QUICK LINKS
Presidential Election May Hinge on Born Again Voters
The Barna Research Group is saying that, according to their research data, born again voters will cast about half of all ballots in the next presidential election.
They define a “born again” believer as someone who has a personal commitment to Christ and say they will go to heaven when they die.
While most “born again” voters are Republican, not all are. In fact, according to the Barna Group, there is a growing number of Democrats now stepping forward identifying themselves as “born again” and they said they plan to vote their values as well.
This will be very interesting in the upcoming elections leading up to the presidential election in 2008. Barna says that candidates must understand and reflect the faith of values voters if they want to connect.
When a half-dozen or so of us met privately with John McCain earlier this year, my question to him was, “Do you feel you understand the issues that are most important to those of us in the faith community? And if so, do you support them?”
He said he felt he did understand and felt he did agree, with the exception of embryonic stem cell research. He supports that. And that is big to us.
Please understand, I am not suggesting that I support McCain or not. Frankly, I’m probably where you are; looking at all the candidates trying to figure out who they really are and if they would make a good President.
It will be important for all of us, as well move forward, to make every attempt to know as much as possible about each candidate, not only the presidential candidates, but those running for local government as well.
Faith & Freedom is committing to a new and accelerated level of education both through this website and through local statewide meetings.
David Kinnaman, president of the Barna Group, said, “You can’t just misrepresent yourself to get votes. Candidates must understand the heartbeat, the passion, the commitments, the values, the interests, the lifestyles of people of faith, because they represent such a huge segment of the voting population. They cannot be ignored.”
And we won’t be ignored. I believe God has called many of us for such a time as this.
_________________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.
42 Comments:
Gary said:
And we won’t be ignored. I believe God has called many of us for such a time as this.
Human says:
Amen and amen!!
There are 7,000 who have not bowed their knee to the right-wing Baalim. Father, make them strong with truth, honesty and integrity and love towards all men.
Human is really strange. He sounds more and more like a Jehovah's Witness. 7,000. LOL
human sounds like a meth head
Wow, I think is a record for how quickly a thread can devolve into anonymous Christianists launching personal attacks on Human. Well, done my little brownshirts!
-FFN Staff (posting anonymously so's we can attack peoeple we disagree with)
Spoken like only Human/Vishanti can.
Gary,
We do need to discern what a person means when they say they are "born again". The Bible does not tell us we must declare we are "born again"; but to confess Jesus is Lord.
That said, we need to go further and define what "Jesus is Lord" totally means. There are many who will come in Jesus name and are imposters! People will believe them, though, so will be deceived.
The Jesus we are to believe in has many declarations in the Bible as to who he is. Both Old Testament and New Testament give specifics about who Jesus is. If we do not accept these criteria, we are not "born again". This is not legalism but discernment. For instance, Jesus was predicted in the Old Testament that he would be born of a virgin. The New Testament comfirms this.
The Scriptures demand and declare that Christ is Himself God. The Christ of God must die on a cross as a substitutionary sacrifice for the sins of men. The Christ of God must rise from the dead on the third day. The Christ of God must ascend into heaven and sit on the right hand of God as our great High Priest ever living. The Christ of God who lives in heaven in His bodily capacity also lives now on earth in His people by the Holy Spirit. The Christ of God must come again in like manner as He went into heaven. So, every spirit that confesses that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ of God thus described in the Scriptures of God is himself a teacher come from God.
The key is, we must discern who the "Jesus" is that a person claims their "new birth". I am afraid a lot of people are coming to the claim of "religion" because they FEEL this will make them more saleable politically! You know,how "Hollywood" realized that to make "Christian" movies could well be profitable!
Again, two questions:
1) If you were to die tonight do you know for a fact that you would go to heaven?
2) If you were to die tonight and go before God and he asked you, "Why should I let you in my heaven?" What would you answer?
Anon 2:17,
I appreciate your setting some requirements.
What about the requirement of "integrity" and "honesty"??
I would like you to read Gary's Blog re: the ACLU (a couple blogs back) in conjunction with the linked actual ACLU letter. Please tell me if you think that Gary's representation of the ACLU letter is even close to what the ACLU letter in fact stated.
"Jehovah hates a false weight".
My other question with your high set of requirements to be saved is - what about the ignorant and illiterate, the children throughout history (remember that most people were illiterate and did not have a Bible or a nice set of Bible Studies from the local Christian bookstore). These people came to Jesus in simple faith without any familiarity of the 2,000 years of theological development. When I read of those being saved in Acts, it seems a very simple, contrite act before the person of Jesus without knowing all the details about Him except that He is a person who existed, died for them and is now alive.
