Christian Right Split Over GOP

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: zinfamous
I only hope that you educate these 19 to 29 year olds into realizing that environmental issues are by far more important than abortion or gay marriage--which have always been nothing more than political issues, as the history of most politicians will show you that these only come up for elections.

climate change is an ongoing issue, that we confront in the real world. abortion/gay marriage are simply trotted out for election time for politicians to sway the ignorant masses, and quickly brushed under the rug b/c none of them give a damn.

As if I'm in some sort of position to educate others on envirnmental issues?

It's a church service. Not a newscast!

I'll let the media and Al Gore do that.

Lawl!

You couldnt be farther from the truth.

The reason abortion/gay marrige are brought up around election time is because candidates believe they can sway voters who find those issues to be important. That doesnt change the fact that no matter election time or not, conservatives still care about those isses.

Your opinion of envirnmental issues being more important that abortion or gay marriage shows just how complete polar oppposite you are from those college aged Christians I referred to.

I don't think you'll find many college aged people who care about abortion or, especially, gay marriage the same way you do...not even when you narrow it down to college aged Christians. Abortion has been settled law since most of them were born, and you're going to have a hard time finding very many people under 30 threatened by something that has been socially acceptable for most of their life. Not that there aren't younger social conservatives, it's just that they are very few and far between. Given enough time, those issues will disappear as viable election strategies when politicians discover not very many people care any more.

Of course the point really is that brining those issues up around election time is just a blatant attempt to manipulate social conservatives. Yeah, I know you guys CARE about those issues, but how MUCH should you really care? This goes double for gay marriage, but every election, both issues are trotted out and you guys start slobbering over the issue...and nobody seems to stop and think about whether or not that's a smart strategy. In the case of abortion, especially, you might care a lot, but you've been supporting Republicans in election after election despite the fact that they have NEVER done a single thing to further your cause. They've been running on that old chestnut for several decades now, and each and every time they know they can count on the support of millions of people without having to produce a single tangible result. It's like Christmas for Republicans, they've managed to find the most naive group of voters in the country and convince them to vote Republican with the mindless enthusiasm usually reserved for teenage boys and Jessica Alba movies.

I'm not dismissing the validity of your viewpoint here. I disagree with your stance on abortion and gay marriage, but reasonable people can differ. But when it comes to politics, you guys are morons. The Republicans have these perfect wedge issues that they've managed to convince you they feel strongly about, and on that alone you give them your total support. I have to admire the Republicans for having such a great strategy, but it should be pretty obvious that you're being manipulated here...and it would seem that maybe the wheels are coming off that particular wagon.

Your entire post is based on your opinion. You have no interaction with college aged Christians, and therefore, have no valid argument to make. I WONt even bother with the rest of your post.

What, are you stalking me or something? :roll:

I'm only 24 years old, which means I was in college not too long ago. And as it happened, I went to a college with a fair number of Christians (must be that whole small town midwestern school thing), many of whom were both deeply religious and my friends. And I don't think I knew very many people who cared about abortion and gay marriage the way older Americans seem to. Sure, there were groups that did, but they didn't seem to be in any way representative of the population at large. Because of your political views, I imagine YOUR interaction tends to be with those kinds of groups, but don't confuse that with having a good understand of college students as a whole.

As for my other point, I know the truth hurts, but the sooner you guys wake up from this bizarre delusion you're living under, the better off we'll ALL be.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
...
No, actually, it's pretty well known that social conservativism has been dying for about 40 years now as younger generations become more accustomed to Supreme Court rulings such as Roe v. Wade (which'll never be overturned). For example, the issue of gay marriage today will eventually be known as the 1948 equivalent of Strom Thurmond running on a segregationist platform. It'll be looked back on in the same way (i.e. severely frowned upon), because the homosexual rights movement is only just getting started today, much like the Civil Rights Movement got started a few years after Thurmond's run for President.

It's not like it's a new development, the clock on social liberalization almost NEVER turns backwards. At virtually every single moment in history, the modern social views would shock social conservatives of even a few decades before. Today's social conservatives are just outraged about gay marriage, when the idea of being openly gay would have been equally as offensive to social conservatives of 20 or 30 years ago. But progress doesn't stop marching forward, so they conceded that particular battle. And soon enough, they'll concede the marriage battle as well. That's how social development works, being on the conservative end of things never pans out in the long run because the line between "liberal" and "moderate" just keeps on moving. The only difference between a social liberal and a social conservative is about 25 years.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
No, actually, it's pretty well known that social conservativism has been dying for about 40 years now as younger generations become more accustomed to Supreme Court rulings such as Roe v. Wade (which'll never be overturned). For example, the issue of gay marriage today will eventually be known as the 1948 equivalent of Strom Thurmond running on a segregationist platform. It'll be looked back on in the same way (i.e. severely frowned upon), because the homosexual rights movement is only just getting started today, much like the Civil Rights Movement got started a few years after Thurmond's run for President.

