Now they come for the children....

[segovius]

A new documentary by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady - the directors of the amazing Boys of Baraka which won several awards earlier this year - lifts the lid on the little known and secretive Christian summer camps for kids that are experiencing phenomenal growth across the US.

In scenes that will prove disturbing to many, the directors gain unprecedented aspects to these secretive institutions and document the more shocking aspects of these camps - children speaking in tongues and talking of being "born again" at age 5.

Among other disturbing revelations, the film Jesus Camp (http://www.alternet.org/movies/37373/) for the first time records filmed proof of the indoctrination of children into a potentially violent mindset.

In scenes chillingly reminiscent of al-Qaeda training techniques in Pakistan one group facilitator explains her mission:

The star of the film is Pastor Becky Fischer, who explains the startling mission of her "Kids on Fire" camp: "I want young people to be as committed to laying down their lives for the Gospel as they are in Pakistan."

At the camp, the children are asked: "How many of you want to be those who will give up your life for Jesus?" Little hands shoot up from every direction. They are told: "We have to break the power of the enemy over the government."

At one point, Becky yells: "This means war! Are you a part of it or not?" More little hands.

The message is a little confusing though as in addition to 'breaking the power of the enemy over the government' it seems that the government is also equated to quasi-divine status:

Suddenly, a camp counselor places a life-size cardboard cutout before the group. No, it's not Jesus. It's George Bush. Clapping erupts and Becky encourages them to "say hello to the President." Becky claims that "President Bush has added credibility to being a Christian."

The last comment about credibility seems slightly odd but given her earlier injunction to 'say hello to the President' which was really a cardboard cut-out I suppose there might have been some confusion between Bush and the cut-out and which was exercising the most power.

This would make sense - the cut-out (as far as we know) has not ordered the death of hundreds of thousands of people and is not actively behaving as if demon-possessed rather than spirit-filled (or whatever the phrase is) and, if only by virtue of in-animation, certainly seems a tad 'meeker'.

This article is a must read for all thinking people - if even for its comedy value. Where else can you get comedy gold such as this:

A mother helps her children with homework and informs them that, "Global warming is not going to happen. Science doesn't prove anything."

That's the sort of thing that almost makes you warm to them. Almost. I shall miss them when they're gone.

:D

[Frank777]

Oh, for heavens sake, Segovius.

"little known" and "secretive" summer camps?

Christian camping has been a staple of North American life for at least 200 years, probably a lot more.

Everyone and their mother is aware that, at almost every public opportunity, Christians give people the chance to become born-again.

And yes, Charismatic camps will likely encourage attendees to speak in tongues.

To try to link this with Al Qaeda training camps is dishonest at best.

If you're seriously trying to link Christian camping with anti-government militias in the U.S. Midwest, I think it's clear you have absolutely no understanding of North American Christianity at all.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Frank777
Oh, for heavens sake, Segovius.

"little known" and "secretive" summer camps?

Christian camping has been a staple of North American life for at least 200 years, probably a lot more.

Everyone and their mother is aware that, at almost every public opportunity, Christians give people the chance to become born-again.

And yes, Charismatic camps will likely encourage attendees to speak in tongues.

To try to link this with Al Qaeda training camps is dishonest at best.

If you're seriously trying to link Christian camping with anti-government militias in the U.S. Midwest, I think it's clear you have absolutely no understanding of North American Christianity at all.

I didn't link it - the camp facilitator did - she distinctly referenced camps in Pakistan.

I'm just commenting frank -don't shoot the messenger.

Btw - I have had the horrendous misfortune to be subjected to some of these camps as a child. I think I am still scarred, admittedly they were not so violent then but it was still an experience I am glad is behind me.

[southside grabowski]

The little christians march through our neighborhood at night. They carry torches and clubs and chant in tongues. Very frightening. There are rumors that the little Bible thumpers beat homosexuals and the homeless and burn their bodies on the street. I wouldn't think of going out at night without a large cross.

[segovius]

Originally posted by southside grabowski
I wouldn't think of going out at night without a large cross.

yes, I believe that certain organizations would require that you carry one before you can join in the fun.

Don't forget the gasoline - but I don't need to tell you that do I?

[southside grabowski]

There you go. Bring out the KKK card. Can we get a Hitler ref too?

[Chris Cuilla]

From the article:

While it's never disclosed in the movie, Jesus Camp is in fact a Pentecostal camp, which puts it far to the right theologically and politically, even within the evangelical movement. The directors explained that they didn't want to confuse audiences by disclosing this and instead referred to the camp only as "evangelical."

Other interesting snippets:

And it's no different if Wallis is meeting with the leader of an evangelical mega-church. One such leader recently told Wallis, "I'm a conservative on Jesus, the Bible and the Resurrection, but I'm becoming a social liberal." When Wallis asked why, he heard what has become a familiar refrain: evangelicals are increasingly despairing over the neglect of the poor, the environment, and the U.S. inaction on fighting the genocide in Darfur.