Peace,
In Christ,
Human
Anon 2:17: I probably couldn't answer your questions in a way that would meet the definition of "born again", but as a faithful Catholic I stand in solidarity with you on all of these important issues. Our Lord is working through His mystical body (all of us) to defeat the culture of death. Thanks be to God!
Human, If Gary was trying to distort the action or intent of the ACLU, why would he post the link to the letter, thus suggesting that people read the actual letter. Actually I find Gary much more open than many of you. He says what he thinks. He keeps this site open for comment even to people like you, and goes by his real name.
Neither you nor I can match that.
I really think you should start your own website and display the same openness and fairness that Gary shows to you and others like you on a sight that is supported by those of us who contribute to Faith and Freedom.
If it were up to me, you would be history.
As far as Randall and FFN being "open" to dissenting views and persons, I'll give them credit as far as the comments section on this blog.
As far as their attitude toward those persons and their views the only way they could be more closed minded is to actually delete such comments.
Randall has regularly misrepresented the facts in his posts, and refuses to respond challenges to his arguments, at least under his name (to engage a a bit of speculation), and instead moves on to the next topic.
That, I suppose, is one way to be infallible.
Just take this post, Randall bases his the entirety of his argument that conservative (and I would argue, theocratic) Christians are a growing power in American politics, on the research of a conservative Christian organization and ministry.
The Barna Group fairly up front about its bias in its mission statment, "The ultimate aim of the firm is to partner with Christian ministries and individuals to be a catalyst in moral and spiritual transformation in the United States."
Randall seems to forget this little fact in citing Barna's research. He does however more accurately represent the results of the "study" than the one commission by his organization in a post last week.
In that post Randall fully, and I think intentionally, mislead readers by saying that a majority of WA State residents do not support domestic partners or gay marriage. The results of their own study contradict that assertion.
It all comes down the political needs of FFN's agenda, and not the facts.
Vishtur.
The only guy I know who uses the words Christianists . Smoking the flower yourself lately ?
He believes homos are sinners And you believe Christians are bigots , but a thread devolves when Human is attacked ? He promotes drugs , thinks gays are all going to hell , and loves you Vishtur.
----------------------------
Human or Vishtur said
I think is a record for how quickly a thread can devolve into anonymous Christianists launching personal attacks on Human. Well, done my little brownshirts!
-FFN Staff (posting anonymously so's we can attack peoeple we disagree with)
Andrew
You might keep in mind that Fuieten, not Randall wrote the analysis of the Elway poll you refer to.
ou might keep in mind that Fuieten, not Randall wrote the analysis of the Elway poll you refer to.
But he is responsible for the accuracy of any information he presents, at least that's what I was taught in Sunday school. A Christian is proscribed from not just overtly lying but half-truths, innuendoes, and other forms of gossip - same things as lying.
As to the term 'Christianists' you need to get out more - many people are using it to differentiate between those that 'walk the walk' and those that just 'talk the talk' with the mentioned inaccurate poll presentation a good illustration of the difference between the 2 approaches.
I have noticed a strong focus on the word "lying" attributed to "Christians", particularly, Gary.
I would say that the word "lying" (and any other accusations like that) are coming from each person's POINT OF VIEW. For OV and Human especially it appears they FEEL they have the purest form of anything - from their point of view.
What is a person's intent? What is a person's total thought? Sometimes when only a few words are used, some people will get the impression that what that person just said is false! A silly example: one person who picks up a 50 lb rock may say, "Boy, that is light!" Another person takes a look at this rock and THINKS that it sure looks heavy not light so the first person must be lying. The second person may or may not try picking up the rock to prove the "lie". Was the first person "lying"? Not necessarily. He may have been very strong and to him, it seems light. (Ask a UPS delevery person!) Maybe it is the shape of the rock that makes it awkward to pick up and seems to "add" to the weight.
If the second person does pick up the rock he now will assess the lightness/heavyness based on his own perception and ability. See, the whole situation is based on each person's point of view. It does not mean either one is lying although one or the other may FEEL the other is lying.
The other example is, say, four people witnessing a football game. Each person may be more interested in one aspect over any other. If you asked each person about the ball game, you might get four different answers to your question. They might not even agree on the final score! Who is right and who is wrong (lying) from,especially, a legalistic point of view?
What that tells me is, what is the motive of anyone? Is your glass "half full" or "half empty"! Is the sky falling or is it just a pea that fell on your head! Point of view and perception.
Human,
Yes, I do grasp what Gary is saying as true. In reading the ACLU letter, they are trying to foist their agenda rather than accept the teaching of abstinence. It is known that the ACLU is a very liberal organization so what (from their point of view) would you expect them to declare?
