Armageddon's-a-comin'!

[Vincent_Valashar]

I am very tolerant to Christians as long as they keep their religion to themselves. What goes behind their close doors is none of my business just as what I do at home has nothing to do with them.

[Dakoth]

I agree. That's why I'm so tolerant of those with subpar intelligence.

So anyone not as sducated as you has subpar intelligence? Wow you just insulted a lot of people. Really so all the bashing of Bush and the far right is what you consider tolerance looks to me by all the debate you have tried to change my or others views on things.

 

I am very tolerant to Christians as long as they keep their religion to themselves. What goes behind their close doors is none of my business just as what I do at home has nothing to do with them.

 

Free speech one of the wonderful things our constitution affords American citizens.

[Vincent_Valashar]

Yes, but that free speech ends when these Christians are trying to force their beliefs down my throat and try to dictate policy that effect how I live my life.

[Dakoth]

As opposed to you doing the same? As someone said before freedom of speech protects unpopular speech more times than popular.

[Cantousent]

You know, what good does it do to rail on against religion? Folks who revile religion and make rather strong claims against religious people don't help progressives or Democrats win elections. It's simply true that Americans are generally religious. *shrug* That might be more important than policy, but I fail to see how.

 

You want a progressive agenda? Fine. I'm a Catholic. I practice my religion. I express my faith when the discussion warrants such disclosure, but I don't tend to bring up the topic of religion nor do I respond with anger to an expression of disbelief or, even more dangerous to religion, a complete lack of interest.

 

Now, of course, we have what I see as a dogged attack on religion by folks who are angry with Bush's victory. The evil, they say, is the all powerful religious right.

 

Mostly, I've not responded to this discussion because I think folks who've followed their candidate throughout the campaign only to see him lose deserve a chance to vent their frustration.

 

Still, while the religious right might have tipped the balance, the issue is a little more complex.

 

First of all, you don't have to appreciate* religion to understand that the population in the United States is religious. If you make this issue atheism versus religion, you will lose. If that's the main (or only) issue for you, then I applaud your determination, but get used to defeat.

 

Second of all, if you want to win on the policy decisions, then you must not alienate religious folks. As a general rule, I'm leery of calling folks uneducated. The accusation flies around this board like a flock of birds. It's not a matter of wondering if the charge will be leveled. It's a matter of when. Hell, it's a matter of how soon.

 

I am an educated adult. This is a simple reality. I am well read. I have contemplated the issues. I believe in God. If that offends you, there is nothing I can do. ...But the fact that I'm religious need not be an obstacle to our cooperation on issues of policy. If you like losing elections, then I suggest you keep insulting my intelligence and education.

 

That leads me to my third point... I attend church more regularly than many folks who would probably be termed "religious right." If that makes me "religious right," then consider this: I voted against the measure banning same sex marriages in California when it came up for vote a few years back. What does that mean? It means that general statements are useful to describe a general condition. Conversely, believing in a generality when faced with a complex problem will not help your position.

 

If the Democrats answer their loss by bashing religion and religious people, they will have plenty of opportunity to lose even more elections in the future.

 

Now, I'm going to address the general idea of conspiracies... let it go. Unless you have some real, substantial, and substantiated proof, you don't have a point. Some of the charges of conspiracy are no less a matter of blind faith than the hateful faith of the religious right. Real conspiracies are undoubtedly hidden in the midst of theories that only serve to muddy the waters.

 

I don't mind wild conspiracy theories. I think of them as a little wacky. I think they're funny. I think the folks who propose these conspiracies are generally decent but misguided. Overall, I think these theories are harmless. ...But they aren't. These conspiracy theories kill Democrats. Democrats have left mainstream America to join in the orgiastic glut of fringe movements.

 

...And consider this as your angry fingers dance over the keyboard: my words aren't particularly harsh. You don't have to agree with what I say, but you can't preach tolerance while attacking even the most respectfully worded voice of dissent.

 

On the other hand, I appreciate a particularly funny or clever attack, even if I'm the target.

