.
War is an option whose time has passed. Peace is the only option for the future. At present we occupy a treacherous no-man's-land between peace and war, a time of growing fear that our military might has expanded beyond our capacity to control it and our political differences widened beyond our ability to bridge them. . . .

Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war.
--RICHARD M. NIXON, "REAL PEACE" (1983)

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, represents, in the final analysis, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children."

Dwight Eisenhower
User avatar
Sylvus
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7033
Joined: July 10, 2002, 11:10 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: mp72
Location: A², MI
Contact:

Post by Sylvus »

Now Jice, there's no "proof" (ha!) that GWB was ever a coke fiend. He is a confirmed rumpot though.
"It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant." - Barack Obama

Go Blue!
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27728
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Post by Winnow »

Sylvus wrote:Now Jice, there's no "proof" (ha!) that GWB was ever a coke fiend. He is a confirmed rumpot though.
I'm on the verge of switching my preferred booze from Vodka to Rum. I've discovered Rum and Dr. Pepper. There may be no turning back.

I also want to drink what the president drinks!
User avatar
Chidoro
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3428
Joined: July 3, 2002, 6:45 pm

Post by Chidoro »

Rum and diet A&W root beer or cream soda. Although vodka is nice because it doesn't make your breath stink heh
User avatar
Tenuvil
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1841
Joined: July 11, 2002, 6:13 pm

Post by Tenuvil »

vodka and diet dew!
User avatar
Marbus
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2378
Joined: July 4, 2002, 2:21 am
Contact:

Post by Marbus »

Personally I do not have problem with the way Kerry is explaining his faith, NOR the way Bush did initially because they are describing it, especially as Kerry did in the last debate, as part of who they are.

Each of us bases our actions on our own understanding of the world. If you are religious that will effect your world view, you can't change that, it's who you are.

The difference is that while Kerry has continued to talk about his faith as how it effects him and how it will play a part in his decisions, JUST like Bush did, he also continues to bring up how he must regulate and take notice of that world view when making decisions for a country that is made up of many different views. He answered that in the debates and I agree 100%.

Bush on the other hand has continually tried to force his beliefs on others and use it to make decisions for people outside his faith thus bluring the boundary between church and state.

Example: Marb's Politics on Abortion.
Personally I believe it's wrong, however at the current time the only support I have for that belief is my religious beliefs and what my wife and I have personally experienced.

Because my understanding is based upon a belief rather than hard factual evidence I would not campaign or appoint judges who would try to overturn RvW.

For me a President, or ANY elected official has to represent his constituents, all of them, not just ones he agrees with. Yes we have many Christians in the country who are against abortion but we have many who are for it. Since you can't make a secular argument against it, it's not something a Government who believes in separation of Church and State should touch with a 10 foot poll.

What's interesting is that Abortions have actually gone up since Bush was elected yet he is "against" them. Why have they gone up? Because Bush, unlike Kerry, can not seem to see outside of his own little "reality." Everything is black and white, abstanence! Lets spend MORE money on those programs because that is the only thing I agree with morally! Well that dosen't work for the rest of the country Mr President. In any issue you have to look at all sides. If he REALLY wants to decrease abortions he will spend more on education, planned parenting, condoms and abstance (sp). Lets face it a unilateral approach when dealing with a complex subject often defined by human emotions does NOT work... most people understand that. Sadly though, still many more do not.

I have no problem with what Kerry is saying as long as he continues to focus on who he is and that he understands how it will effect his decision making process. I just don't want a President who thinks he has the only Red Phone to God.

Marb
User avatar
Xzion
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2567
Joined: September 22, 2002, 7:36 pm

Post by Xzion »

I strongly disagree with Kerry discussing religion.
Yet they have a point, he said due to his faith he is against abortion, but he will not ban it as he does not seek to use the american government as a tool to opress others with his personal faith. Of course, bush republicans jump all over this and add this to there flip flop propaganda machine "kerry says hes against abortion, but he voted for abortion rights!" simpletons cannot differentiate having moral disagreement with an issue while at the same time trying to protect peoples freedom to make there own moral descisions.

He has a strong catholic faith, which i never find to be a positive, BUT he has done a good job, so far seperating himself from combining church and state opposed to our president who has promoted some disgusting policys based on his personal faith


Any christian (or any other moral-based religious person) who trys to use government to enforce there personal faith is not a true christian, but an utter perversion
-xzionis human mage on mannoroth
-zeltharath tauren shaman on wildhammer
Rekaar.
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 689
Joined: July 18, 2002, 8:44 pm
Contact:

Post by Rekaar. »