You view the "standards" I relate to be "saved", are too high! And what about the "ignorant and illiterate" and the children from history. The Bible does say in Romans 1:19-20, that God has made known about God what is plain to see. That since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities have been clearly seen so that men are without excuse. God will "judge" based on any person's awareness of him in any time of history.
We are now in the "church" dispensation or segment of history. We do have God's Word made flesh and also recorded in "The Bible". (even with the many versions of the Bible available now days, there is the common thread of what God is about.)
Yes, in Acts and the early Church, as the Church was being established, the "requirements" were simple; but, they were required to "grow" and some dis and some didn't. They did have many miracles and events that established God's desire for ALL people to come to him, not just the Jews as was understood since they are God's "chosen" people from which His "Savior" would come out of. There were those who were not Jews that also accepted by faith the God-provision that would come.
So, with the richness of God's mercy during this Church dispensation which requires any who come to God to come through faith in God's gift, Jesus (of Nazareth etc.) as Jesus himself prayed in John 17:20-21, "My prayer is not for them (his diciples) alone, I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me."
It is sad that here Jesus is praying that all who believe will be "one, just as you are in me and I am in you" There is so much dissention among those who CLAIM to be "Christians", that it is hard for the world to see the "oneness"! What is wrong! A simple answer is that maybe all who call themselves "Christian" may not really be Christian!
High set of requirements? Maybe with the witness of God, the Word (written and alive in Jesus) and the Holy Spirit that is available in this dispensation, the "requirements" are more fine tuned! See, each dispensation has different elements. We do not have the "miracles" the same as was evident during Jesus time on earth and during the establishment of the "Church". Those miracles have been withdrawn. Not that there are no miracles experienced today as there are, at the discretion of God himself. But, we have the Holy Spirit living within each true Christian. Yes, sometimes, the "natural man" (as long as we are still in this earthly body) of that Christian rears its ugly head and if one witnesses that happening would highly question that person being a Christian at all! What that Christian needs to do is to confess that "natural man" blurt, and ask forgiveness in Jesus name and God WILL forgive! What a savior!
After any person may "simply" accept Jesus as Savior as you state; they MUST grow in Christ to the degree they are able. Otherwise they reamin an infant! We see in the natural world, that if a person is born into this world we do expect growth to occur! We nurture and take care of that baby until that person grows to maturity. If they don't mature, there is something wrong! Please refer to the illustration Jesus gave regarding the seeds sown on the different soils. Only the seeds that fell on the good soil produced a crop. The others did not!
Here is a public example, I believe. There was a great piece of news that Jane Fonda became a Christian! She seemed to "take root"; but, if you check with the Larry King transcripts, she states:
"Interview with Jane Fonda
Aired April 6, 2005 - 21:00 ET
KING: All right. I'm going to tell you something. Not out of school, because Ted Turner said it to me, but he didn't say (UNINTELLIGIBLE). He said -- I said, what happened with Jane? He goes, she's religious! Jane found religion. What's the story?
FONDA: It was little tiny baby steps that were leading me in this direction, and then when Ted brought me to Georgia, I, for the first time, got to know people -- well, you know them, Andy Young, Rosalynn and Jimmy Carter and others, who were people that practice their faith. And I was very interested, and I spent a lot of time thinking about it and reading about it and talking to them. And when I -- when the marriage was collapsing -- it was collapsing anyway -- and I didn't feel Ted and I were on the same team.
Still, it was wrong of me to do this. I became a Christian. I didn't discuss it with him, because I knew that he would talk me out of it. And then when we separated, I began to really study it, and I thought, uh-oh, I don't know. There's a lot of problems I have here with this Christianity. Maybe I've made a mistake. I'm a feminist. But I'm on a journey. I am really studying it, and I'm...
KING: You're not a born again?
FONDA: I don't even know what that means. It is hard to say -- for someone like me to say that they're a Christian because it is so politically loaded and it's so identified with fundamentalism now.
KING: But what does it mean to you? You're not a fundamentalist.
FONDA: To me -- no, to me, feminism and Christianity are very compatible. The teachings of Jesus is, is feminist. What I mean by that is that all people, women as well as men, have to claim their whole humanity, have to open their hearts, have to care about the less-than, have to be generous and forgiving and peace-loving, and -- but he viewed everyone as a whole human being. He never looked down on women. And I have to just stay with that. I have to stay with those teachings and not the ones that say that women were the cause of the downfall of man and all that part.
KING: Do you read your Bible?
FONDA: I read theology. I read biblical history. I read everything from Robert Graves' "King David" to the "Gnostic Gospels" to "The Book of John." I read a lot. I'm on a journey, and it's hard for me to talk about it a lot because it is pretty new."