 

*You should appreciate it in terms of understanding it and looking at it critically without engaging in dismissive or angry comments. I don

[Vincent_Valashar]

As opposed to you doing the same?  As someone said before freedom of speech protects unpopular speech more times than popular.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I would not go in someone's face and tell them that their way is wrong, nor create policy that which would effect them personally or limit their rights.

[Commissar]

I agree. That's why I'm so tolerant of those with subpar intelligence.

So anyone not as sducated as you has subpar intelligence? Wow you just insulted a lot of people. Really so all the bashing of Bush and the far right is what you consider tolerance looks to me by all the debate you have tried to change my or others views on things.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, what I said was, I'm tolerant of those with subpar intelligence. You're the one off on the whole education kick.

[Commissar]

Eldar says a lot of stuff.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I argue against religious involvement in the government; I argue against faith-based initiatives and leading a country with more of an eye to the Bible than to, say, the Constitution or science or even common sense.

 

Beyond that, I generally keep silent about my extreme dislike of religious institutions. And, speaking generally still, I actually don't disapprove of most religious organizations, just the sort of people they often produce. I was baptized Catholic, and I still attend Catholic mass now and then - especially when I can find an obscure church in Europe where they still do the service in Latin. I honestly enjoy it.

 

What I do not enjoy are the attempts on my personal morality made by a lot of more froward Christians. Catholics don't do this, which is one of the reasons I usually like them; it's generally the more wild Southern types. Like Bush.

 

I know plenty of religious people who never make mention of God or faith in their everyday conversations. The people who get my blood up are those who are...far too believing with it. I've got a woman at work who firmly believe God sends her premonitions. She calls them prophecies. She regaled all of her coworkers with her "prophecy" of Bush winning this election on Wednesday. She said that Roy, of Siegfried and Roy fame, was attacked by that tiger because he's gay, and God told the tiger to do it. People like that give religion a bad name and tend to become the representatives of their faith.

 

A lot of Christians are rational human beings. A lot aren't. Same could be said for atheists, but the thing about atheists is, by their very nature they don't have that one core focal point for their rabid, bat**** insanity.

[Product of the Cosmos]

and "Similar results were found with respect to Hussein

[Product of the Cosmos]

Actually, if you read the original AP article (what's that?  cnn edited out what they didn't like from the AP article?  no!  heaven forbid!), you will find that that glitch occured on ONE machine in ONE county.  What's really interesting, is that only that ONE county in the entire state used that type of machine, which the AP article describes as "older".  So, ONE older machine, the likes of which are found in no other county in Ohio, glitched and gave Bush extra votes, but not enough extra votes to change the election result.  There goes your "multiply that 'error' by all the precincts of ohio" theory.  Further, if you read more carefully, you will find that it screwed up the votes for county commisioner, not just for Bush, so there goes any kooky "Bush bought off the voting machine companies" theory which you may be expounding upon.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Uhhh dega... It just says that one county had a problem.. Not that no other county had a problem. As they wouldn't know yet would they!? And if you use your noggin there, if someone is actually pulling this off, they obviously have experience in fraud(Take Enron or Halliburton or Aurther Anderson for example), and they know how to cover their tracks, and give each scenario some attention in their act.

 

You can't think in 'this is not possible' mode when your trying to deem if it's possible(LOL). It just doesnt work. Use your head, and think it through, and you will find that people who could plan something like this would have backdoor scenarios... To make their hardcore followers who will bend their reality to fit their opinion, not think it was a scam even if it obviously was(like the 2000 election for example).

 

If it was me I would make the code give Kerry a bunch of votes in an irrelevant state/province like Washington DC or Oregon. To create a counter arguement it was just 'chance' that Bush gained from the beta software. LOL. I know how these people think because I am related to them...

 

Or do you think they are common theives you see on worlds dumbest criminals giving their ID to someone before they steal beer or something. lol.

 

I live in a small hick town and work in a very large city and guess what I see more bigoted actions and views in the city of Chicago than I have ever seen in any small town. Your words only show typical big city elitism.

 

Cites= More anonimity, racial tension, and flat out uncaring people, more crime, drugs and environmental concerns.

lol. Well you see more of just about everything in a place where there is more people..

 

Edit: Sorry if it is starting to get a little heated Phosphor but some of these guys are real idiots.

lol.. Ya

 

*sorry phosphor for making this get heated*

*flame follows*

lmfao

 

I view anyone who puts faith before science, or blind belief before rational thought, or the Bible before the Consitution as less than intelligent myself.

 

I couldnt agree more.

[Product of the Cosmos]

Mostly, I've not responded to this discussion because I think folks who've followed their candidate throughout the campaign only to see him lose deserve a chance to vent their frustration.

 

Did ANYONE in this thread like Kerry?!

 

Now, I'm going to address the general idea of conspiracies... let it go. Unless you have some real, substantial, and substantiated proof, you don't have a point.

Let it go? With that state of mind nothing will be found to begin with.

 

2000 election

9-11

 

Both have enough evidence to indict this administration. And this is based off CITIZENS investigations, not people who have resources like the FBI.

Real conspiracies are undoubtedly hidden in the midst of theories that only serve to muddy the waters.

I agree many theories are disinformation to make real conspiracies less heard. But that doesn't make discussing possibilities bad, or inefficient.

 

 

These conspiracy theories kill Democrats. Democrats have left mainstream America to join in the orgiastic glut of fringe movements.

Democrats? I think your view on this rise, is the fact that the Bush admin are so corrupted the opposition has become aware of this. Yes it's slightly overblown, but many have a lot of merit. And these voices are barely heard in America.

 

A lot of Christians are rational human beings. A lot aren't. Same could be said for atheists, but the thing about atheists is, by their very nature they don't have that one core focal point for their rabid, bat**** insanity.

 

lmfao!!!!!!!

[Cantousent]

That's okay, Product, I read it anyhow. :D I waited for it with relish. Anyhow, late night. Talking politics is an exhausting business.

[Product of the Cosmos]

taks i think I found the reason why quotes werent working.

 

If you have more then a certain number of quote boxes they dont work.. its like 5 or something.. I'll test it.

 

test

 

test

 

test

 

test

 

test

 

test

 

test

 

test

 

 

test

 

LMAO! nvm. Worked though when I cut my post in half.

 

 

And which countries were bribed by Saddam Hussein to not go to war against him!? And prove it.

I think he just meant they had financial interests in Iraq's commodities staying in Saddams control.. Hardly bribes. lol. More like interests in their own investments, being put above morality etc. We all no America never does THAT :ph34r: lol

[Dakoth]

I

would not go in someone's face and tell them that their way is wrong, nor create policy that which would effect them personally or limit their rights.

 

Actually you are doing it right now you are in everyones face about how evil, rude, and wrong religion is. How did you vote was it for a democrat that believes in the complete removal of all refernce to religion in schools. Seems to me my rights are limited if they say I can not pray in school.

 

No, what I said was, I'm tolerant of those with subpar intelligence. You're the one off on the whole education kick.

 

First by having been so general that is the only conclusion one could come to. Lets face it America believes the more education you get the smarter you are, if it didn't there would not be a huge push for college after highschool. By using my quote you put me forth as an example even if it was not ment to be, therefore I and people like me become those of sub-par intelligence. If schooling is not how you measure intelligence then how do you?

 

I argue against religious involvement in the government; I argue against faith-based initiatives and leading a country with more of an eye to the Bible than to, say, the Constitution or science or even common sense.

 

Then you are fightin a losing battle for the underlined portion of that statement because just as politics has a vested interest in the church, so to does the church have a vested interest in politics.

 

A lot of Christians are rational human beings. A lot aren't. Same could be said for atheists, but the thing about atheists is, by their very nature they don't have that one core focal point for their rabid, bat**** insanity.