And today, many evangelical leaders believe that a growing number of these voters are prepared to return to the Democratic fold, but only if Democrats stop misunderstanding, neglecting, and even intentionally ignoring what was and should be a natural constituency.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by segovius
A new documentary by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady - the directors of the amazing Boys of Baraka which won several awards earlier this year - lifts the lid on the little known and secretive Christian summer camps for kids that are experiencing phenomenal growth across the US.

In scenes that will prove disturbing to many, the directors gain unprecedented aspects to these secretive institutions and document the more shocking aspects of these camps - children speaking in tongues and talking of being "born again" at age 5.

Among other disturbing revelations, the film Jesus Camp (http://www.alternet.org/movies/37373/) for the first time records filmed proof of the indoctrination of children into a potentially violent mindset.

In scenes chillingly reminiscent of al-Qaeda training techniques in Pakistan one group facilitator explains her mission:



The message is a little confusing though as in addition to 'breaking the power of the enemy over the government' it seems that the government is also equated to quasi-divine status:



The last comment about credibility seems slightly odd but given her earlier injunction to 'say hello to the President' which was really a cardboard cut-out I suppose there might have been some confusion between Bush and the cut-out and which was exercising the most power.

This would make sense - the cut-out (as far as we know) has not ordered the death of hundreds of thousands of people and is not actively behaving as if demon-possessed rather than spirit-filled (or whatever the phrase is) and, if only by virtue of in-animation, certainly seems a tad 'meeker'.

This article is a must read for all thinking people - if even for its comedy value. Where else can you get comedy gold such as this:



That's the sort of thing that almost makes you warm to them. Almost. I shall miss them when they're gone.

:D


Seg,

Of all the folks I've encountered here on AI and well, anywhere, you are unquestionably the most desperate to slam Christianity in any form possible. One must wonder...why?

You linked to a biased article written about a biased movie. you then make biased interpretations that, if nothing else, show your pure and utter ignorance of Christianity. Worse, you find examples of true extremists in Christianity and claim they represent the faith as a whole.

Where do I begin with the post? Let's start with the term "Christian Soldiers." This is not a new term, and it does not mean "those who use violence to spread God's will." The term has been used to describe those who evangelize for the sake of saving their fellow human beings...an "army" of Christians does not refer to militance.

Now I realize you'll turn around and accuse me of being a member of the Religous Right and proceed to dismiss me. But I'll save use that discussion by just coming out and telling you my background. I am from a Luthern family that went to church somewhere between regularly and "not very much." I now consider myself a Christian though I really do not attend church any longer. I believe Christ died for my sins. I believe the bible is God's word translated through men who did a nice job changing it to their liking in some places. I also think that some of it is literal and some of it is not. My wife's family, particularly her sister and brother-in-law are essentially "born again" Christians. Last week I was invited to the Promise Keepers event in Baltimore, and I ended up going. Though I can't say I bought into all of what was presented, I can tell you that even such a conservative organazation (some would say, "fundmental") is not what I can only assume you think they are. It was really an experiment for me, on that I'm not sure I'll repeat. The reason I present is that I didn't meet a single "militant" or person whom I percieved to be waging war on the rest of society. It was a large group of men coming together to worship and be better people.

Now, does that mean that there are no Christian extremists...even violent ones? Of course there are. The problem comes when you portray the majority of the so called regious right as akin to islamic terrorists. The comparison is uttely invalid and I for one am sick of these ridiculous threads you're posting. Your vitrol re: Christianity is really getting tired.

[Chris Cuilla]

There is also something sinister implied in the thread title: "Now they come for the children...."

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
There is also something sinister implied in the thread title: "Now they come for the children...."

Ya think ;) It's typical seg.

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Seg,

Of all the folks I've encountered here on AI and well, anywhere, you are unquestionably the most desperate to slam Christianity in any form possible. One must wonder...why?

You linked to a biased article written about a biased movie. you then make biased interpretations that, if nothing else, show your pure and utter ignorance of Christianity. Worse, you find examples of true extremists in Christianity and claim they represent the faith as a whole.

Where do I begin with the post? Let's start with the term "Christian Soldiers." This is not a new term, and it does not mean "those who use violence to spread God's will." The term has been used to describe those who evangelize for the sake of saving their fellow human beings...an "army" of Christians does not refer to militance.

Now I realize you'll turn around and accuse me of being a member of the Religous Right and proceed to dismiss me. But I'll save use that discussion by just coming out and telling you my background. I am from a Luthern family that went to church somewhere between regularly and "not very much." I now consider myself a Christian though I really do not attend church any longer. I believe Christ died for my sins. I believe the bible is God's word translated through men who did a nice job changing it to their liking in some places. I also think that some of it is literal and some of it is not. My wife's family, particularly her sister and brother-in-law are essentially "born again" Christians. Last week I was invited to the Promise Keepers event in Baltimore, and I ended up going. Though I can't say I bought into all of what was presented, I can tell you that even such a conservative organazation (some would say, "fundmental") is not what I can only assume you think they are. It was really an experiment for me, on that I'm not sure I'll repeat. The reason I present is that I didn't meet a single "militant" or person whom I percieved to be waging war on the rest of society. It was a large group of men coming together to worship and be better people.