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mp ... ok/2866344

Great article on church vs state from an archbishop in houston. Some short excerpts:
the election approaches and I hear more lectures about how Roman Catholics must not "impose their beliefs on society" or warnings about the need for "the separation of church and state." These are two of the emptiest slogans in current American politics, intended to discourage serious debate. No one in mainstream American politics wants a theocracy. Nor does anyone doubt the importance of morality in public life. Therefore, we should recognize these slogans for what they are: frequently dishonest and ultimately dangerous sound bites.
Lawmaking inevitably involves some group imposing its beliefs on the rest of us. That's the nature of the democratic process. If we say that we "ought" to do something, we are making a moral judgment. When our legislators turn that judgment into law, somebody's "ought" becomes a "must" for the whole of society. This is not inherently dangerous; it's how pluralism works.
People who support permissive abortion laws have no qualms about imposing their views on society. Often working against popular opinion, they have tried to block any effort to change permissive laws since the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. That's fair. That's their right. But why should the rules of engagement be different for citizens who oppose those laws?
As James 2:17 reminds us, in a passage quoted in the final presidential debate, "Faith without works is dead." It is a valid point. People should act on what they claim to believe. Otherwise they are violating their own conscience, and lying to themselves and the rest of us.
Time makes more converts than reason. - Thomas Paine
User avatar
Xzion
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2567
Joined: September 22, 2002, 7:36 pm

Post by Xzion »

Rekaar. wrote:http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mp ... ok/2866344

Great article on church vs state from an archbishop in houston. Some short excerpts:

People who support permissive abortion laws have no qualms about imposing their views on society. Often working against popular opinion, they have tried to block any effort to change permissive laws since the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. That's fair. That's their right. But why should the rules of engagement be different for citizens who oppose those laws?
quote]
Are you fucking serious?

So he’s essentially saying "people try to impose freedom upon us religious fanatics by allowing women to make there own decision about there body, yet they try to deny our freedoms of trying to deny there freedoms"

see, watch...

"People who support integration laws have no qualms about imposing their views on society. Often working against popular opinion, they have tried to block any effort to change permissive laws since the Supreme Court's Brown vs Board of Education decision. That's fair. That's their right. But why should the rules of engagement be different for citizens who oppose civil rights and equality?"

I love how extreme conservatives try to argue that people are imposing on there freedoms by trying to integrate more freedom into our society
-xzionis human mage on mannoroth
-zeltharath tauren shaman on wildhammer
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Post by Nick »

Subtle difference in reluctantly discussing your religion and zealously forcing it upon the daily lives of millions around the world (hundreds of millions!) with Holy wars based on lies.

Although I don't think I ever said Kerry was a saint anyway, it's anti-Bush for me all the way. You could have a blind quadraspazzed orangutan called Cecil as the challenger and I would still support him. (Unless his policies were of course, more damaging and self serving than the current administration. Which, of course, they wouldn't be.)

:-({|=
Rekaar.
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 689
Joined: July 18, 2002, 8:44 pm
Contact:

Post by Rekaar. »

With you being a Guardian-reading foreigner your stance only serves to reinforce mine, so thank you for sharing your unbridled hatred of the man.
Time makes more converts than reason. - Thomas Paine
User avatar
Lohrno
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2416
Joined: July 6, 2002, 4:58 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Lohrno »

Teenybloke wrote:Although I don't think I ever said Kerry was a saint anyway, it's anti-Bush for me all the way. You could have a blind quadraspazzed orangutan called Cecil as the challenger and I would still support him. (Unless his policies were of course, more damaging and self serving than the current administration. Which, of course, they wouldn't be.)
I for one welcome our blind quadraspazzed orangutan overlords!

Or some other such tired cliche. =P

No, but seriously, a blind quadraspazzed orangutan would do a better job...

-=Lohrno
User avatar
Aruman
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 683
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:53 pm

Post by Aruman »

Dregor Thule wrote:Agnosticism is worse than being religious. Living your life on a philosophy of uncertainty is no way to live.
That's kind of funny in a way... since I view religion the same way. I haven't 'declared' my beliefs or lack thereof... but I am the kind of person that needs to see physical evidence of some kind before I will entertain the possiblities of something existing.

Certainty just because someone says so? Faith is fine, but it can only take you so far. Sooner or later you need to see some kind of evidence in some form, otherwise how can uncertainty not take hold?
Hesten
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2620
Joined: April 29, 2003, 3:50 pm

Post by Hesten »

Teenybloke wrote:Although I don't think I ever said Kerry was a saint anyway, it's anti-Bush for me all the way. You could have a blind quadraspazzed orangutan called Cecil as the challenger and I would still support him. (Unless his policies were of course, more damaging and self serving than the current administration. Which, of course, they wouldn't be.)
Hehe, brilliant quote.
"Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich"
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Post by Nick »

Guardian reading?
User avatar
Akaran_D
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4151
Joined: July 3, 2002, 2:38 pm
Location: Somewhere in my head...
Contact:

Post by Akaran_D »

Aruman: The fact lies in death and what happens to us immedately after.
If we're simply shut off, religion is wrong.
If we're not.. someone was right somewhere.

Sadly, that's a door you can't cross more than once..
Akaran of Mistmoore, formerly Akaran of Veeshan
I know I'm good at what I do, but I know I'm not the best.
But I guess that on the other hand, I could be like the rest.
User avatar
Xzion
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2567
Joined: September 22, 2002, 7:36 pm

Post by Xzion »

Aruman wrote:
Dregor Thule wrote:Agnosticism is worse than being religious. Living your life on a philosophy of uncertainty is no way to live.
so being open minded sucks, huh dregor?

one hell of an accepting liberal you are

people with that stance are no better then Jerry Falwell or any other religious fanatic
-xzionis human mage on mannoroth
-zeltharath tauren shaman on wildhammer
Post Reply