When I heard she was doing her anti-war protests again, it made me wonder what she is all about. When I read this transcript, I realized the soil she is, is not the "good soil" where there is a harvest. Somewhere along the line she has "aborted"! I am not "judging" her. Her own words are judging her. She is mired in all kinds of her "readings" like 2 Timothy 4:3-4, where it says people will not put up with sound doctrine and instead TO SUIT THEIR OWN DESIRES, they will gather a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. That they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
Regarding children. There is salvation for children up to the age of accountability. That "age" may differ with each individual, God only knows for each person. Because of Jewish "custom", the "age of accountability" is accepted at about 12-13 or the time of bar-mitzvah for boys and bat-mitzvah for girls. So, we can estimate that children, in general, are saved in the Lord up until they are accountable for their own choices. That said, there are children who are very young and have already given themselves over to the "evil one"! So, to state that ALL children are saved until the age of accountability is not necessarily true. God is the judge of all that. It is enough for Christians to teach and display their own faith to their children so that they will make a decision themselves as to the gift of salvation God offers to anyone who will come.
I have noticed other "elements" also understand to teach children their ways! That is why the danger of teaching acceptance of homosexuality to kindergarten children in school is so dangerous! All in the name of "diversity" and "love all people as they are." This is deception - BIG TIME!
This post has been removed by the author.
Oshtur Vishanti said
As to the term 'Christianists' you need to get out more - many people are using it to differentiate between those that 'walk the walk'
Sort of Like Black and Uncle TOM . I see , a non believer makes the distinctions, or when someone disagrees with an opinion and bases their retort by insulting their race . All black people have to walk a certain way , all Christians have to fit your model . Global Warming is going to destroy this earth in 20 years or your a crack head , Bush was behind 911 and the Iranian hostage taking of the Brits . If you don't meet your expectations ,name calling is acceptable ..
Ok , I guess we will not have a discussion then .
Well said Art!
Anon 8:53
I greatly appreciate your intelligent efforts!! Welcome change to be sure.
I don't have a lot of time at the moment would most immediately follow up with this:
a. Jane Fonda - In light of the cultural baggage she comes with, I would not expect too much right away. Give God time - you and I both needed it I am sure!
b. Requirements/Growth - I basically agree with all your points - these were my points. We don't want to set an artificial standard but let God set the standard depending on the age, maturity, dispensation, etc., etc. Your orignal requirements seem inflexible but I believe your amplification brings our prespectives into harmony with mine.
c. ACLU - Did the ACLU state that teaching abstinence was acceptable or not? That is the only question. As I read it, the point they made was the nature of the abstinence teaching not that it should not be taught. This is diametrically opposed to Gary's representation.
FYI - because of the right wing church I was in, I began hating the ACLU without any real knowledge of it except the indoctrination that I was spoon fed. Granted, as any organization, they do not always make the best decisions - it is a very diverse rather than singular organization so what one part does does not necessarily reflect what all parts support.
However, as I studied the organization, I fund that its entire focus is on maintaining our constitutional freedoms. While imperfect, it is quite in contrast to the Evangelical Religious Right which is often focused on crushing our civil liberties and oppressing America with their anti-Christ philosophy.
You seem like you would be objective; therefore, I encourage you to let go of the knee-jerk hatred and see them for what they are (same with the public school system, etc.).
Yours,
In Christ,
Human
Human says:
" because of the right wing church I was in, I began hating the ACLU without any real knowledge of it except the indoctrination that I was spoon fed. "
Well that is strange Human/Vishanti. You said you go to Mars Hill. Guess you didn't know it is a right wing church!
Now isn't that just odd?
And isn't it equally odd that churches don't even talk about this stuff?
You really haven't a clue about you are talking about.
Human asks:
"what about the ignorant and illiterate, the children throughout history (remember that most people were illiterate and did not have a Bible or a nice set of Bible Studies from the local Christian bookstore). "
A Chrisitan of 30 years (as you claim you are) would know the answer to this.
Art says:
"I guess we will not have a discussion then"
There have been some nice FFN opponents with whom dialogue was possible. Vishanti/Human is not one of them. He has no interest in what you say--only forcing himself on people who don't think llke him.
Religion is decribed as superstition .
Traditional Beliefs as bigotry
Christians as Christianists
Yes Mick you've made your point of view very clear - everyone has to pretend you are right and only your point of view is correct.
Most religions ARE superstitions based solely on the definition of 'superstition'. Why is it intolerant for me to express that I am not superstitious? I fully acknowledge your right to be so if you so choose.
And 'traditional belief' is only bigotry when those holding think that they can tell others how they are supposed to live their lives. Again, you can live yours as you choose - don't eat shrimp, don't wear two fibered cloth, whatever. The difference once again is you don't want others to be able to live their lives other than by your rules.