Now, does that mean that there are no Christian extremists...even violent ones? Of course there are. The problem comes when you portray the majority of the so called regious right as akin to islamic terrorists. The comparison is uttely invalid and I for one am sick of these ridiculous threads you're posting. Your vitrol re: Christianity is really getting tired.

SDW, I wouldn't accuse you of being in the religious right - the right maybe but I have never thought of you as particularly Christian. But if you say so....

As it happens, I respect anyone who thinks things through and reaches a spiritual conclusion (over say, an atheist or materialist) no matter what it is but that is kind of my point - whether they DO actually think or not.

Thinking is everything - some Christians here do think (Fellowship and Frank would be good examples) though I disagree with their conclusions. Fellowship in particular always seems (so far as I can tell) to 'walk the walk' of what he believes - ie is not a hypocrite.

My point in all this is to point out a (potential) danger.

I'll give you another example: I was at University doing my undergraduate degree in 1992. My university in London was one which specialized in Africa and the Middle East and had many Muslims in it.

My specialization was on Islam and modern cults (including Christian ones) and me and some friends were in trouble a few times from Muslims for saying exactly what I am saying about Christianity now. Strangely, the responses were the same - that we were 'hating Islam', that we were 'accusing all Muslims' etc.

In reality we were pointing out extremism - but the extremists didn't want anything pointed out. They especially didn't want to have it known they were a minority - they had to portray themselves as being the majority, the norm.

Just like now. I have said a million times that these people I am bashing are not Christians, that they are not the 'norm'. No matter. They, and people who support them, have to portray themselves as the real deal.

This is exactly what happened with the Wahabis - and I would say exactly the same now about Islamists if I needed to. But I don't need to - and you all know why.

But it wasn't that way in 92 and it won't be that way with these 'Christians' pretty soon either. Bigotry should unite us - it threatens us all. and if you think there is no bigotry or hate in these people then you need to wake up.

It's absolutely nothing to do with politics.

I would welcome a discussion on this actually but the people most intent on slagging me off for saying these things NEVER EVER enter into a discussion. Never.

They don;t know the theology or the scientific research and they reject it if you show them it. How is this in any way 'open minded'?

We need rationalism, these days and we need it damn quick. It 's one thing that really is black or white - we go forward to the future with a new rationalism (and religious pluralism) and we REALLY achieve freedom and democracy - or (and this is what fundies Islamic and Christian want) we go with them to the medieval and throw away all we have learnt.

I take that threat very seriously and I am going to fight it to the last.

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Ya think ;) It's typical seg.

It's because I still have a sense of humour.

If my detractors had one too they could also make some funny jokes about Islam and we could all have a laugh.

As it is, you'll have to put up with me.

:D

[segovius]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
There is also something sinister implied in the thread title: "Now they come for the children...."

You puzzle me Chris.

If you were to say (for example): "Islamic nutters must be stopped - Islam wants to kill people"

I would say that islam doesn't want this and these people are not Muslims. I wouldn't say "stop bashing Islam" and focus on that.

I have never said that these Christian nutters represent Chrtistianity - in fact I have said many times they don't and proved to any reasonable person they do not act in accordance with the teachings of Christ.

it is YOU who is trying to say that I am claiming they represent Christianity. I think this is because YOU yourself think they do.

I can think of no other reason and you have never denounced their antics despite being asked many times. Fair enough - but they are a threat.

I'm fine with it being kept in the US - it is your 'product' after all. But when they try to export it then they are going to have a problem.....

[southside grabowski]

Seg you have made this point over and over. There are extremists who act in the name of Christianity. I get it. There are extremist who act in the name of Allah. I get it. So where do we go from here?

[segovius]

Originally posted by southside grabowski
Seg you have made this point over and over. There are extremists who act in the name of Christianity. I get it. There are extremist who act in the name of Allah. I get it. So where do we go from here?

We burn them at the stake and kill them......

:D

[segovius]

Seriously - we try to all understand that extremism is extremism and that it stems from a sub-cause: non-thinking or being prevented from thinking.

Both these factors are very present today. For example - the mother's quote in the original article about 'science being not needed' or something worse.

How can that benefit anyone?

Maybe global warming exists maybe not - I don;t know, the point is it will be SCIENCE that proves it one way or another.

We need to get this stuff out of the way before we can move on. The WOT will never be won while this is not sorted - it will just breed more terror. Why? Because ignorance breeds ignorance - only rationalism is the weapon that can bring victory and that is not being used.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius
it is YOU who is trying to say that I am claiming they represent Christianity.

I don't seem to be the only one that gets that same impression from the variety of threads and postings you've made.

It is extraordinarily disingenous of you to a) deny that you are creating the impression (even if you are not saying explicitly) that some small bands of people are representative of Christianity as a whole, b) that some of these groups which you illuminate are even doing the evil things you have suggested, and c) it is merely me claiming you are suggesting/implying/saying all of this.

Originally posted by segovius
I think this is because YOU yourself think they do.

Wrong. Nice try though.

Originally posted by segovius
I can think of no other reason and you have never denounced their antics despite being asked many times.

Of course you cannot.

BTW...denounced whose tactics exactly?

