Smelling The Coffee: 2010

I'm fully aware of that. I was more questioning the religious aspect: are we viewed as being predominently christian, trying to push christianity on the world?I know all too well that Americans are seen as loudmouth hicks. When I was in Germany, I could always tell which bars had Americans: they were the loudest,most rowdy.

---

Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people
-Carl SaganFor me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
-Carl Sagan

That "one nutcase" is just the most recent and most publicised. See here. Shootings, assassinations, bombings, arson, threats, and even anthrax have been used in the undeniably Christian terrorist opposition to abortion. It's very plainly not just "one nutcase," but rather an entire movement.That also wasn't the only example raised. The Irish conflict between Protestants and Catholics was carried out using terrorism.Further, Islamic terrorism is (thankfully) only represented by an extremist minority of Muslims. If a majority of the Muslim population decided that violence were a good idea, we'd be in serious trouble - there are about 1.5 billion Muslims, after all.If you want to get down to the basic tenets of the faiths, Christianity and Islam both include instruction that we find reprehensible in the West. Christians no longer stone their rebellious children, or adulterers. Gays are no longer persecuted by law, blacks are no longer considered to suffer from the "curse of Ham," etc.The determining factor between a religion-crazed homicidal zealot and a devoted follower of a faith who is still able to function in a society with people of different faiths is still the person, not the instructions of the religion. The anti-abortion terrorists have decided that murdering doctors saves the lives and souls of many more. Islamic terrorists have decided that Western decadence is a threat to the moral fiber of humanity, and that violence is an acceptable means of combating it. Fortunately the vast majority of both Christians and Muslims don't believe that violence is the answer.Don't forget, Bush Jr. believed that invading Iraq was a mandate from God. He most definitely qualifies as a violent fundamentalist aggressor - it's the American equivalent of Iran invading Israel because Amediniwhatsit thinks Allah told him to. That's a laugh, Buz. Secularism and Atheism don;t even have any dictates to encourage violence. Or nonviolence. Or anything else, since there are no dictates whatsoever - atheism is simply a lack of belief in a deity. And China isn't an Atheist nation. Represented by an extreme minority of Muslims. Except for the Christians who actively desire the initiation of open and possibly nuclear warfare in the holy land. And the fundies who think we should just "rape the planet" (to use Ann Coulter's words) because Jesus is coming soon anyway. Read more about the founding fathers, Buz. Jefferson and others were hardly fundamentalist Christians - you'd run them right out of your church. Remember, Jefferson published a version of the Bible with all of the "magic" removed. Freedom of speech does not mean that speech expressed freely cannot be harmful or wrong, Buz. Some of the groups Granny mentioned are actifely fomenting violence and hatred. You bring up the Black Panthers, but Granny is talking about the modern militia movement. These are the crazt fundamentalist anti-government reactionary loons that include Timothy McVeigh, the OK City bomber. Their hatred and readiness to commit violent acts threatens a peaceful and just world. They also owned slaves, Buz. The Foundign Fathers were not gods. They weren;t perfect. And they weren;t a monolithic group that always agreed, either.But let's draw your attention to the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by the US Congress in 1797:

quote:

---

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;

---

Next, let me point out the actual-factual words of Thomas Jefferson himself, one of the very Founding Fathers you pretend were fundamentalist Christians:

quote:

---

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

---

Clearly, the Founders did intend a barrier between church and state, to protect both the state and all religions from each other's influence. It's ironic - the separation of church and state is what guarantees that your church can never be outlawed by the state, that your kids will never have to pray to Allah in school. Yet you pretend it;s a bad thing because it also prevents you from using government authority to force your beliefs onto everybody else. What did Lincoln have to do with McCarthy?And of course Lincoln was a Republican. The Republicans were the liberal party of the time - they shifted to the right some time later. Things change over time, Buz. And Ann Coulter says we should convert all Muslims to Christianity and kill the rest. You're boring me, Buz. Opposition to forcing Christian beliefs into public classrooms attended by non-Christian children is hate speech?I love Christian claims of hate speech. Every time they get stopped from breaching other people's rights, they screech about how it's actually their rights that have been violated, as if Christians have some right to teach their Creationist hubbidyboo to my kids in a public school.Preventing Group A from oppressing Group B is not oppression of Group A, Buz. Even if you're a member of Group A. Uganda is also about to institute a new law that would make the first count of homosexual activity punishable by life in prison, with the second count carrying the death penalty. Being infected with HIV/AIDS would also be considered a violation of homosexual activity (regardless of the fact that it spreads just fine through heterosexual populations) and carry the death penalty as well. This law was encouraged by American Congressmen who are members of "The Family," a conservative fundamentalist Christian organization.That has nothing to do with any civil war. It's just Christians actually seeking to execute those whom they consider to be "abominations before God." With legal authority. This, of course, is what happens when you don;t have a separation between church and state.

I just read the article the other day. sourcenow THAT i shate speech.

