Au,
If your solution is just to complain loudly and try to encourage Americans who agree with you to care and to vote, then we are in complete agreement.
The only thing is that I tend to resist labels. I consider myself intelligent and informed enough to make decisions indepedendently.
I don't worry that much if occasionally I agree with the "religious right" or the "radical left". I vote my conscience issue by issue. These labels are just political manipulations.
I believe that if every American felt this way. We could avoid these incivil yelling matches.
Brown
Actually I do not care whether they agree with me or not. All I would like is for Americans to get off their duffs and vote. I have enough confidence in the American people to believe that if they vote they will stave off the tyranny of religion or for that matter any other tyranny.
If waking them up by means of fear mongering will do it than fear mongering it is. After all is that not a political ritual at election time. I should add did not Bush use it to get the US into the present situation in Iraq.
.
ebrown wrote:
Quote:The only thing is that I tend to resist labels. I consider myself intelligent and informed enough to make decisions indepedendently.
I don't worry that much if occasionally I agree with the "religious right" or the "radical left". I vote my conscience issue by issue. These labels are just political manipulations.
The use of the designation of "Fundamentalist, evangelical Right" is descriptive and is used by me to refer to a particular group. If you want to make independent decisions, I encourage you, in this case, to go to their web sites and check out who this group is. It's not me that is labeling them, they have labeled themselves. They believe that fundamentalism is a good thing. They believe that literal interpretation of everything (not just the Bible) is the proper way to understand.
I applaud your determination to make your own informed, intelligent decisions. But do be informed. Go to one of their churches for a few weeks. Introduce your children to them, send your kids to their sunday schools. Then come back and report to us your decision.
Au,
OK I get it. You are putting forward "fear mongering" as a solution.
There is only one problem. There is a group of people here who are yelling at me about the "fundamentalists" who are taking over the country.
There is another group who are yelling about the "Liberals". They both are making extreme generalizations and demonizing people who don't agree with them, without addressing the issues I care about.
Lola and Phoenix sound just like the "conservatives" who are fear-mongering. I think that they are on different sides somehow - but if you exchange the words "Liberal" and "Fundamentalist" they all sound the same.
You imply that this mutual fear-mongering will increase the involvement of everyday Americans in politics. This would be nice, but my impressions are that it has the oppisite effect.
Lola,
Just face it, the terms "Fundamentalist, evangelical right" are derogatory terms that have no real meaning. They along with the terms "Liberal" and "Pinko" are just ways to lump all the people you disagree with into one group that you can denigrate.
Look, I have views that are on both sides.
What about the person who is pro-life and anti-capital punishment. These two positions are not at all mutually exclusive.
Is this person a "fanitical fundamentalist" or a "pro-criminal liberal"?
I have been to evengelical churches, and I know that it is completely wrong for you to try to demonize an entire class of people.
Like any group of people, the vast majority are sincerely trying to choose what is best. In any church there is a range of opinions even with political positions. I have a friend, for example who is a member of Evangelicals for Social action. This is a bible-thumping group of folks with a pretty progressive (dare I say liberal) political agenda.
So Lola, I don't buy it. I get upset when any one of you try to influence my opinion with fear-mongering.
If you want my support for an issue, convince me rationally that your viewpoint deserves my support.
Demonizing people who disagree with you will not earn my respect.
Brown
Quote:You imply that this mutual fear-mongering will increase the involvement of everyday Americans in politics. This would be nice, but my impressions are that it has the opposite effect.
If it did not work than why do politicians risk their political life on it. Do you remember the campaign against the universal medical coverage when it was being proposed during the Clinton years. It was based upon fear mongering and it worked. Fear is a very potent political weapon.
Fundamentalist and Fanatical Right are, like Neo-Con, terms used by those in those groups to describe themselves.
ebrown,
"fundamentalist" and "evangelical" are not derogatory labels. These are labels by which this group of people (self selected through political action groups and churches) call themselves. I was raised in these churches, all of my family are still active in these churches and political organizations, some of them are placed high, very high in the pecking order. So I doubt I need to face anything. I'm not trying to scare you brown, I'm trying to say that the danger is greater than you apparently know.