Originally posted by segovius
Fair enough - but they are a threat.

To whom? How?

Originally posted by segovius
But when they try to export it then they are going to have a problem.....

Is that a threat?

[southside grabowski]

Segovious, there is a difference between non-thinking and extremism. Many of the non-thinkers I see are so because they are lazy. They don't read and they seldom look outside of their little box. Most Americans have little interaction with people even slightly different from themselves. Unless one is in a profession that forces such interactions, it takes effort and many are too lazy to put forth that effort. I think that many of the decisions that you dislike are rooted in selfishness and greed much more than in an extremist agenda. I may be naive, but I don’t see Christian extremist as significant players. Not to say they don't need to be watched.

Perhaps you are trying to encourage us to understand Muslim extremists? I agree that terrorism will only be solved when we understand and correct the underling reasons that motivate a young man or woman to blow themselves up for a cause. We cannot "kill all the terrorists” and be safe. The answer is free, economically solid Muslim nations where people can grow up with hope of a good life. I admit I don't know how to do that.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Frank777
Everyone and their mother is aware that, at almost every public opportunity, Christians give people the chance to become born-again. That's quite a generalization. There are plenty of Christian churches, like my own, where they never talk about being born again. If they did, people would leave in droves. My 7-year-old was at a church camp last week, and they never talked about being born again. Yes, it's pretty popular in North America, but my guess is that the majority of Christians here don't talk about being born again.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

och aye the noo, i'm in a bad mood.

[BRussell]

segovius, have you ever seen Hell House (http://www.hellhousemovie.com/hellhouse/index.html)? It's similar, and I know you like to get worked up about these kinds of things. ;)

[segovius]

Originally posted by southside grabowski
The answer is free, economically solid Muslim nations where people can grow up with hope of a good life. I admit I don't know how to do that.

Bingo.

That is the answer and it is easy to do.

Why doesn't it happen?

Christian Extremists. They wan't to convert people - when are you going to understand that? They aren't ever going to say: you choose to be a Muslim, fine. They want people's minds.

You talk often about problems in Iraq - hat you won;t hear is that a lot of it is stirred up by 'Christians' evangelizing over there. You won't admit it but it's true.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius
Bingo.

That is the answer and it is easy to do.

Why doesn't it happen?

Christian Extremists. They wan't to convert people - when are you going to understand that? They aren't ever going to say: you choose to be a Muslim, fine. They want people's minds.

You talk often about problems in Iraq - hat you won;t hear is that a lot of it is stirred up by 'Christians' evangelizing over there. You won't admit it but it's true.

Christian extremists are the reason for the dearth of "free, economically solid Muslim nations where people can grow up with hope of a good life"?

[southside grabowski]

I think it has more to do with greed on the behalf of both Arab and Western leaders and financial interests.

[segovius]

Originally posted by BRussell
segovius, have you ever seen Hell House (http://www.hellhousemovie.com/hellhouse/index.html)? It's similar, and I know you like to get worked up about these kinds of things. ;)

Hehe - it's a classic! That's exactly the sort of thing I do like to get worked up about, you're so right! Positively medieval.

To your earlier post about the 'born-again' thingy : exactly spot-on - and you show perfectly that there ARE two different strains of beliefs here (at least) yours and Franks in this case.

All I am saying is that yours seems progressive and the way forward when compared with less 'empowering' formulations.

I am much in sympathy with certain Christian approaches and your Church sounds like one I would attend. I have a lot of time for many Christian thinkers - Tony Campolo for example - but then that is because they ARE thinkers and (imo) represent true Christianity which does indeed exist.

But for every truth there is a counterfeit if it is of value and I think it needs to be continually pointed out - more often if anything, judging by the reactions of some.

[Northgate]

Originally posted by southside grabowski
There you go. Bring out the KKK card. Can we get a Hitler ref too?

You guys would know. You use it every chance you can.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius

To your earlier post about the 'born-again' thingy : exactly spot-on - and you show perfectly that there ARE two different strains of beliefs here (at least) yours and Franks in this case.

Are you saying that "Christians" that believe in the "born again" concept are not true "Christians"?

[segovius]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Christian extremists are the reason for the dearth of "free, economically solid Muslim nations where people can grow up with hope of a good life"?

Actually yes.

Certainly the current US foreign policy is biased irrevocably towards Israel because of Christian extremists and their moronic mis-interpretation of Scripture.

This has traditionally been the case for a long time but now in Iraq - instead of building a sophisticated westernized Muslim state like say, UAE or other Gulf States - extreme right-wing Christians have been given positions of power in the administration and act from their own bias and stupidity.

And of course there are the 'missionaries' mentioned earlier. (Note: some of these are doing very good work but then they are real Christians unlike the ones of which I speak).

All these factors cause a reaction.

So yes, they are responsible.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Are you saying that "Christians" that believe in the "born again" concept are not true "Christians"?

I am saying that people who are not 'born-again' (whatever they might term it) are not real Christians.

To be 'born-again' implies a death to the old life and the world and an entry into new life and the Christ nature.

If I see someone with the old nature who does not have the Christ nature who makes such claims then I just read my Bible where it says "by their fruits you shall know them" and I draw my own conclusions.

