Obama wants to expand faith-based programs - Page 9

cheapseats · 07-06-2008, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Environment Man

I am so proud of Barack for displaying his religious side.

Display: place prominently so that it may readily be seen; give a conspicuous demonstration of

"Displaying his religious side," indeed.

With respect...recall my gratitude at having been placed under your protective umbrella...I contend that your degree of religious fervor does not reflect majority sentiment.

Then, as to your approval of Obama's displayed religiosity, are you not on record as being quite amenable to a McCain victory?

Finally, I urge to consider my absolute certainty that pride and religious displays do not belong in the same sentence.

leftparadise · 07-07-2008, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapseats

THAT WOULD BE BECAUSE IT RUNS CONTRARY TO THE WHOLE REASON THAT THOSE PILGRIMS CAME OVER HERE AND USURPED A LAND MASS, WHICH NECESSITATED FOUNDING DOCUMENTS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

actually, i don't think the pilgrims came here to establish a place where you could worship freely as you choose, they wanted a place where people worshipped as they did, that's why the drove out the quakers and other who were not puritans - freedom to worship my god

Heretic · 07-07-2008, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leftparadise

actually, i don't think the pilgrims came here to establish a place where you could worship freely as you choose, they wanted a place where people worshipped as they did, that's why the drove out the quakers and other who were not puritans - freedom to worship my god

That and the Puritans didn't leave England due to persecution, they left because of ridicule. Charles II bought into Puritan ideology and forced the whole country into it. He ordered that no one have fun, no one party, no loud colors, etc. Then Charles III takes the throne and reserves all of that [most of the country breathed a collective sigh of relief]. The Puritans got pissed off that they could no longer dictate everyone else's lives, so they got into a leaky boat and sailed to where they could massacre Indians.

mentor · 07-07-2008, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapseats

Perfectly understandable...what are your options?

But why do Obama's supporters not force his hand on the change thing? McCain and Obama are vying for the same voters. Each has their respective die-hards, and they're playing for the middle.

Why on earth, after all this jawing about change, does not the Obama Tide rise up demanding CHANGE? Obama is appealing to the same voters that McCain is appealing to, with the SAME emphasis on Religiosos. It is INCREDIBLE.

Jeepers, I'da thunk...between Jihad Du Jour and our being mired in a religiously whacked country...that maybe a majority of Americans now recognized that it is desirable to have LESS, not more, religious presence in public affairs.

Of what are the Democrats so afraid? That if Obama truly runs on a platform of change, they'll lose?

You know what's even MORE amazing? Brief months ago, Evangelicals were beginning to make public remarks about having become TOO political, and about it being time to be LESS political. What do we do? Invite them back. "No, don't go...here, have some money."

It should have been a dream come true, even if they're only saying it because the People are beginning to speak of taxing the churches. The People should be DEMANDING taxation of the churches, but the People don't like to rock the boat.

They SAY they like to rock the boat but, clearly, they do not like to rock the boat.

In my view, it's rock the boat or it's stay the course.

The People are demanding NOTHING of the candidates. The People are acting like spectators at the Hairsplitting National Championship.

This race to the middle is totally unimportant, IMO. I think what we have to look at is what kind of judges each of these guys would appoint. McCain will appoint E-man clones to the supreme court and we will become the only superpower in history with Sharia Law.

mentor · 07-07-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Heretic

That and the Puritans didn't leave England due to persecution, they left because of ridicule. Charles II bought into Puritan ideology and forced the whole country into it. He ordered that no one have fun, no one party, no loud colors, etc. Then Charles III takes the throne and reserves all of that [most of the country breathed a collective sigh of relief]. The Puritans got pissed off that they could no longer dictate everyone else's lives, so they got into a leaky boat and sailed to where they could massacre Indians.

I wonder where the Republicans will go?

Heretic · 07-07-2008, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mentor

I wonder where the Republicans will go?

Antarctica: the last unsettle continent on Earth. That's why they want global warming to happen. Interestingly enough, real estate is the same motive behind the crimes of Lex Luthor.

gonzo · 07-08-2008, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leftparadise

actually, i don't think the pilgrims came here to establish a place where you could worship freely as you choose, they wanted a place where people worshipped as they did, that's why the drove out the quakers and other who were not puritans - freedom to worship my god

And the ermmmm..Native Americans? Oh yeah, they didn't worship like the fookers.

mentor · 07-08-2008, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Heretic

Antarctica: the last unsettle continent on Earth. That's why they want global warming to happen. Interestingly enough, real estate is the same motive behind the crimes of Lex Luthor.

I didn't think of that. Perhaps all the "liberals" can stay up north, and we can have a truly bipolar world. We'll rename north and south left and right.

cheapseats · 07-09-2008, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leftparadise

actually, i don't think the pilgrims came here to establish a place where you could worship freely as you choose, they wanted a place where people worshipped as they did, that's why the drove out the quakers and other who were not puritans - freedom to worship my god

But then there were visionaries among them who wrestled everyone into a binding acknowledgment that the people's of one nation would be free to worship idiosyncratically. It matters not if their largesse was only to protect themselves.

One nation under God, by the way, does NOT imply Christianity...not to suggest that you suggested it does. I just like to remind us, whenever possible, that we are so so so NOT a Christian nation.

cheapseats · 07-09-2008, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Heretic

That and the Puritans didn't leave England due to persecution, they left because of ridicule.

Ridicule IS persecution.

persecute: subject to prolonged hostility and ill-treatment; persistently harass or annoy

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode