The church should be able to set almost any rules they want for their church
Yes, but we needn't respect them for their actions. A forty plus member church votes 9-6 to boot the interracial couple. What were the other members doing during this farce. Where were the family's supposed friends?
I know the original pastor is gone, but there's no way that this is the only screwy doctrine the church practices.
I'm not sure why you are surprised at this. I though it was well known that racism is deeply entrenched in southern conservative "christianity".
At about 1:30 or so you can see a ghost in the background.
At around 1:40 there appeared to be a white statue that was out of focus and in the direct sun (i.e. too bright, compared to the person being interviewed).
Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
I'm not sure why you are surprised at this. I though it was well known that racism is deeply entrenched in southern conservative "christianity".
What makes you think those folks represent conservatism?
They may claim it, but, like many of their other claims, that doesn't make it so.
Socons are far closer to statists than conservatives. They want to use the power of the state to enforce their beliefs to the detriment to all other beliefs.
To my way of thinking that is not conservative. I see conservatives as espousing individual liberties and limited government. That's not what socons are looking for at all.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
but you should very actively support their right to have what you think are screwy doctrines.
No, I don't have to do any such thing. Yes, they have the right to do anything they want, but unless they are being threatened in some way, I don't have to actively do anything to support them.
The current pastor is not in favor of their policies and wants to change them. In your opinion, should I support him or should I try to convince the church to fire him?
I see conservatives as espousing individual liberties and limited government.
I have to admit to being baffled by this line of thinking. I understand that you consider yourself to be conservative in a way distinct from social conservatives and neocons, but what is socially conservative about racism? I though racism was just ignorant.
Racists are only considered conservative because large numbers of them profess to hold other conservative values and because the more conservative major party doesn't seem to find it all that important to distance themselves from them.
The social conservatives were democrats until Nixon picked them up as part of his southern strategy. The racism simply came along for the ride.
That doesn't make them either conservative or in favor of small government and individual liberties. To me those are hallmarks of conservatism. Statism is the exact opposite.
The socons would rule the country with their values enforced by law if they could get away with it, and that is statism. I have no use for it.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
That doesn't make them either conservative or in favor of small government and individual liberties.
It's pretty easy to cast racism as being in favor of small federal government and individual liberty to associate and hate whoever you want. And in fact that's exactly how those southern Democrats did characterize it. Racists don't want laws to enforce their values, they'd be just fine with laws interfering with racism (e.g. 1964 civil rights act Brown v. Board of Education) being removed.
The socons would rule the country with their values enforced by law if they could get away with it, and that is statism. I have no use for it.
A quite reasonable sentiment. But it seems to me that you must find it quite difficult to identify any Coyote conservatives.
™ Version 4.2
(1)