Except according to the Bible homosexuality is a sin and being black is not.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
What, are you stalking me or something? :roll:

I'm only 24 years old, which means I was in college not too long ago. And as it happened, I went to a college with a fair number of Christians (must be that whole small town midwestern school thing), many of whom were both deeply religious and my friends. And I don't think I knew very many people who cared about abortion and gay marriage the way older Americans seem to. Sure, there were groups that did, but they didn't seem to be in any way representative of the population at large. Because of your political views, I imagine YOUR interaction tends to be with those kinds of groups, but don't confuse that with having a good understand of college students as a whole.

As for my other point, I know the truth hurts, but the sooner you guys wake up from this bizarre delusion you're living under, the better off we'll ALL be.

Dont flatter yourself. Im not stalking you, just replying to your posts.

Again, like I said, you may know a few Christians from college, but the hundreds I have met in both seminary, the church, and secular college would strongly disagree witht he positions you have taken in this thread and that of the article in the op.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
What, are you stalking me or something? :roll:

I'm only 24 years old, which means I was in college not too long ago. And as it happened, I went to a college with a fair number of Christians (must be that whole small town midwestern school thing), many of whom were both deeply religious and my friends. And I don't think I knew very many people who cared about abortion and gay marriage the way older Americans seem to. Sure, there were groups that did, but they didn't seem to be in any way representative of the population at large. Because of your political views, I imagine YOUR interaction tends to be with those kinds of groups, but don't confuse that with having a good understand of college students as a whole.

As for my other point, I know the truth hurts, but the sooner you guys wake up from this bizarre delusion you're living under, the better off we'll ALL be.

Dont flatter yourself. Im not stalking you, just replying to your posts.

Uh, I meant that you claimed knowledge of who I did or did not know. Since I'm some random guy on the Internet, having that knowledge would be difficult unless you were a mind-reader, knew me in real life, or were stalking me...or you're just aghast that someone disagrees with you, so I MUST be wrong.

Again, like I said, you may know a few Christians from college, but the hundreds I have met in both seminary, the church, and secular college would strongly disagree witht he positions you have taken in this thread and that of the article in the op.

You are not interacting with a representative sample of students, you're interacting with the ones who are specifically more likely to agree with your point of view. While my sample size might be smaller (although I doubt you know "hundreds" of people very well), it was chosen for non-political and non-religious reasons, which means it's more likely to match the general population than students who join the kind of groups you'd be involved in.

Now I'm not arguing that you're imaging these students, I think they are certainly out there. I'm just saying that if you expect them to lead the charge against gays in the next few decades, you're going to be sorely disappointed. Not that they wouldn't lead, but there won't be any charge. It's going to be the handful of people you've met ranting and raving amongst a general population that doesn't give a shit. I'm not arguing political views, I'm arguing demographics, and survey says liberal social views are the future...if only because that has always, ALWAYS been the case.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
No, actually, it's pretty well known that social conservativism has been dying for about 40 years now as younger generations become more accustomed to Supreme Court rulings such as Roe v. Wade (which'll never be overturned). For example, the issue of gay marriage today will eventually be known as the 1948 equivalent of Strom Thurmond running on a segregationist platform. It'll be looked back on in the same way (i.e. severely frowned upon), because the homosexual rights movement is only just getting started today, much like the Civil Rights Movement got started a few years after Thurmond's run for President.

Except according to the Bible homosexuality is a sin and being black is not.

You do realize that all sorts of racial issues have been argued from a "religious" point of view, right? Back in the old days, interracial marriage and racial mixing was "obviously against the will of God" because God put the different races on different continents...obviously he didn't want them interacting. New issue, same silly-ass argument.

In any case, even if the Bible comes right out and says homosexuality is a sin, the Bible says a lot of stuff that modern Christians who aren't huge assholes mostly ignore. Mostly because religion is bigger than some words on paper, even if Christians might not put it in those words, they understand the point.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
It'll be interesting to see if the GOP really is as split as it seems to be with all the various evangelical leaders divided on their support of candidates. Will they stay home, I think, is the major point here, as they were crucial in the 04 election when they came out in droves.