"Evangelical," is not, in and of itself bad, as long as they know how to witness only when or if invited. Jimmy Carter is an evangelical, and your friend from the social action group is too.
"Fundamentalist" is a label of which fundamentalists are proud. It is descriptive. It means they believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible, what they believe to be the fundamentals.
Put these two terms together, which they do themselves, and you have an unusually intrusive, never-take-no-for-an-answer person who will drive you crazy, if you let them. I'm sure some are nicer and less invasive than others. My sister, for instance is a very kind, loving woman, but she believes that Bill Clinton committed murder and that the liberals are trying to take away the guns of the citizens in this country and herd all those who refuse to give them up onto old Army bases as concentration camps. No joke. And let me clarify, she and all the members of her church and political action groups believe the liberals are, but are not limited to: politicians and law enforcement officials above county level, game wardens, internal revenue agents, judges, lawyers, bankers, journalists, unionists, the Rockefellers, the Clintons, gays, the entire movie industry or at least Hollywood, and the UN. Now I know this sounds fantastic. But it is true.
Not all evangelical fundamentalists believe this particular story, and maybe my sister doesn't either anymore. She tried to convince me of this a few years ago after the Waco tragedy. But they do believe they are morally obligated to force you and me and everyone to behave as they see fit, according their own moral standard. And they don't see morality or conscience as a construct, no, they believe morality is their literal interpretation of the Bible. And they believe they are morally obligated to win you for Christ, and if you won't be won, then you will be harassed until your eyes pop out. In any case they have no tolerance for any other religion than their own.
I'm not demonizing an entire class of people. I've never said they were evil. But you don't hang out in these churches and on these web sites and in political action groups for long if you don't believe some of their basic premises. Except of course, there are some very passive people who tag along because they're in a family that is politically active. Some, I'm sure believe as you do that these groups are innocuous. But they are not. If they were evil, it would be easier. No, they do these things because they truly believe that they are commanded by God to do them.
So, if you've been to churches you believe to be those of evangelical fundamentalists and you've hung around very long, and you haven't found these folks, then it's a very different animal than the ones I'm referring to.
I'll earn your respect if you decide I make sense. Part of the problem is that you don't know me and why should you take my word for it? Go out and see for yourself. But be sure to go to the more firmly believing groups........then tell me what you think. I'll go find some more stuff to post for you. I'll get some samples of their message. Maybe that will earn your respect.
au1929 wrote:
If it did not work than why do politicians risk their political life on it. Do you remember the campaign against the universal medical coverage when it was being proposed during the Clinton years. It was based upon fear mongering and it worked. Fear is a very potent political weapon.
You might be right. I don't like it.
Lola,
I don't get your point. You are describing a type of person that you say I should be afraid of. You still haven't told me what I should do about it. But, you insist I should be afraid.
The problem is, I am not afraid. I believe in Democracy. These people you are describing are certainly not a majority. My responsibility in a democracy is to vote my conscience and to participate in public discourse. I do both of these things without the need for fear.
You still haven't said what I should do about these people (other than fear them)? And I wish you would.
This is a democracy. They have a voice and a vote and a right to their beliefs. You can't shoot people just because you disagree with them. You can't even lock them up. In a free society you need to learn to live with people who hold different opinions.
Personally I consider myself an independent thinker. I will listen to opinions about each issue no matter who holds them. I don't think it reasonable to throw out someones well thought out opinion, just because she goes to a "fundamentalist" church. But that's just me.
Lola, Of course you have the right to yell and scream and tell me how dangerous *these* people are. And you are doing that very well.
But there are people who are also yelling and screaming to tell me how dangerous *you* are. And their arguments are just as convincing as yours (i.e. not very).
I just wish you would all stop screaming. I don't need my fear mongered by anyone.
Was I screaming? Yelling?