Then I post here and prepare for the stones of the Pharisees.

:D

One more thing: A lot of my posts on this issue are - ie to articles or to comments or events.

As someone who is interested in (real) Christianity - ie the teachings of Jesus Christ - and who upholds them as the utmost of human ideals if only they could be put into practice, then I feel like commenting. Often.

For example, if someone comes on here saying Christ was a paedophile then I will comment and argue against this distortion. if someone Who shall remain nameless says that he never existed and was a Sun God then ditto.

And if someone professing Christian beliefs (CC for example) says a comment like 'keep killing them till they are all dead' then again I will comment on the discrepancy.

It's very simple: [i]just follow the real beliefs no-one - least of all me - is going to ever argue against them.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius
Actually yes.

Certainly the current US foreign policy is biased irrevocably towards Israel because of Christian extremists and their moronic mis-interpretation of Scripture.

This has traditionally been the case for a long time but now in Iraq - instead of building a sophisticated westernized Muslim state like say, UAE or other Gulf States - extreme right-wing Christians have been given positions of power in the administration and act from their own bias and stupidity.

And of course there are the 'missionaries' mentioned earlier. (Note: some of these are doing very good work but then they are real Christians unlike the ones of which I speak).

All these factors cause a reaction.

So yes, they are responsible.

Seems like an overly simplistic analysis.

:\

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius
I am saying that people who are not 'born-again' (whatever they might term it) are not real Christians.

To be 'born-again' implies a death to the old life and the world and an entry into new life and the Christ nature.

If I see someone with the old nature who does not have the Christ nature who makes such claims then I just read my Bible where it says "by their fruits you shall know them" and I draw my own conclusions.

All fine and fair enough.

It just seemed like in your exchange with BRussell, that you both are implying that real Christians don't talk about this "born again" stuff.

Perhaps I am mis-reading.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
All fine and fair enough.

It just seemed like in your exchange with BRussell, that you both are implying that real Christians don't talk about this "born again" stuff.

Perhaps I am mis-reading.

Can't speak for BR, but to be fair, I have known many that do use this term that do seem to have experienced a genuine change.

I am not talking about those.

[MarcUK]

completely off topic, maybe ill comment later but check out this Jesus Video....:lol:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8075724674317499248&q=jesus+the+musical

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Seg,

Of all the folks I've encountered here on AI and well, anywhere, you are unquestionably the most desperate to slam Christianity in any form possible.



Bugger, im going to have to step up my efforts :p

[southside grabowski]

Are folks like MarkUK and perhaps Sego a form of extremist?

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
completely off topic, maybe ill comment later but check out this Jesus Video....:lol:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8075724674317499248&q=jesus+the+musical

"Islamic Dance Party" is a classic :lol:

Strangely, been to a few Pentecostal meetings just like that too.....

[Chris Cuilla]

Uh oh...this ought to be fun.

( sits back, grabs popcorn and a beer )

:lol:

[segovius]

Originally posted by southside grabowski
Are folks like MarkUK and perhaps Sego a form of extremist?

You'd need to argue it a bit more succinctly - or someone else could for you - but it is a philosophically valid question "are those that oppose extremism extreme?"

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius
You'd need to argue it a bit more succinctly - or someone else could for you - but it is a philosophically valid question "are those that oppose extremism extreme?"

I'll throw in "are those intolerant of intolerance intolerant"...and..."if a man is speaking in a the woods, and there is not woman around to hear him, is he still wrong?"...and..."Chicken? Egg? Who's first?"

( sits back, grabs popcorn and a beer )

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by southside grabowski
Are folks like MarkUK and perhaps Sego a form of extremist?

Same question as should I tolerate intolerance... Very difficult to answer, and at the end of the day you have to be very careful that in staring the monster in the face, you do not become a monster.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
I'll throw in "are those intolerant of intolerance intolerant"...and..."if a man is speaking in a the woods, and there is not woman around to hear him, is he still wrong?"...and..."Chicken? Egg? Who's first?"

( sits back, grabs popcorn and a beer )

Of course those intolerant of intolerance are intolerant by definition.

Imo there is nothing wrong with this - Jesus himself was intolerant of certain things so a little metaphorical fashioning of whipcords and table-turning can surely be in order. Literal over metaphorical on occasion could be stretched to too in my book.

Don't know about men in the woods or chickens, will bow to your greater experience there, but I can say that the issue of 'extremism' is different to intolerance.

Extremism is never extreme to an extremist and it is in any case, subjective. Intolerance is more clear-cut.

Unless you are an extremist who is intolerant - then you call it 'compassion'.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius
Of course those intolerant of intolerance are intolerant by definition.

Imo there is nothing wrong with this - Jesus himself was intolerant of certain things so a little metaphorical fashioning of whipcords and table-turning can surely be in order. Literal over metaphorical on occasion could be stretched to too in my book.

<snip> but I can say that the issue of 'extremism' is different to intolerance.

Extremism is never extreme to an extremist and it is in any case, subjective. Intolerance is more clear-cut.