I do believe there was some talk about this after the 2000 election and then in 2004. While it may be true that turnout is imperitive, it does not mean all evangelicals are Conservative.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.slate.com/id/2089641/">Myth 1: Evangelicals all vote Republican. People often confuse the words "fundamentalist" and "evangelical." Fundamentalists are very conservative and almost entirely Republican because they view the deterioration of traditional morality as the primary public policy crisis. But fundamentalists are a subset of evangelicals, which is a more diverse group.

John Green, a professor at the University of Akron and the foremost scholar of evangelical voting behavior, spliced and diced data some time ago and managed to delineate a group of moderate evangelicals. I like to call them "freestyle evangelicals" because they are socially more liberal (they don't vote strictly for pro-life candidates, for example) and politically "in play." There are about 8 million to 10 million of them. This group went for Bill Clinton 55 percent to 45 percent over Dole in 1996* and 55 percent to 45 percent for W. over Gore in 2000. That's a swing of about a million votes.</a>
It seems in 2K4 there was a surge in religious "progressives" too.

The problem here is that the media likes the word "evangeligal" but that doesn't mean it's Conservatives. I think there is an Evangelical split that is being ignored regarding this topic.

However, I do believe that the "Fundie Right" has less relevance/sway as of late which is not such a bad thing.

True, not all evangelicals are conservative, but a solid majority are. There are indepedents who are on the fence in every part of the political spectrum save for the very fringes of the left and right. That said, the evidence is there that most evangelicals and, indeed, religious persons in the U.S. consider themselves more conservative/Republican than they do liberal/Democrat. There's a good book about it here.

That may start changing though.

Yes, no doubt the religious tend to be more Conservative but Evangelicals are becoming more split.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
You are not interacting with a representative sample of students, you're interacting with the ones who are specifically more likely to agree with your point of view. While my sample size might be smaller (although I doubt you know "hundreds" of people very well), it was chosen for non-political and non-religious reasons, which means it's more likely to match the general population than students who join the kind of groups you'd be involved in.

Your'e right! The ones I talk to about this attend church, so of course they are going to agree with me. They believe what the Bible says, not what pop cluture and secularism believes. Thats why they are at church in the first place. And I never claimed to know hundreds very well. But I do claim to have spoken with hundreds on the very subjects we discuss here. Im not saying our country is NOT trending liberal, of course it it. Its called the downfall of morality. Its prevelant in every culture. But that doesnt mean those of us who believe in certain principles just give up. That doesnt make us "ranting and raving" people. It makes us people who care about our country and how our children will grow up in it.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
You do realize that all sorts of racial issues have been argued from a "religious" point of view, right? Back in the old days, interracial marriage and racial mixing was "obviously against the will of God" because God put the different races on different continents...obviously he didn't want them interacting. New issue, same silly-ass argument.

In any case, even if the Bible comes right out and says homosexuality is a sin, the Bible says a lot of stuff that modern Christians who aren't huge assholes mostly ignore. Mostly because religion is bigger than some words on paper, even if Christians might not put it in those words, they understand the point.

Thats the difference. Homoseuality is specifically pointed out as a sin in the Bible. The others you speak of are not. Apples and oranges.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
You are not interacting with a representative sample of students, you're interacting with the ones who are specifically more likely to agree with your point of view. While my sample size might be smaller (although I doubt you know "hundreds" of people very well), it was chosen for non-political and non-religious reasons, which means it's more likely to match the general population than students who join the kind of groups you'd be involved in.

Your'e right! The ones I talk to about this attend church, so of course they are going to agree with me. They believe what the Bible says, not what pop cluture and secularism believes. Thats why they are at church in the first place. And I never claimed to know hundreds very well. But I do claim to have spoken with hundreds on the very subjects we discuss here. Im not saying our country is NOT trending liberal, of course it it. Its called the downfall of morality. Its prevelant in every culture. But that doesnt mean those of us who believe in certain principles just give up. That doesnt make us "ranting and raving" people. It makes us people who care about our country and how our children will grow up in it.

Typical elitist claptrap. Just because you have a more rigid and more conservative view of "morality" doesn't mean you're the only ones concerned with it. For my part, *I* believe that letting people do what they want as long as it doesn't hurt me is the CORE of moral behavior, and people who think of morality as forcing everyone to live life based on one approved set of tastes are uncivilized. I believe in those principles as strongly as you believe in yours, and I think it's the height of arrogance every time you people talk about morality like you invented the concept.

And at the very least, I'm able to believe in and defend my principles without having to fall back on some book that people have assured me is holy. Be your own man, for the love of God. Because if there is one, he created us with brains for a reason...I doubt he'd appreciate the irony of his most enthusiastic followers refusing to use what he gave them.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
You do realize that all sorts of racial issues have been argued from a "religious" point of view, right? Back in the old days, interracial marriage and racial mixing was "obviously against the will of God" because God put the different races on different continents...obviously he didn't want them interacting. New issue, same silly-ass argument.

In any case, even if the Bible comes right out and says homosexuality is a sin, the Bible says a lot of stuff that modern Christians who aren't huge assholes mostly ignore. Mostly because religion is bigger than some words on paper, even if Christians might not put it in those words, they understand the point.

Thats the difference. Homoseuality is specifically pointed out as a sin in the Bible. The others you speak of are not. Apples and oranges.

Fair enough, but there are lots of things that are a sin in the Bible that don't seem to overly concern modern Christians. Let's face it, the good book is basically several hundred pages itemizing all the things you'll go to hell for doing. I think the extremely detailed reading people do is missing the forest for the trees. There is a lot in that book that doesn't really jive with the overall message very well.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
You are not interacting with a representative sample of students, you're interacting with the ones who are specifically more likely to agree with your point of view. While my sample size might be smaller (although I doubt you know "hundreds" of people very well), it was chosen for non-political and non-religious reasons, which means it's more likely to match the general population than students who join the kind of groups you'd be involved in.

Your'e right! The ones I talk to about this attend church, so of course they are going to agree with me. They believe what the Bible says, not what pop cluture and secularism believes. Thats why they are at church in the first place. And I never claimed to know hundreds very well. But I do claim to have spoken with hundreds on the very subjects we discuss here. Im not saying our country is NOT trending liberal, of course it it. Its called the downfall of morality. Its prevelant in every culture. But that doesnt mean those of us who believe in certain principles just give up. That doesnt make us "ranting and raving" people. It makes us people who care about our country and how our children will grow up in it.

Typical elitist claptrap. Just because you have a more rigid and more conservative view of "morality" doesn't mean you're the only ones concerned with it. For my part, *I* believe that letting people do what they want as long as it doesn't hurt me is the CORE of moral behavior, and people who think of morality as forcing everyone to live life based on one approved set of tastes are uncivilized. I believe in those principles as strongly as you believe in yours, and I think it's the height of arrogance every time you people talk about morality like you invented the concept.

And at the very least, I'm able to believe in and defend my principles without having to fall back on some book that people have assured me is holy. Be your own man, for the love of God. Because if there is one, he created us with brains for a reason...I doubt he'd appreciate the irony of his most enthusiastic followers refusing to use what he gave them.

Whast more eliteist than telling someone they are not using their brain?

its obviousy we hold very different beliefs, and I'm not saying yours are wrong. But the Bible does tell us to stand up fr what we believe in and for what the Bible says.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Fair enough, but there are lots of things that are a sin in the Bible that don't seem to overly concern modern Christians.

Care to give specifics? Or just more generalizations?

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
You are not interacting with a representative sample of students, you're interacting with the ones who are specifically more likely to agree with your point of view. While my sample size might be smaller (although I doubt you know "hundreds" of people very well), it was chosen for non-political and non-religious reasons, which means it's more likely to match the general population than students who join the kind of groups you'd be involved in.

Your'e right! The ones I talk to about this attend church, so of course they are going to agree with me. They believe what the Bible says, not what pop cluture and secularism believes. Thats why they are at church in the first place. And I never claimed to know hundreds very well. But I do claim to have spoken with hundreds on the very subjects we discuss here. Im not saying our country is NOT trending liberal, of course it it. Its called the downfall of morality. Its prevelant in every culture. But that doesnt mean those of us who believe in certain principles just give up. That doesnt make us "ranting and raving" people. It makes us people who care about our country and how our children will grow up in it.

Typical elitist claptrap. Just because you have a more rigid and more conservative view of "morality" doesn't mean you're the only ones concerned with it. For my part, *I* believe that letting people do what they want as long as it doesn't hurt me is the CORE of moral behavior, and people who think of morality as forcing everyone to live life based on one approved set of tastes are uncivilized. I believe in those principles as strongly as you believe in yours, and I think it's the height of arrogance every time you people talk about morality like you invented the concept.

