What MommaAngel fails to understand is that she has NO RIGHT to impose her religious views on EVERYONE ELSE through the power of the government--e.g., through OUR official (mandated by law) pledge to OUR flag and to OUR country.
When she claims she doesn't understand the BIG DEAL about two words (under God) in OUR national pledge and when people try to explain the BIG DEAL to her, she gets offended, accuses people of being rude to her, and then opens another thread claiming people are attacking her faith and attacking her as a Christian.
If MA cannot tolerate having her point of view challenged and debated, perhaps she should hone her debating skills or stay out of the fray.
momma angel, you seem to be a nice woman, but you also seem to want to live in a pillow.
I don't want to tune in to various threads as I see people getting bounces back, a kind of robot pillowness. For me it isn't very interesting. For others, perhaps a comfort. But - repetitive blanketings of be me and be nice, however well intentioned, aren't doing more than murmurings of niceness.
I don't want to undermine your niceness, but it isn't convincing to me - not that you aren't nice, you are, but how that can change decisions that effect lives in various local situations. Look to graft and corruption, look to shoring up your local economy, look to getting people working. Don't talk to me about sweetness re religion.
ossobuco wrote:momma angel, you seem to be a nice woman, but you also seem to want to live in a pillow.
I don't want to tune in to various threads as I see people getting bounces back, a kind of robot pillowness. For me it isn't very interesting. For others, perhaps a comfort. But - repetitive blanketings of be me and be nice, however well intentioned, aren't doing more than murmurings of niceness.
I don't want to undermine your niceness, but it isn't convincing to me - not that you aren't nice, you are, but how that can change decisions that effect lives in various local situations. Look to graft and corruption, look to shoring up your local economy, look to getting people working. Don't talk to me about sweetness re religion.
Wow Osso - Thanks, you hit the nail square on the head
You know, one of the reasons I joined A2K was because I saw so many interesting forums, and one of the most interesting I thought would be R&S.
Boy, was I wrong. I really try to avoid this forum, but sometimes I see a thread I just can't resist viewing, and in this case responding too.
While I'm typing however, I'm shaking my head, because from my past experience I can pretty well predict the response, if any, will be some watered down, pillowy "make nice" talk, that makes innocent proclaimations that have has much real substance as marshmellow fluff.
Osso right, I really can't tell what kind of person you are, there is just this pervasive niceness, which gets really boring, really fast, since nothings really being said.
Anyway -
your original question. I can just speak for myself.
I don't put down or critique any relegion as a whole.
Whenever I express disgruntlement, it's with specific people in mind.
and sometimes, yes, it's you MA.
When I start reading your posts, I very shortly just start scanning, not really reading, since it all goes in the same directions anyhow.
It generally falls into a few catagories: The....
you have every right to .......it's always followed with a spoken, or unspoken "but"
I'm not judgemental......well, why are you upset with others language?
why do you express that it's people's responsibilities to be polite?
Oh wait, I see, you're just "expressing your opinion" another catagory.
Oh - and the really annoying one....When you express dismay of how others choose to act, and another one of the posters who can't seem to just blurt out what's on their minds, talks around and around and around, joins you in your astonishment.
Then remarks about maturity level or lack of morals are thrown out there, and you both have a little private chuckle over it.
"Oh those poor people who are going to hell. aren't they funny."?
"yes, yes, indeed they are. isn't it just so NICE being saved"?
I've tried, but I really don't know who you are, or what you're like, except you sound condescending most of the time.
OK, this is where now YOU bring out another one of your themes, the...
"well, I'm sorry if that's how you see me, but......"
you're not sorry at all.
You know, I have asked some questions in the past on this forum, that I just KNOW could have been answered in a straight forward manner with a few facts, and some background.
That's just not about Christians, but Islam as well.
Instead what I get is pages and pages of run around, misreading the intent of the question, entrapping someone because of how something was phrased, even though it's obvious what the meaning intended was.
It's just all too devious for my taste.
You know what, I lived in a small Southern town for a while.
I know what you are talking about re having manner, respecting your elders, etc.
The scariest women in that town where the weekly church goers who had such fine manners, but assassinated other peoples characters every chance they got.