Ahem...** cough **...I was attempting to inject some levity...but if you want to debate...well...well I agree with you. :\ ;)

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
Same question as should I tolerate intolerance... Very difficult to answer, and at the end of the day you have to be very careful that in staring the monster in the face, you do not become a monster.

Not the same question at all.

People like Ghandi did not tolerate intolerance - many people in fact such as those who fought to repeal the corn-laws, the Suffragettes, US civil Rights Workers.

In many of these cases it is not necessary to be extreme to win - 'extremist' is just the label the real extremists will put on you if you try as a means of neutralizing you as a threat without having to actually kick your head in. Which they will probably do if necessary when it comes down to the wire.

Looks like you've bought into their redefinition.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Ahem...** cough **...I was attempting to inject some levity...but if you want to debate...well...well I agree with you. :\ ;)

Yes, I know you were attempting witticism. It's just that we can't be seen to be agreeing - I've got a bad reputation to consider.

:p

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by segovius
Yes, I know you were attempting witticism. It's just that we can't be seen to be agreeing - I've got a bad reputation to consider.

:p

Crap. Damn. Won't happen again. ;)

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Uh oh...this ought to be fun.

( sits back, grabs popcorn and a beer )

:lol:

ok i'll spoil the fun. Why is it Chris, that if we have childrens Xian camps where Bush, Jesus, etc are portrayed as heroes, and conversion is sought, why is this any different than a (hypothetical) Islamic Childrens camp where Osama and Muhammed are portrayed as heroes?

What makes one a perverse attempt at brainwashing the innocent, and the other perfectly acceptable?

Another quick question...Why do evangelicals even want to convert people anyway. You use fear (satan, hell etc) and false promises (heaven, eternal life) to either scare or reward people into finding God. Can they be true conversions to walk the path? Or just manipulations of vulnerable people.

Surely being a genuinly born again would mean that you havn't been tricked into finding God, and if people really want to find God, it must be a choice in their hearts to go to him.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by segovius
Becky claims that "President Bush has added credibility to being a Christian."
That's classic. :lol:

[Northgate]

I almost spit up my Diet Dew when I read that line. :lol: :lol:

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by segovius
SDW, I wouldn't accuse you of being in the religious right - the right maybe but I have never thought of you as particularly Christian. But if you say so....

As it happens, I respect anyone who thinks things through and reaches a spiritual conclusion (over say, an atheist or materialist) no matter what it is but that is kind of my point - whether they DO actually think or not.

Thinking is everything - some Christians here do think (Fellowship and Frank would be good examples) though I disagree with their conclusions. Fellowship in particular always seems (so far as I can tell) to 'walk the walk' of what he believes - ie is not a hypocrite.

My point in all this is to point out a (potential) danger.

I'll give you another example: I was at University doing my undergraduate degree in 1992. My university in London was one which specialized in Africa and the Middle East and had many Muslims in it.

My specialization was on Islam and modern cults (including Christian ones) and me and some friends were in trouble a few times from Muslims for saying exactly what I am saying about Christianity now. Strangely, the responses were the same - that we were 'hating Islam', that we were 'accusing all Muslims' etc.

In reality we were pointing out extremism - but the extremists didn't want anything pointed out. They especially didn't want to have it known they were a minority - they had to portray themselves as being the majority, the norm.

Just like now. I have said a million times that these people I am bashing are not Christians, that they are not the 'norm'. No matter. They, and people who support them, have to portray themselves as the real deal.

This is exactly what happened with the Wahabis - and I would say exactly the same now about Islamists if I needed to. But I don't need to - and you all know why.

But it wasn't that way in 92 and it won't be that way with these 'Christians' pretty soon either. Bigotry should unite us - it threatens us all. and if you think there is no bigotry or hate in these people then you need to wake up.

It's absolutely nothing to do with politics.

I would welcome a discussion on this actually but the people most intent on slagging me off for saying these things NEVER EVER enter into a discussion. Never.

They don;t know the theology or the scientific research and they reject it if you show them it. How is this in any way 'open minded'?

We need rationalism, these days and we need it damn quick. It 's one thing that really is black or white - we go forward to the future with a new rationalism (and religious pluralism) and we REALLY achieve freedom and democracy - or (and this is what fundies Islamic and Christian want) we go with them to the medieval and throw away all we have learnt.

I take that threat very seriously and I am going to fight it to the last.

I'd like to take that at face value, but I'm not even sure you do that, so I can't. I wonder, if the groups you refer to are really in the vast minority, why not spend your time exploring say, Muslim extremism? It seems there are a lot more Muslim extremists, no? Secondly, one of the main problems I have with your posts relates to your comparison of Christians fundamentalists to Muslim fundamentlists. They are just not the same thing, particularly with regard to violence. You might find the occasional group, but it's nothing like the 5% or more of Muslims that subscribe to a violent extremeist ideology. I just don't see how you compare a Christian camp to extreme Islam, nor why you would even attempt to do so.