And differentiating between people who actually follow the teachings of Jesus and those that merely claim then name 'Christian' - again, how is that intolerant other than you would like to pretend there aren't radically different kinds of followers of Jesus?
Why is it you can't tolerate others but you get all huffy when they even suggest your's isn't the only way to look at things?
And you wonder why the term 'hypocrisy' keeps cropping up...
Sort of Like Black and Uncle TOM .
You don't think that was a useful term? A person who genuflected to the enemies of his group? Interesting - there were many black people who were 'uncle toms' in that regard -and fortunately the world went on in-spite of them. Would you just prefer a different term or do you think people like that don't/didn't exist?
There are people who call themselves Christian who don't follow the teachings of the Gospels - you don't think its fair to differentiate them from people that do?
Oh and you did notice how you gunny sacked a number of totally unrelated topics into one as if they were somehow linked. Do you really think they are or was that just a rant?
At 1:15 PM, April 04, 2007, Anonymous said...
There have been some nice FFN opponents with whom dialogue was possible. Vishanti/Human is not one of them.
Thanks 115 I got that . A friend of mine was called an Uncle Tom once for defending pro life issues. Did not represent the right political party because of it .
Some people use the N word when it is referenced to uppity blacks because they deserve it too . Ann Coulter , whooo , will not go there .. Just a different culture I guess. My Mother use to tell me that name calling was a lack of an ability to communicate your real thoughts . I guess I still think my Mom was right .
Does he go way ? Even after you made it clear you don't talk to name callers . I won't from either side . Why so many anoms ?
This post has been removed by the author.
You do this to your husband , no wonder you have so much spare time to harrass others . I bet he pays for your internet
Can I quote you ? That was good ..;0)
Mick,
I appreciate your frustration with OV. However, I am curious, is this how Jesus responded to His frustrations with the common man? Remember OT is not one of the religious fascists Jews that Jesus routinely skewered (or even one of His disciples who He occasionally skewered).
BTW - the reason why some of us who have the ministry of exposing the Evangelical Right do not expose ourselves is because it is not yet our time. I know that you understand that concept. In light of Saint Calvin - a murdering, terrorist as anyone who has read about his life knows, is that this same spirit is alive and sick in the ERR. I know that it is not necessarily in every person but it is very apparent even on this site and certainly in ERR promulgation. Hence, "violence as the solution" is a frequent policy in the good ol' USA.
Peace,
In Him
Human
Actually a chair from PFLAG that is a good friend of mine thinks your style is fairly pathetic .
Well I doubt they got a real understanding of the issue. I bothered to go back and read our first notes - mine were generic opinions but yours:
"You have little knowledge or compassion for the kids in this situation"
"So bad behavior is rationalized to be accepted behavior . Lying is acceptable when done for the right reasons , sex out of mariage is just a choice with no consequences , stealing from a corporation is justified , and hatred of Christians ,or any group is acceptable because "some" Christians say bad things or some other people in a group have done something wrong to another group of people . "
"Perversion being celebrated as diversity"
"I have no idea of the things you refer to as discriminatory except you hate me"
"someone maybe like you , who could not give two flips about that child"
"Are you crazy , have no knowledge ."
And on and on and on. And scanning for your signature 'space before a period or comma' consistently pops up some of the meanest of the 'anonymous' messages.
Mick you have been playing the victim since day one, putting words into people's mouths, and generally been the one on personal attack since your arrival at the blog. And then you complain when you provoke someone to respond in kind to you - haven't we all seen this kind of thing before? Do you really think it fools anyone who is actually reading your posts?
I don't know what has done this number on you to end up this way but something is terribly wrong. You really need to get some help from someone. Quite living as a victim, get some help, and your life will get so much better.
Human I hope you can accept this .
First you have no authority by Christ to look into the motives of God's annointed . God is not using you to expose the leaders in the church .. Its not your job .It goes against scripture my friend to believe it is .. God does not use us that way .. ..
Remember King Saul and David . God put David under Saul, Saul was David's mentor . God put him in that position . Trust God my friend .. Think how hurt David was when he proved to old Saul that he could had nailed his butt, remember . Saul did not care , he kept coming after him anyway . Saul made the Baptists look cub scouts , even to your perceptions .
What did David do , he had the dude who took Saul's Life and had him executed . I myself might have given the guy a medal . After all Saul and 3000 guys were trying to kill David for a few years .. David never responded in the way you do Human .. if david did not respons like you , what makes you think God has a calling on your life to do his will ?
David never did anything but honor who God had put in charge , he allowed God to handle it .. Did he not . God took care of Saul , and David was a better man for trusting in God . But that is those in leadership in the Church . God does have a way of taking them down in his own time .