Those soft words sometimes hides a heart more evil than I would like to imagine.
I'd rather have someone use profanity in front of me or children, if they have a true heart, than listen to all the platitudes in the world, knowing I have to watch my back.
What I really wonder is this MA...
why do you bother coming on this forum?
It's not as if anything will ever be said that will change your beliefs, and I don't think anyone's beliefs will be changed because of this forum.
It always adds up to the same people, saying the same thing.
BAM!!!
Right on the mark!!!
Am I good or what?
I TOLD you I could predict how you would respond!
Not only that, but you took the extra steps of twisting my words so they were about you!
HA!
You don't even realize that what you say is reinforcing the stereotypes you say you're trying to dispell.
This is useless....
I'm not gonna bother reading anymore of this, but perhaps you should think about this......
WHERE did I say I was speaking about YOU? except for that "pillow nice" stuff I found so dead on?
the watch your back, the respect stuff, that's pretty paranoid MA. Where am I judging YOU?
The putting words in your mouth....you can look on any off your threads and find yourself saying these things.
I didn't even BRING up some of the things you have associated with me, the compromise bit for instance.
OH OH OH, I forgot the best theme....."well, I'm praying for you"
See, that's what I mean, and you just can't see it. You twist others words to make them seem what you want.
You throw the "nice" bread crumbs out there, so if anyone does disagree, it makes them sound like a real sh*t because you're so nice all the time, how can they be so awful and to not be nice back to you?
You know what?
I feel SO sorry for you.
I mean, not being judgemental or anything.
Frank,
I don't know how many times I have to explain this to you.
Just because I do not believe what you believe it does not give me the right to return your sharing of your take on things with scorn or words I find offensive.
Why can you not understand that? Respecting someone's take on things doesn't mean you have to accept it. To me, it means it is important to you, I need to respect the fact it is important to you and not ridicule you or your take on things.
I don't understand
I feel no need to ridicule your take. Why do you feel a need to ridicule mine and those that have the same take?
You don't have to respect what I believe, Frank, just my right to believe it.
Scorn for various beliefs is often a reasonable response to hearing about them. Whose scorn, whose beliefs, therein lies the dilemma.
mesquite wrote:I did not ask if I had the right to WANT it there. I asked if it was my right to HAVE it there. Please understand the difference. That is the reason that the only true compromise is to return the pledge to its original form which was NEUTRAL toward religion.
Mesquite,
Actually, I don't see the difference. It is my right to have Under God there as it is your right to have Under No God there. However, stated either of these two ways, only one side is satisfied. That's where we differ, I believe.
So, if we had it the way as you suggested and I accepted, then we both are reasonably satisfied?
This is what I feel, believe, or whatever words you would have.
I believe in everyone's right to believe what they believe (or what their take on things is). I believe that everyone's beliefs or take is theirs personally and therfore, important to them. I do not believe that anyone has to believe it is ridiculous or anything else, except that it is different and they have that right. I believe you can just believe they are different and leave it at that.
I don't believe in ridiculing people just because they are different or they believe in something different. In ridiculing their beliefs, you are in essence, ridiculing them for believing what they believe.
Debra_Law,
Well...I not only do not agree that we should respect other people's "beliefs"...I often do not respect (in any sense of that word) their rights to hold those "beliefs."
There are people who "believe" it is okay to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings.
I do not repect those beliefs...and I do not respect their rights to hold them.
Call me a crud for feeling that way...but...
Momma Angel wrote:mesquite wrote:I did not ask if I had the right to WANT it there. I asked if it was my right to HAVE it there. Please understand the difference. That is the reason that the only true compromise is to return the pledge to its original form which was NEUTRAL toward religion.
Mesquite,
Actually, I don't see the difference. It is my right to have Under God there as it is your right to have Under No God there. However, stated either of these two ways, only one side is satisfied. That's where we differ, I believe.
So, if we had it the way as you suggested and I accepted, then we both are reasonably satisfied?
Before we get entirely lost in "to respect or not to respect" can I assume that what is in bold above means that you do agree that returning the Pledge to its original form ( or its original form plus "equality") is a fair and reasonable compromise that keeps the government neutral and does not favor one religious viewpoint over another?