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
I'd like to take that at face value, but I'm not even sure you do that, so I can't. I wonder, if the groups you refer to are really in the vast minority, why not spend your time exploring say, Muslim extremism? It seems there are a lot more Muslim extremists, no? Secondly, one of the main problems I have with your posts relates to your comparison of Christians fundamentalists to Muslim fundamentlists. They are just not the same thing, particularly with regard to violence. You might find the occasional group, but it's nothing like the 5% or more of Muslims that subscribe to a violent extremeist ideology. I just don't see how you compare a Christian camp to extreme Islam, nor why you would even attempt to do so.

Well I have. You can search the posts here - there was a very long thread about Fundamentalism and the Saudis being responsible for world terrorism etc. There are many.

But the reason I don't are as I implied: it is superfluous - everyone knows there is a threat there. Only an idiot would deny it. And besides, there are many others here doing that.

Re the comparison: I agree. But these things evolve. Islamic extremism now is far worse than it was ten years ago. And all that started from a very small seed in Afghanistan. Personally I used to support the Afghan mujahidin in their war against the Soviets and so did many so-called 'liberals'. Certainly the US did too. Of course then there was only a very, very small bunch of radicals. So small that no-one noticed. I didn't know and I was studying this area.

I would say that Christian extremism has the potential - not the certainty - but potential to grow into something dangerous, Of course it will take a different form but it might be dangerous. How can you say it won't? Better safe than sorry.

I bet you wouldn't apply the same logic to say, a suspected terrorist. If he was acting suspicious then you would say 100% check him out. That's all I'm saying. of course it depends what you view as 'suspicious' but that's a different story.

In my view it comes down to this: we need tolerance and peace. We need to strive to get it. We will know we have it when I can be of religion X and you of religion Y and we can both stand next to an atheist (say) and we can all say - "We all believe different things and I even think my neighbour is wrong but it is no part of my belief to convert him or change him in any way".

That's how I cut it up: if your religion tries to change my way of life it is intolerant. Liveit, believe what you want but don;t try to change anyone else or convert them. No-one has that right.

And there are plenty of so-called Muslims and so-called Christians doingt exactly that all over today. Some do it with words, some do it with bombs - some move form one to the other.

I'm talking about freedom. I think you can understand that -it's merely a question of whether you believe these people are trying to change others and - if they are - whether it matters.

Perhaps to you it doesn't. Fair enough - but to me it does.

[rufusswan]

I hope this thread doesn't stop here as it has been worth many laugh out loud chuckles. Might I say "Divinely Humorous"?

I just love when folks insert 'religion' into what should be a thoughtful topic. There always seems to be someone who does not hesitate to be pompous and self-rightous, and to assert that they can distinguish between "Real/True" [insert name of religion here]'s from those "UNReal/UNTrue" [insert name of religion here]'s.

How in the blazes do folks like that come to posess that ability???

Is it learned in some church camp or seminary?

Is it by some divine intervention of their god?

Do your read the sacrificial remains of a slaughtered animal?

Can you now buy a "Real [insert name of religion here] scanner similar to a police scanner at the local Radio Shack?

Or is it like the "GayDar" 6th sense that so many people have developed in the last few years to spot homosexuals/lesbians 'at a glance, and from a distance'?

I wonder.

Paz

[MarcUK]

Possesing that 'ability' is a sign of ignorance and arrogance.

Ignorance of all the other religions, cultures and values
Arrogance in beliving your religion, culture and values are superior to everyone elses.

[finboy]

The whole "born again" thing is relatively recent in terms of being a label. There weren't that many people who were "born again" in mainstream Protestant Christianity in the US when I was growing up. And I grew up in a VERY evangelical church. But the SnakeHandlers were always on the fringe, as were the born again types.

It's been used as a tag (or codeword) by the media and the Left, and so it's been made more widespread and scary than it should be.

[SDW2001]

Seg.

Re the comparison: I agree. But these things evolve. Islamic extremism now is far worse than it was ten years ago. And all that started from a very small seed in Afghanistan. Personally I used to support the Afghan mujahidin in their war against the Soviets and so did many so-called 'liberals'. Certainly the US did too. Of course then there was only a very, very small bunch of radicals. So small that no-one noticed. I didn't know and I was studying this area.

I would say that Christian extremism has the potential - not the certainty - but potential to grow into something dangerous, Of course it will take a different form but it might be dangerous. How can you say it won't? Better safe than sorry.

That's absurd. You're comparing the threat of muslim extremism as it was 10 years ago to Christian funamentalism of today? Seriously...think about that claim for second. What is causing you to take Christian fundamentalists as such a threat or potential future threat? Redical Islam has been preaching the destruction of the West for almost 40 years. I don't see any large Christian movements (or even respectable size ones) preaching that kind of violence...just because someone worships another God. I don't see Christians being put to death for wearing their beards too short. Or listening to a certain type of music. I don't see Christians raping women who show their faces in public. The two just cannot be compared because they're not the same. Never will be.

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Seg.

That's absurd. You're comparing the threat of muslim extremism as it was 10 years ago to Christian funamentalism of today? Seriously...think about that claim for second. What is causing you to take Christian fundamentalists as such a threat or potential future threat? Redical Islam has been preaching the destruction of the West for almost 40 years. I don't see any large Christian movements (or even respectable size ones) preaching that kind of violence...just because someone worships another God. I don't see Christians being put to death for wearing their beards too short. Or listening to a certain type of music. I don't see Christians raping women who show their faces in public. The two just cannot be compared because they're not the same. Never will be.