 

Please tell me where I fit in ot all of that. Also atheists do have a core focal point and that is the church, well more like the things the church tries to influence. Who out of everyone wants the removal of all religion from all government the most? I have not said they are wrong for believing that just that most atheists can rally around the fact they don't believe in religion so it shouldn't be there.

[random evil guy]

"how old are you? 12?"

 

Ooo.. The 'ol I don't like what youa re saying so you must be a kid insult. R00fles! And, oh btw, I am 1 years old. Next troll, please.

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

no, i just think using the expression "lol" is pathetic in a discussion.

 

besides, you never wrote how i impose my views on religious people. you said something about the absence of religion in laws. excactely how? i don't want to ban anything; just saying that i won't tolerate religious people telling me what i can and can't do.

 

i.e. abortion. many christians want to ban it; i don't. excactely how am i forcing my views on others? i say it's up to each individual to decide wheter they want to have an abortion or not...

[deganawida]

You know, since this thread was started, I have had tremendous difficulty taking it seriously. Why? Well, to put it simply, this is a thread that has focused primarily on bashing Christianity while it names itself and models itself after Christian iconography. "Armageddon", in the Christian belief system, is that area in the Middle East where the armies of the world are supposed to engage in a massive battle near the end of time. I mean, how am I supposed to take this seriously, when the thread is so laced with irony that one can choke on it?

 

Anyone else have this problem?

[~Di]

Just a point, in case old Product of the Cosmos cares: Those using a black background cannot read your tiny blue letters. If you believe your words to be so precious they must be distinguished from the words of others by special size and color, you might as well use a size and color that others can actually read.

 

Or not. I don't mind just hitting "page down" every time I come to one of your posts if you don't mind it.

 

That said, I think bashing and generalizing is usually the reflection of immaturity and ignorance, no matter which side the bashing and generalizing comes from. There seems to be a lot of that going around in this thread.

[Volourn]

"Goes to show how the Bush administration has brainwashed half is population."

 

Yeah, that's right, as a non Amerikan I get ALL my facts from Bush. R00fles! Seriosuly, that's asanine. I tend to get my news for various sources - the main ones being CNN, CBC, and the BBC. That's one Amerikan, Kanadian, and British news station. I also try to pay attention to what Al Jazeera says as well as look at the net. You should know who you talk to before spamming bull about them. Thank you.

[The.Donut]

More love, less war. Ta.

[Darque]

Just a point, in case old Product of the Cosmos cares:  Those using a black background cannot read your tiny blue letters.  If you believe your words to be so precious they must be distinguished from the words of others by special size and color, you might as well use a size and color that others can actually read.

 

Or not.  I don't mind just hitting "page down" every time I come to one of your posts if you don't mind it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Agreed on this.

 

I'm already to the point I just avoid his posts

 

Posts that are too difficult to read aren't worth the effort.

[Volourn]

"Or not. I don't mind just hitting "page down" every time I come to one of your posts if you don't mind it."

 

Stop spamming about it. Geez.. I don't like the way he does his posts now so I just didn't bother to respond to him at all. Youa re just encouraging him to continue as we all know youa re reading his posts in all their entirety.

[Darque]

Oh look, it's Volourn pretending he's a psychic again.

[Volourn]

Nah. I'm not pretending. I AM psychic.

[mr insomniac]

"Or not.  I don't mind just hitting "page down" every time I come to one of your posts if you don't mind it."

 

Stop spamming about it. Geez.. I don't like the way he does his posts now so I just didn't bother to respond to him at all. Youa re just encouraging him to continue as we all know youa re reading his posts in all their entirety.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Heh, that's funny: you telling someone else to stop spamming.

[Volourn]

"Heh, that's funny: you telling someone else to stop spamming."

 

Thank you. However, I should say, I basically have two types of posts - ones thata re strictly on topic, and thsoe where I tend to have tod efend myself from those who accuse me of some great Sin tm sicne we all know Im Evillly Stupid Incarnate or pointing out to people that posts like the one I quoted help no one...

 

"