Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Politics This Reader May Not Have a High Opinion of Evangelicals or Republicans
Posted by Pete Kotz on Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 4:15 PM
Comments (16)
Showing 1-16 of 16
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
"Also, I grow so weary of typing 'airplane' in the box below. It is tiresome."
like
dislike
"Christians generally are now ridiculed, hated and feared as much as Muslims"
This is patently absurd.
Christians are routinely ridiculed by leftists in movies, cartoons and newspapers precisly because they are NOT feared.
The psuedointellectual blowhards who contragatulate themselves for being so "brave" in mocking Christians wouldn't dare do the equivalent to Muslims.
They're too chicken for that.
Gilbert is that some kind of haiku you're writing?
Muslims aren't the ones antagonizing us in this so-called Culture War. A good portion of the Muslims living in the U.S. are moderate and even liberal, hence moving here in the first place. Since I don't see Muslims out there trying to fuck up domestic policy, I don't tend to get as irate at them.
Sure, their religion is a backward cult of ridiculous dogmatic fanatics who are the source of vast suffering and violence (yep I said it), but most of that takes place well away from my daily life. (One of the overlooked favors Senor Bush did us- he took the fight back to Iraq and we haven't had a building knocked down since 911.)
Christians, however, are right up in my grill, demanding their fairy tales be taught in science class, trying to turn the airwaves into some kind of puritan sanctuary, withholding science by restricting valuable research, and CLOSNG FUCKING CHIK-FIL-A every Hangover Day.
You fuck with my science and my fried chicken, and we have a problem. But like I said in the other thread, times are changing, and evangelicals will be forced back into their caves soon. I am doing my part.
As usual, you are trying to run off on a tangent,burrtio.
The point is that the attempt of the writer featured in this post to equate Christians with radical Muslim terrorists is patently absurd.
The writer says the only difference between the two groups is "access to weapons and the willingness to use them". There are 200 million guns in this country. I expect any evangelical who wants "access to weapons" can get one readily easily. The fact is there is no comparison and the evangelicals are no more likely to go around shooting people than the rest of the population.
The posturing leftists like to pat themselves on the back for "bravely" standing up to a boogeyman they've created out of whole cloth by celebrating such things as a crucifix in a jar of urine as "art". But when the radical Muslims start killing people for political cartoons of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban, they hide under their beds and keep their mouths shut.
As for your rant about Christians being "up in your grill", get back to me when you can prove that Christians are the cause of even a miniscule fraction of the intrusive, bossy and downright unconstitutional government laws and regulations that have been promulgated by the socialists and environmental wackos (many of whom are one and the same).
It wasn't the Christians who initiated massive wealth redistribution schemes like "progressive" taxation or social security and medicare. It wasn't the Christians who dreamed up gun control laws. It isn't the Christians who are trying to tell us all what kind of cars we can drive, how much mileage they have to get, what kind of fuel or other power source we use in them. It isn't the Christians who want to mandate what kind of light bulbs we can by or what type of toliets are allowed to be installed in houses. And so on and so on.
...but it WAS the Christians who demanded we restrict the number of cell lines we can experiment on.
And it WAS the Christians who said we needed to teach creation myths in science class. To some maybe this is a trivial issue, but to me it is paramount. So yes, they are certainly part of the problem of bossy, intrusive govt. (Which is crazy because Republicans are supposed to be against that.)
So far, nobody's told me what to drive. I've got a big Explorer and I love the thing. Actually does better than you'd think on milage too. The things you mentioned are still part of the free market, and I believe you can get any lightbulb or toilet you want. HOWEVER I can't experiment on any cell line I want. I think this is a problem.
I am as scared of Socialism as you are, GM. I don't fault you there. But the climate of repression that has sprung up in the 21st Century cannot be wholy attributed to the socialists. They're a liberal bunch.
And yes, you are right that fundamentalists could get their hands on any number of weapons here in the U.S., and for the most part they don't. But maybe that's because they have events like Waco to deter them. Remember that Texas BBQ?
"So far, nobody's told me what to drive. I've got a big Explorer and I love the thing. Actually does better than you'd think on milage too. The things you mentioned are still part of the free market, and I believe you can get any lightbulb or toilet you want."
You are mistaken. Those things are NOT part of the "free market". The government has had CAFE mileage regulations for years and the laws in place are ramping them up significantly over time. Laws already in place mandate low flush toliets for new installations. Laws already in place will prohibit the sale of incandescent light bulbs at some future date.
And of course the biggest real world impact on anyone's life are the socialist wealth redistribution schemes. Many middle class people would be rich and retired already if they had been able to keep and invest their own money instead of having it yanked out of their wallets by the government for social security, medicare and "progressive" taxation.
If I could retire ten years earlier with a net worth two or three times as much as is otherwise the case, I wouldn't give a damn whether creation was taught in school or not.
Well that's a shame because then people like me who make significantly less $, but spend most of our time trying to figure out how to save you from dying of cancer, will have our hands tied.
At the rate things are going, most of us will have defected by then anyway. We'll just take our lifesaving research to countries who don't bully us because their imaginary friends told them to. But by all means have fun counting your money and nursing that malignant tumor!
Progressive taxation is good. Tax those who have money instead of those who don't. Makes sense.
But how do you sell that to the rich, who are already paying most of our taxes and employing msot of us?
"Well that's a shame because then people like me who make significantly less $, but spend most of our time trying to figure out how to save you from dying of cancer, will have our hands tied."
As far as I know, a belief in creation has never precluded anybody from pursuing a career in medical or any other type of science. I'll bet there are plenty of scientists who are regular church goers.
"Progressive taxation is good. Tax those who have money instead of those who don't. Makes sense."
No what makes sense is to cut out government wealth redistribution schemes and then charge out government services on a user fee basis.
Fairness in paying for government provided goods and services is no different that it is in paying for private sector provided goods and services - on a user fee basis.
McDonald's doesn't demand to see a copy of each customer's 1040 tax return and charge the "rich" ones some "progressive" price for a burger so it can give away free burgers to the poor. It wouldn't stay in business long if it tried.
If it's not fair for McDonalds to do that, it's not fair for the federal government to do it either.
Actually, a belief in creation is precluding LOTS of scientific work, as I have very obviously explained above. How are you supposed to pursue a career in cell biology, when they won't even let you look at all the cells, Gilbert?
"Actually, a belief in creation is precluding LOTS of scientific work, as I have very obviously explained above. How are you supposed to pursue a career in cell biology, when they won't even let you look at all the cells, Gilbert?"
You haven't "obviouly" explained any such thing.
Just who exactly is "they" who are preventing you from looking at cells?
As in a lot of cases, I expect the real translation of "they won't let me do something" boils down to the government is not spending the taxpayers money on something I want it to be spent on.
Which isn't the same thing at all.
You can do whatever scientific work you want on your own dime - or the dime of any other private sector party you can convice to finance it. There is no inherent "right" to have the government fund anything.
Yes but what venture capitalist in their right mind is going to fund research which will never get past the FDA?
There's no point in developing this technology if the government won't let you legally use it. There are people flying to China, CHINA! for medical procedures that involve stem cells because we can't do it here. That is so embarrassing. Don't think that people all over the world aren't snickering at the "American Taliban over that one."