What you should do, ebrown is make up your own mind, as you said you would. Then vote. That is my recommendation, but hardly necessary since you said you would already do that anyway. I have never suggested these folks be banned or stopped from their political activity. What has given you this idea?
ebrown
Is there never any valid cause for fear possible then, in the sense in which this discussion addresses? No political or ideological movement which folks SHOULD be scared of possible at all?
I'm scared shitless of the current USA administration - does that count
Well . . . it's time for a time-out.
My late mother used to tell me never to discuss religion and politics in public. Were she to read this thread, I would think her reaction would be, "See, I told you so!"
Hurt feelings, name-calling, Lola upset, Craven upset . . . whew, is it worth all this?
Everyone should complete this time-out by accessing
www.tolerance.org.
Then, the time-out is over; you can put the gloves back on, ladies and gentlemen of A2k. I love you
all.
and I love you too WilliamHenry..........
that's a lovely site, Williamhenry.
And let us all have tolerance for this:
http://www.family.org/docstudy/solid/a0015081.html
Blatham and BillW,
I am no fan of the Bush administration. I will be working to defeat him in next years election. I agree with you both that Bush's policies are very damaging for the country, and that the country will be much better if Bush does not serve a second term.
What I am objecting to in this post are the religious attacks which are inappropriate in any intelligent political discussion.
Let's talk about things that matter. Let's have a discussion about why the war in Iraq was a mistake. Let's talk about how the tax cuts are ludicrous especially in this time of rising budgets.
These are the matters that the president deals with. Bush's stand on these political issues are the reasons that many Americans will vote for him, and many others will vote against him.
It is no surprise that there is a number of Americans who consider themselves "bible believing Christians". This has always been the case. This is part of the diversity in the US. I am not afraid of them, and preaching fear against a religious group seems unamerican.
Like any other American "bible believing Christians" are part of the process. Lola is doing her best to prove to us that *these people* are a threat to democracy. But I don't buy it.
This election is about issues. The issues will be chosen by Americans. The religion of the Americans or the Candidates really doesn't matter.
BillW, I am not saying that your fear of Bush's *policies* are ungrounded. But policies and religion are different things. I dont care about prayer meetings in the Oval office. I do care about a turnaround in Iraq that will accept international control and support, offer a stable Iraq and bring the troops home.
I am saying that this noisy crusade against religion is irrelevent, divisive and unamerican.
Speaking only for myself......I am not opposed to or afraid of anyones religious beliefs....it is using those beliefs as tools to manipulate that I object to, and using religion and religious beliefs in this manner negate them IMO.
I think the most special place in hell, if there is such a place, will be reserved for people who use religion to further their own ends with no real connection to the ideals they lay claim to, and I believe Bush and his band of merry folks are the epitome of that type.
If I objected to and feared religious Presidents then I would have feared Jimmy Carter
.
Let's don't get into judging his performance on this thread ...that's a whole different issue, I was just making a point.
Brown
I will give you one last shot. The religious right or whatever you choose to call it is both a religious and political movement. Do you remember Ralph Reed. And as such is a valid subject for discussion on a political thread.
Au,
You are right. So what?
Ralph Reed for example had a valid political perspective. He participated in public debate in a reasonable way. Reed acted as a political figure, and I don't have a problem with that.
I do have a problem with this thread. Even the title implies that we are in imminent danger of being overrun by THEM. If you think about this - it is ridiculous.
But it is also somehow familiar. The same type of post is used to disparage "Liberals" and the "Religious right". I can't even tell the difference any more.
Please tell me again how this type of post is helpful?
---------------
Let's fight against THEM(tm).
THEY are a group who has embedded themselves in the heart of America. They have beliefs we don't agree with.
I will show you we we should fear THEM. Look at these websites. THEY believe these strange things. Look at what this person said - and THEY all believe exactly alike.
And They vote. They form groups and try to get people elected and laws passed that support Their values. This is how They plan to take over the country.
This is an outrage. You should be very afraid of THEM.
And, that's why you should support My views on these topics.