Now you have insulted many people on this sight , you use words that if used in your Home Church, Mars Hill, a Bible believing Church , would cause you most likely to loose your membership . I know you know that , and I kniow you do not speak to the people like you do here under cover .
I am not talking about leadership , I am talking about your brothers and sisters In Christ . The Lord is your Savior , you say you have confessed him . Then we are your brothers and sisters . We are related .
I know you do not talk to people who you know face to face in the manner you do to us .
What does the Bible teach , a Brother OFFENDED is harder to win then a strong city , and contentions are like the bars of a castle.
These are brothers In Christ on this web , you have called them racist, stereotyped their denominations , and you know not their names , their hearts , or what place they are in their walk with God . You also have assumed God does not want them in the churches they attend . Trust God Human to put people where He wants them .. Perhaps their calling is to make them better . Would you want them to go elsewhere ?
I say this as a brother .. I apologize for offending you . Offence is the tool of the devil my friend . Love of Christ is unconditional.
Wolves always go for the weak sheep Human , not the healthy ones . I know those who provide the Fruit of the Spirit by the ones who exhort one another . I know I need it from time to time .. There are those who I know support one another because of Christ , I know they love God , they love one another and show that love .
My friend Human , you do not show that ..
THE LORD IS HERE RIGHT NOW . PLEASE CONSIDER THAT HE HAS ALREADY BEEN DEALING WITH ME , AND HAS GIVEN ME THE OLD SPANKING .
Ohstur
Actually just your defence of using words bigot to describe the people who believe homosexual marriage was in the best interest of our nation was enough to put you in a bad light on the diversity scale with her . I am aces might I add , from her lsitening to me defend people I don't agree with I believe . Or maybe she just thinks people from NJ need all the friends they can get .
My friend is big on that diversity deal . Actually I share that , we use different lingo , but we love all the different colors and cultures God has created . I guess we are museum types in the human world . . Actually one of the few liberals I can say I admire and will stand up for all of us . A better person then I . A friend .
. Still wonder if you talk to the democrats like that in this state . I can see you , Can I speak with Mr Murray the bigot please , whats the deal with you democrats , where is my marriage bill . Whats the going rate for hate per hour these days ? I believe you deserve a raise . But the extra hours must really get to you .
Now on to Diversity 101
Uncle Tom is a derogatory method of racism that assumes a person has to think the way a "race" does . What's next , a homosexual who votes republican is a sissy sue , . Would you also have a problem with a homosexual who believed in wanting less taxes and government out of his life called a name that ridiculed his sexuality because he shared my conservative view point . Or who had no interest in marriage or looked as your view as the one that was forcing itself on others .
You know , some actually consider your the one forcing your views .
Sort of separation of oshtur and state thinking .
Whats worse , what happens if a gay person wanted to try to go straight because of his religion . . Is that a sissy sue ?
What happens if he goes straight , but has a belief and concern for those who can't , and supports homosexual Marriage . Now is he a sissy sue but not a bigot ? Can he or her still be friends with me ?
I know people like that , I have met them . Sang with them , prayed with them , and I can't figure out when they are bigots , or just people doing the best they can . In fact from my superstitious perspective , they are just people trying to the best they can with the chips they given to them .
The fact that a person deserves dignity regardless if he wants to go straight or stay gay has no meaning for you does it . That a person deserves dignity and respect regardless if they agree with me or you has no meaning for you .The KKK thought that blacks were dumb , and you believe blacks who do not measure up to their race should be called Uncle Toms . I guess you consider yourself not a racist either ? Because I believe I was taught that people who expect a certain race to think in a certain way is racist.
Is Uncle Tom's name calling only allowed when it passes the Uncle Tom name calling special police test .. Who decides this by the way ? What happens if someone makes a mistake , do they get a written apology , a yearly membership to the NAACP , a watermellon . What does a black person have to do to be black for you .
Somehow I have identified no examples here where I am the victim , in all the cases your the victim .
How could you have real friends ? People have to meet your conditions to be respected , Oshtur , people need to be respected inspite of themselves . Don't you know that ?
If we only respected people who deserved it , you would be the only person on this earth who would deserve it . The rest of us don't my friend .
Sorry about the victim crap .and anger . I was wrong ..
I am beyond help ,but I believe you have potential .. Why are you wasting it ?
You could at least have used your ability with the english language to possiblly brak some walls down .. Shhesh . you build them higher .
..
"
Actually just your defence of using words bigot to describe the people who believe homosexual marriage was in the best interest of our nation was enough to put you in a bad light on the diversity scale with her
See I knew you had lied to her.
