Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,742 Year: 3,999/9,624 Month: 870/974 Week: 197/286 Day: 4/109 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   soul of fundamentalism
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 135 (189394)
03-01-2005 2:22 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Trump won
02-28-2005 11:33 PM


I'm not opposed to fundies so long as they are content to just be fundies, but when they work to deny civil rights protections to people I have a problem. Fundies have a history of fighting legal protections for vulnerable people. From protecting old ladies from prosecution as witches, to protecting people from church-sanctioned torture, to protecting small children from virtual slavery in factories, to ending slavery, to ending segregation, to ending any and all forms of bigotry, fundies are always there to fight change. They always claim to have God on their side. These are the same people who claim that every word of the bible is literal truth. They are therefore at least somewhat inured to such things as rape, incest and genocide, since all are either sanctioned or practiced by the god of their bible.
Many of them are good people who would do anything for you if you were in need (and indeed there are many fundies I myself care for deeply; I live in the Deep South after all), but I will always speak out against them and oppose them politically.
chris porcelain writes:
quote:
I am a christian fundamentalist to show a symbol that I have faith in God and I identify with a beautiful piece of literature more than scientific evidence.
Then you should drop all pretense of intellectual discussion. You are interested only in emotion and romance. You have nothing to offer to anyone who is more intersted in facts and reason, and neither would a person interested in facts and reason have anything of value for you.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Trump won, posted 02-28-2005 11:33 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Phat, posted 03-01-2005 2:37 AM berberry has not replied
 Message 6 by Silent H, posted 03-01-2005 5:16 AM berberry has replied
 Message 11 by Trump won, posted 03-02-2005 11:14 PM berberry has replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 135 (189456)
03-01-2005 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Silent H
03-01-2005 5:16 AM


holmes insults me:
quote:
PCKB.
Yes, I know, because I'm not worried about one of the wealthiest men in the world and whether or not he'll be able to buy a fair trial. That's off-topic in this thread, holmes. Just because no one paid much attention to your thread is no reason for you to try to drag this one away from it's OP.
quote:
And I am uncertain how people like Rev. Martin Luther King, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and Malcolm X could be considered anything less than fundemantalist and yet against bigotry.
I can't imagine that anyone is stupid enough to be confused about the type of fundie I'm talking about, but since you apparently are let me make myself clear: I'm speaking specifically about those fundies who believe every word of the bible is true and who believe they have a duty to see to it that any group of people they don't like is denied civil rights and legal protections.
Besides, I'm unaware that any of those men ever professed a belief that every word of the bible is literal truth. Even if they did, it must have led them to different conclusions because they don't fit my definition of 'fundie'.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Silent H, posted 03-01-2005 5:16 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Silent H, posted 03-05-2005 5:57 AM berberry has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 135 (189728)
03-03-2005 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Trump won
03-02-2005 11:14 PM


Then please explain the reasoning process by which you reach the conclusion that an ancient piece of literature is more reliable than scientific evidence.
I don't want to pick on you too harshly, chris, since I believe you said somewhere that you wouldn't support a ban on gay marriage. That shows that at least you are willing to follow God in your own life without trying to impose your beliefs on others. I think that's highly commendable and I would thus never call you a bigot, but I'm still curious as to how you reach the conclusion that literature is more reliable than evidence.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Trump won, posted 03-02-2005 11:14 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Trump won, posted 03-03-2005 4:25 PM berberry has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 135 (189964)
03-04-2005 3:09 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Phat
03-04-2005 2:17 AM


The word 'fundamentalist'
I'm not sure I see your point, Phatboy, but I'm not arguing with it ('specially since it's philosophical), however unless I'm very much mistaken the genesis of the words 'fundamentalist' and 'fundamentalism' as they relate to Christianity can be traced to The Fundamentals, a series of books released in the early 20th century. These books were written as a statement of basic Christian beliefs, never to be doubted or argued against. They were a reaction to the biblical higher criticism and the theory of evolution. A 'fundamentalist', as I use the term, is one who holds views that are in general accord with those espoused by this series of books. The fundamentalist world-view has changed very little if at all over the past century.
This is not to say that I don't allow myself some rhetorical latitude in using 'fundamentalist' or 'fundie'; I'm only stating my understanding of the definition.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Phat, posted 03-04-2005 2:17 AM Phat has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024