And at the very least, I'm able to believe in and defend my principles without having to fall back on some book that people have assured me is holy. Be your own man, for the love of God. Because if there is one, he created us with brains for a reason...I doubt he'd appreciate the irony of his most enthusiastic followers refusing to use what he gave them.

Whast more eliteist than telling someone they are not using their brain?

Hey, I'm calling 'em like I see 'em. I'm not saying you're stupid or your position can't possibly have any reasonable merit, I'm saying that "but the Bible told me!" is not an argument that requires using your brain. You want to make an actual argument without resorting to claiming a monopoly on morality or suggesting God is telling you what to think, I'll retract my statement.

But no fair dodging the question...don't you think it's a bit elitist to claim that you and you alone care about morality and your country and your children? I'll admit what I said was a bit elitist as well, but I'm tired of conservative religious folks whining about elitism and then busting out gems like your post.

its obviousy we hold very different beliefs, and I'm not saying yours are wrong. But the Bible does tell us to stand up fr what we believe in and for what the Bible says.

Clearly, I just wish that people held their beliefs for their own reasons, because otherwise it's impossible to have an intelligent discussion over these issues. I can READ what the Bible says, it's not particularly helpful to have millions of people repeating it back to me.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Fair enough, but there are lots of things that are a sin in the Bible that don't seem to overly concern modern Christians.

Care to give specifics? Or just more generalizations?

Well since it's been a while, these might be a little vague. But I seem to remember quite a bit about killing people for working on the Sabbath, or wearing two different kinds of cloth, or planting their crops in the wrong order, or eating the wrong kind of food... Hey, you're the expert, are you really telling me that everyone follows, to the letter, everything written in the Bible? Because it seems to me that you folks are just a bit selective in what you read in the good book.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Fair enough, but there are lots of things that are a sin in the Bible that don't seem to overly concern modern Christians.

Care to give specifics? Or just more generalizations?

Well since it's been a while, these might be a little vague. But I seem to remember quite a bit about killing people for working on the Sabbath, or wearing two different kinds of cloth, or planting their crops in the wrong order, or eating the wrong kind of food... Hey, you're the expert, are you really telling me that everyone follows, to the letter, everything written in the Bible? Because it seems to me that you folks are just a bit selective in what you read in the good book.

I never claimed to be an expert, but when you make statements like you have, you may want to have proof to back it up, rather then just throw it out there and not be able to back it up. Of course, I can already tell you are bringing up Old Testament theology which has been done away with since Christ came to Earth.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Hey, I'm calling 'em like I see 'em. I'm not saying you're stupid or your position can't possibly have any reasonable merit, I'm saying that "but the Bible told me!" is not an argument that requires using your brain. You want to make an actual argument without resorting to claiming a monopoly on morality or suggesting God is telling you what to think, I'll retract my statement.

Thats where you are wrong. We dont use the Bible to debate facts.

Fact. The sky is blue.
Fact. the earth is round.

We use the Bible to debate moral issues.

Moral issue. The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin. Therefore, I am against homosexuality and promoting it.

Moral issue. The Bible says life is sacred and therefore I am against taking innocent life.

 

[lousydood]

Christians are people who believe sincerely in fairy tales. Can you really argue rationally with them? It's pointless. Let them rot in their own hatred and ignorance.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Hey, I'm calling 'em like I see 'em. I'm not saying you're stupid or your position can't possibly have any reasonable merit, I'm saying that "but the Bible told me!" is not an argument that requires using your brain. You want to make an actual argument without resorting to claiming a monopoly on morality or suggesting God is telling you what to think, I'll retract my statement.

Thats where you are wrong. We dont use the Bible to debate facts.

Uh, I never said you did...

Fact. The sky is blue.
Fact. the earth is round.

We use the Bible to debate moral issues.

Moral issue. The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin. Therefore, I am against homosexuality and promoting it.

Moral issue. The Bible says life is sacred and therefore I am against taking innocent life.

I don't know why you think I'm confused about what you're doing, I understand it perfectly...and that's the problem. I KNOW you use the Bible to debate moral issues, and I think that's just intellectually lazy. Because what you're doing isn't "debating" at all, you're not forming an opinion based on reasoning or knowledge or emotional understanding or insights offered by others, you're just borrowing your opinion from a book. I understand just fine that's how religion works, I just don't happen to like it.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: lousydood
Christians are people who believe sincerely in fairy tales. Can you really argue rationally with them? It's pointless. Let them rot in their own hatred and ignorance.