Would you also have a problem with a homosexual who believed in wanting less taxes and government out of his life called a name that ridiculed his sexuality because he shared my conservative view point
Of course not, but that wouldn't be what an 'uncle tom' gay was. Such a gay would be one that basically said the homophobes were right.
Or who had no interest in marriage or looked as your view as the one that was forcing itself on others.
But that was the whole point of 'Uncle Tom' (you have read the book right?) He said that they shouldn't make waves, that they should just remain slaves and that they didn't deserve equal rights.
Whats worse , what happens if a gay person wanted to try to go straight because of his religion . . Is that a sissy sue ?
Can honestly say I have never even heard that term before. But as you know from my notes I think there are a few people who are acting in homosexual ways that can change or were really straight to begin with just as there are even more who got involved in the straight lifestyle when they were really gay. As the study I discussed illustrates though for most who think they have changed they really haven't - they are deceiving themselves and by claiming it deceiving others. That's an issue that needs to be addressed during any such discussion too.
e fact that a person deserves dignity regardless if he wants to go straight or stay gay has no meaning for you does it
Of course it does as I have stated many times and just again illustrates how you can not resist putting words they wouldn't say in other people's mouths.
I would think they should know that the success rate is less than 4% and that many end up just pretending they're straight but if they want to try have at it - just don't think that there's anything wrong with them if they fail in the attempt.
you believe blacks who do not measure up to their race should be called Uncle Toms
Once again words I never said. In that context it would be people the betrayed their race, that said it was inferior, that agreed with the white oppressors in their efforts to marginalize and dominate their race. Hardly not 'measuring up', but then you knew that.
I guess you consider yourself not a racist either
I don't considering the word is Arts - actually its not a word in my functional vocabulary because I've never know anyone that acted that way.
Is Uncle Tom's name calling only allowed when it passes the Uncle Tom name calling special police test
I don't know ask Art.
Somehow I have identified no examples here where I am the victim , in all the cases your the victim .
Yes the inability to be introspective is a problem. If you bother to read your notes they are full of how you perceive equal treatment as 'attacks'.
If we only respected people who deserved it , you would be the only person on this earth who would deserve it . The rest of us don't my friend .
See? Even though I posted your disrespectful messages you can't see you have been disrespectful.
You could at least have used your ability with the english language to possiblly brak some walls down .. Shhesh . you build them higher .
Only with those that would never break down the walls to begin with. See Mick, for people you can reach through discussion pointing out that someone writing a blog had been dishonest and deceptive about presenting the facts WOULD make them reconsider their support for that blog writer. Once might be an mistake, twice a couple bad days, but entry after entry no person that could be reached by reason would still support that person.
Gary Randall could grow horns and a tail and most of his supporters you find on this board would still support him because they aren't motivated by truth or good or 'Judeo Chrisitian values' at all.
This post has been removed by the author.
And Vishtur you totally missed the point .
.
This regarding to homosexuals or people who were just living that life style who have gone straight .
Maybe they were just molested or what ever , thought they were gay , and because of a religious belief system , or just a wish to have a marriage with a family , or whatever reason tried to go straight .
I know people who lived homosexual life styles , and are quite happy now .
Some of those folks may be for gay marriage , some may be against it .
I agreed with you that the ones who can't succeed in going straight are no less deserving of dignity .
.
Had a good discussion with some of the brothers about that , some felt left out at church and left out in the homosexual community . They were lepers in both worlds .
This would mean you would have to understand that even the homosexual community , especially the leadership and those on this sight , are hypocrits dealing with tolerance and diversity . Ibelieve you missed the point again , if the folks were using their going straight as apolitical message , yeah anaylize their joy , I was talking more about you meeting them next door , at your job . Your view that I am a theocrat is just that , your view. Actually politics or political power has nothing to do with a person's joy . I commend those who are active , wish more Christians were involved , wish more people on both sides quite making points by making their opponents appear smaller . But that has always been the case , its why G Washington spoke about politcal parties and the danger they are . Smart guy for a slave owner actually .
Is that possible with you / Or is that like you loosing a debate to just understand that some homosexual activists are as im perfect as some Christian activists ?
If this is not the case , is it then a leap of logic to reconsider some of your ways of at least interacting with me ?
Leave out the name calling . And I promise I will .
If not I promise not to call you names at all . < excuse me but I feel like I am 5 . This is very humbling . So you do not have to even comply . But I have to either way .
I admit I may have to totally just ignore your comments . Rather ignore you then make you feel like a poop head .
But if you dare go into inthis unchartered territory .
If one calls the other a name , we will have to write a blog complimenting Human's wisdom and Love for his fellow man . Or some other severe punishment that could be thought of .
Not insulting Human may take me longer , but I am working on that too .