---

Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people
-Carl SaganFor me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
-Carl Sagan

We agree on one thing. But that's about it. Are you actually saying that Tiller's murder was insignificant? Why don't you go and tell his wife that? I'm sure it will be a big comfort to her. Oh, I get it; Tiller's murder never happened! You are losing it mate.You seem to be trying to fall back upon "the fundamentals of NT Christianity" as your saving grace here, as a buzzword that will get you out of this hole. In reality you are simply using the same NTS fallacy in different garb.The killer was a Christian convert, converted by right-wing Christian anti-abortion groups and, on the basis of his new found faith, he went and shot a man dead. Those are all facts Buz. Take comfort in your fantasy world if you like Buz. If you were actually bothering to read what I say, you would realise that I never said it did. You asked not for terrorist threats, but "What worries you about extremist fundi Christians?". Now you move the goalposts. Shame on you Buz. Pathetic. If you need the Establishment Clause explaining to you at your age, you really aren't much of an American patriot. Know your Constitution! Yes, I think you must. Care to try that again with some backing? I'd be particularly interested to see your evidence for the hymnal claim. Names, dates and places please Buz. Barton is an ideologue, trying to turn public education in to his own indoctrination service.As for your request for Bartonian falsehoods, I will offer this for now; "if they get their way, textbooks will paint slavery as a relic of British colonialism that America struggled to cast off from day one and refer to our economic system as ethical capitalism.". The slavery nonsense should be obvious enough, but the "ethical capitalism" gag is just hilarious. Economics 101; the USA, like almost all nations, is a mixed economy. Barton is either trying to hide the public aspects of US society, or he is simply pig-ignorant. Possibly both. No, you need not, mostly because it's irrelevant. Either you agree with statement "slavery {was} a relic of British colonialism that America struggled to cast off from day one" or you do not. Do you agree with this statement? Or is Barton wrong? This is especially amusing, given your final comment, but we'll get to that in a moment... [/rant]Barton's point here is not entirely spurious; the Quran was used to justify Barbary piracy. However, the overtly politicised tone of descriptions such as "the original war on Islamic terror" are hyperbole and clearly designed as propaganda for current political factions, rather than the neutral academic tone that is expected of textbooks. These are textbooks we're talking about, not a venue for sloganeering. If Barton were to describe the Barbary wars as Islamic terrorism in a political pamphlet or something, i would have no problem with it. In a textbook, one should present the facts and let the reader draw their own political conclusions. to do otherwise is simply indoctrination.Your response also bears a disturbing attitude, one that you often display. You are portraying all Muslims as one giant homogenised monolithic entity, regardless of any difference in view, behaviour or even (bizarrely) time period. This is obviously inane. I have been careful to draw distinction between fundy and moderate Christians. You would do well to apply the same to Muslims. Oh dear. one moment you're extolling free speech, the next you're accusing me of hate speech. I suggest you go and look up the word "hypocrite". Ha! you really are priceless!Do YOU read before you post Buz? I doubt it. Only a simpleton could possibly imagine that your response had something to do with what I posted. You say "Uganda is engaged in civil war among factions"; I'm talking about the bill to execute homosexuals Buz! Are you actually insane enough to believe that Uganda is at war with homosexuals? Do you imagine that there are gay terror groups hiding out in the mountains? Or did you not actually read my post? Or are you actually so astonishingly dense that you are unable to tell the difference between an armed military faction and ordinary homosexual Ugandans (and their friends and family, who might also face execution if the bill passes)?The proposed bill in Uganda not only stipulates execution for homosexuals, but imprisonment for those who "aid and abet" them, i.e. anyone who fails to betray their homosexual friend or family member to the police, so that they might be executed.This bill was directly inspired by American Christian fundamentalists, who held anti-gay conferences in Uganda. But of course, if you had bothered to actually read what I posted, you would already know that...Mutate and SurviveEdited by Granny Magda, : I overstated the excesses of the Ugandan bill. Fixed now.

---

"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod

Well, in Palestine they have the terrorist organization called, "Hamas". Perhaps, in Uganda they have a terrorist organization called, "Homos".

I was tryin to be sarcastic/ironic.I/We know that Americans are no more like that than Brits are bowler hat, pin stripe suit wearing gents who eat fish and chips followed by boiled beef every day whilst out shooting pheasants and shouting "Tally ho" in Hugh Grant type accents.But stereotypes serve a useful purpose. Even if it is only to those of us who (tragically and wrongly as it happens) consider ourselves comediens of sorts.

Heh! The Pink Brigades?Mutate and Survive

Lebanon Gay Terrorist Group: His'ball'ahhh

Roving bands of Gay Banditos, actually.

Rahvin,Damn, I can't get Youtube at work. Thanks for playing anyway.How about: Popular Front, Top, and Bottoms for the Liberation of Palestine

You forgot the beach shorts with the black dress socks on - or are those Germany tourist? I can't tell you guys apart.That's always a classic. - Oni

Hooah, I'm assuming by some of what you have posted that you are in the mid 30's or so agewise. I was born in 1935. LOL. When I was in school out in rural Wyoming, a slim majority of my classmates were professing Christians. The majority of the town fathers were not professing Christians. In the 1950s during my four years in the USAF, I was one of the slim majority of professing Christians. By then, baby, we'd gone a long way down the slippery slope from the time of our founders. By the 1960, before your were likely even born, we pretty much lost it, so far as a Christian mindset in government and on the streets of our towns and cities.So what you see, Hooah, is what we've gotten from the largely secularist powers that be. The majority of professing Christians in America who even have a clue of what the NT teaches, for the most part, consider the fundamentals of Jesus and his apostles who wrote the NT as irrevalent, archaic and radical.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Unfortunately, they are the ones who are trying to turn this country into a Theocracy with their irrevalent, archaic and radical views.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

Speak for yourself!

Hi Bluescat. Such as, for example? I'm surprised. I thought that you thought that it was us Biblio-Christo-fundis who were the irrevalent, archaic radicals.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.