That's an unfair statement, you can't tar all Christians with the same brush any more than you can do it with any other huge group.

There is nothing wrong with faith or religious beliefs, Christian or otherwise. I think spirituality (in a number of different forms) can be a good compliment to reason and logic and science and all the rest. Where you go wrong is when it becomes a REPLACEMENT for those things.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
You do realize that all sorts of racial issues have been argued from a "religious" point of view, right? Back in the old days, interracial marriage and racial mixing was "obviously against the will of God" because God put the different races on different continents...obviously he didn't want them interacting. New issue, same silly-ass argument.

In any case, even if the Bible comes right out and says homosexuality is a sin, the Bible says a lot of stuff that modern Christians who aren't huge assholes mostly ignore. Mostly because religion is bigger than some words on paper, even if Christians might not put it in those words, they understand the point.

Thats the difference. Homoseuality is specifically pointed out as a sin in the Bible. The others you speak of are not. Apples and oranges.

No, it isn't.

 

[Lemon law]

When we talk about the evangelical Christian vs. the conservative Christian movement we are some what talking about a competition that is no longer viable in a modern world.

If we are open minded enough to consider that all religions are a set of old men wearing funny hats without freaking out with a knee jerk compulsion to slay the infidel, we can start to understand the new and old problem of all religions over time.

And at the same time we must realize that the entity of government and the entity of a church are somewhat competing mirror images of each other. Both are delimited from the same questions of viability over time.

In some ways, Christianity and evangelical Christianity is a classic case. Starting from nearly nothing after the death of Christ, its message partly inspired by the faith of Christian converts went from a outlawed sect to the dominant religion of the Roman empire. And even after the fall of the Roman government, Christianity went on to dominate the European continent as far east as Russia as a monopoly government sanctioned religion. But once a government sanctioned monopoly Christian church is all
pervasive, there is zero use for the evangelical Christian.

But the evangelical Christians got new life from two sources. (1) The Christian Church broke up into many pieces. (2) After centuries of being a backwater of human knowledge, the Europeans suddenly leapfrogged advanced science and technology at about the same time the unitary catholic church fragmented.

Giving the Christian evangelical of various flavors to fertile fields to plow (a) The essentially cannibalistic opportunity to grow at the expense of other Christian sects. With all the European wars that came with it. (2) The bigger opportunity to be camp followers of Christian nations that used superior technology to dominate the then known world. With new converts to be found as European mercantalism colonized and dominated the world during the 16'th, 17'th, 18'th, 19'th, and parts of the 20'th century.

Now once again, Christian evangelical movements are spent force, able to only cannibalizes other Christian sects. Which leaves that other part of Christianity to impose itself onto governmental policy to the determent of the institution of government itself.

 

[lousydood]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: lousydood
Christians are people who believe sincerely in fairy tales. Can you really argue rationally with them? It's pointless. Let them rot in their own hatred and ignorance.

That's an unfair statement, you can't tar all Christians with the same brush any more than you can do it with any other huge group.

Refute the first sentence, please.

There is nothing wrong with faith or religious beliefs, Christian or otherwise. I think spirituality (in a number of different forms) can be a good compliment to reason and logic and science and all the rest. Where you go wrong is when it becomes a REPLACEMENT for those things.

Nice argument, but not my point.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

I KNOW you use the Bible to debate moral issues, and I think that's just intellectually lazy. Because what you're doing isn't "debating" at all, you're not forming an opinion based on reasoning or knowledge or emotional understanding or insights offered by others, you're just borrowing your opinion from a book. I understand just fine that's how religion works, I just don't happen to like it.

And thats were secularism comes in. The difference is, Christians believe there is something more to life then just what one believes. THAT is the easy thing to do, to just believe something because YOU think you it is the right thing to believe. Most of us have done that for a certain period of our lives, and then we finally come to the realization that we are just a human being who doesnt have all the answers, but someone above us does. And those answers will never be wrong. Call it lazy. Call it eliteist. Call it whatever you want. But you have single-handedly pointed out the biggest difference between modern secularism, and modern Chrisitanity. One believes they have all the answers themselves, while the other knows enough to know that they don't know everything.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Garth

Originally posted by: Corbett
Thats the difference. Homoseuality is specifically pointed out as a sin in the Bible. The others you speak of are not. Apples and oranges.

No, it isn't.

Yes, it is.