What could this do , could one day I take a person to task who insulted your opinion using homosexuality as a method of attack , you actually taking a liberal to task for using my religion as a means to insult my use of gramar . Could mutual repsect , even friendship be possible ?
Deal ?
It would be fine with me but to do it you are going to have to stop putting words in other people's mouths and I think that will be hard for you. Look how many times you told me how I felt and what I thought in just these last two messages.
And I think one of the key points of this debate is that there are people who think that only their religious perspective should be seen or heard so much of the contention is over religion - how could it just be ignored? Should I be required to give someone a 'pass' on their beliefs when they don't respect the beliefs of others?
Your suggestion sounds good on paper though...
Mick,
I appreciate you reaching out to me. I have reached out to you in the past. I accept your hand of peace.
The only condition to walk with me as I walk in Christ is integrity. But I will extend my peace to you regardless.
I do not believe I have offended you in anyway though I have been offended by you several times and I appreciate and accept your apology and repentance and thank our Father for dealing with you - as He has dealt with me in response to a couple of your former reproves. However, if I have behaved inappropriately toward you, please point it out and I will come before the Lord for repentance.
I sense that your deepest heart is toward the Lord and I am willing to meet you in this regard.
Peace,
In Him
Human
Vishtur ,
Cool ..
No , you never have to give someone a pass . This will be hard for you too I see.
Sometimes religious people can be as stubborn and uncompromising as non religious people so I will try and stand up for you when I can . .
That was a joke . But also some truth in there .
Ok , so far so good .
Mick,
I love what you wrote below (and above. I am happy to join with you in the deal. Though I have never called you a name that I know of. I greatly appreciate your movement towards "living in peace with all men". Yes, it is possible - though I was once a rapid right wing religionist, God set me free from that evil spirit. I see now the possibilities of genuinely manifesting Christ are endless
Peace,
In Christ,
Human
Leave out the name calling . And I promise I will .
If not I promise not to call you names at all . < excuse me but I feel like I am 5 . This is very humbling . So you do not have to even comply . But I have to either way .
I admit I may have to totally just ignore your comments . Rather ignore you then make you feel like a poop head .
But if you dare go into inthis unchartered territory .
If one calls the other a name , we will have to write a blog complimenting Human's wisdom and Love for his fellow man . Or some other severe punishment that could be thought of .
Not insulting Human may take me longer , but I am working on that too .
What could this do , could one day I take a person to task who insulted your opinion using homosexuality as a method of attack , you actually taking a liberal to task for using my religion as a means to insult my use of gramar . Could mutual repsect , even friendship be possible ?
Deal ?
"You don't think that was a useful term? A person who genuflected to the enemies of his group"
Oshtur did you even read the book Uncle Tom's Cabin?
Anom ,
A very liberal African American I knew told me Thomas Sowell was an Uncle Tom because he forgot where he came from . To me that sounded so so racist to the way I thought . I have read Thomas Sowell , calling him an Uncle Tom was just out there to me . I told him it sounded racist to me , he did not understand I don't think .
A chair for the local Kitsap democratic party said those African Americans who supported Republicans were equal to the Kitchen Slave mentality . He even went on about slave field hands .
No one I know of complained . I am a republican , white , so I figured it was not my place . It would just appear as political psoturing anyway I guess.
In my world that was just so far out there , it just sounded like the KKK . BUT the person who wrote that on democratic web page is fondly thought of by some African Americans ..
All I can equate it to is in this way . I have some very good friends who belong to the local Tribe here in Kitsap . If I say Indians , I asked about itonce , they told me they would not care less . They know me , therefore they will accept my terminalogy on a different level then say a stranger used the same words . Like my sister , she is a Lesbian , I gave her a Rush Limbauh subscription once for her birthday . She wrote and thanked me , she told me it saved her on buying Kitty Litter for her cats .
pC world is pretty hard to navigate . A while back a person defending abortion took me to task for using the word black . The people I associate with at church , softball teams and such have no problem with that terminalogy . Perhaps he did not have as many people of color close relationships as I do so he just used the pc term that was acceptable in his circles .. In my victim days I would have thought he was just purposely thought he wanted to call me a racist .
But I am with you , Uncle Tom or kitchen slave mentality to me is like using the f word .
"I don't think"
well that certainly explains it all!
Too bad it doesn't matter whether you vote Republican, Democrat or anything in between and hasn't mattered for years. Our government is being and has been controlled by forces outside of it. CFR, Freemasons, Illuminati, Bildeberghs, Skull and Bones, Bohemian Grove....come on people wake up. The seal in the book of Daniel has been broken and prophecy is being fulfilled. I wish it did matter but along withthe rest of our Constitutional Rights, they no longer matter and are a hindrance to the NWO.
Post a Comment
<< Home