Well, firstly, I think a brief history lesson focusing on the horrors of the Crusades will show that they could easily be a threat and do have something of a track record in this department. All time undisputed world champs you might say. I can supply data on this if you like with blood-curdling examples.

So clearly the potential is there.

But that is not my point. You are talking about specific kinds of threats - an Islamist 'flavour' if you like. Of course the Christian tyranny will not take this exact same form.

Fascism today is nothing like the Third Reich - does that make it less of a threat? No. A charging rhinoceros, a Black Widow spider and the plant Belladonna are all threats. Their obvious differences do nothing to detract from that.

But moving on: what is the exact nature of the 'Christian threat' - can we quantify it? Yes.

I do not rule out the possibility that extreme violence and massacres would not be a part of some future 'Christian' modus operandi, indeed the people of Iraq can bear first-hand witness to that in many cases and soon the 'Christian' President Mr Bush will be acquainting innocent Iranians with more of the same. Of course you would not agree with this - to you these are probaly legitimate deaths and most likely not coming under the 'Christian' banner.

However, to me they are murders which - in some cases (not all) do come under a 'Christian' heading. Of course in the broader sense they are definitely 'Christian' in the sense they are committed by the Christian west - and indeed this is the exact same rule applied to atrocities emanating from the east. They are Muslim. Whether the perp is or not.

I could mention the Lord's Rebel Army here - responsible for more deaths and massacres than any other terrorist group currently active. Although of course, they are not mentioned much and allowed to run free. Christians - or claim to be. But I do not want to dwell on these issues of violence as I see the threat as not being primarily a violent one.

And this is the point: the threat is a threat to freedom. of course it may involve violence (currently as part of the deprivation of freedom the US is utilizing torture - a staple since the Inquisition) but this is secondary.

The threat is to society as we know it - curiously, exactly the same as the Islamists are a threat to society as we know it - they are just coming from different directions using different techniques: violence on the one hand and suppression on the other.

So this is the threat I see: that I will one day not be able to read books of my choice. See films of my choice. Espouse religious ideas of my choice. Study issues of my choice.

It's happening. It may just be that it doesn't apply to you and you will lose nothing - you may even gain. All I am saying is there are many of us who will lose - and society will lose too.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by segovius
Well, firstly, I think a brief history lesson focusing on the horrors of the Crusades will show that they could easily be a threat and do have something of a track record in this department. All time undisputed world champs you might say. I can supply data on this if you like with blood-curdling examples.

So clearly the potential is there.

But that is not my point. You are talking about specific kinds of threats - an Islamist 'flavour' if you like. Of course the Christian tyranny will not take this exact same form.

Fascism today is nothing like the Third Reich - does that make it less of a threat? No. A charging rhinoceros, a Black Widow spider and the plant Belladonna are all threats. Their obvious differences do nothing to detract from that.

But moving on: what is the exact nature of the 'Christian threat' - can we quantify it? Yes.

I do not rule out the possibility that extreme violence and massacres would not be a part of some future 'Christian' modus operandi, indeed the people of Iraq can bear first-hand witness to that in many cases and soon the 'Christian' President Mr Bush will be acquainting innocent Iranians with more of the same. Of course you would not agree with this - to you these are probaly legitimate deaths and most likely not coming under the 'Christian' banner.

However, to me they are murders which - in some cases (not all) do come under a 'Christian' heading. Of course in the broader sense they are definitely 'Christian' in the sense they are committed by the Christian west - and indeed this is the exact same rule applied to atrocities emanating from the east. They are Muslim. Whether the perp is or not.

I could mention the Lord's Rebel Army here - responsible for more deaths and massacres than any other terrorist group currently active. Although of course, they are not mentioned much and allowed to run free. Christians - or claim to be. But I do not want to dwell on these issues of violence as I see the threat as not being primarily a violent one.

And this is the point: the threat is a threat to freedom. of course it may involve violence (currently as part of the deprivation of freedom the US is utilizing torture - a staple since the Inquisition) but this is secondary.

The threat is to society as we know it - curiously, exactly the same as the Islamists are a threat to society as we know it - they are just coming from different directions using different techniques: violence on the one hand and suppression on the other.

So this is the threat I see: that I will one day not be able to read books of my choice. See films of my choice. Espouse religious ideas of my choice. Study issues of my choice.

It's happening. It may just be that it doesn't apply to you and you will lose nothing - you may even gain. All I am saying is there are many of us who will lose - and society will lose too.

I think you're really off base with this. I understand the crusades occured, but I've seen nothing to indicate their return. The US is not waging a relgious war in Iraq. You cannot take isolated examples of current violence and project them onto Christians as a whole. Christianity by its very nature does not preach hatred and violence. Radical Islam does.

I fail to see why you make the statement that "someday I will not be able to read books of my choice, see films of my choice, espouse religous ideas of my choice, study issues of my choice." There is nothing in Christianity as a movement that would force any of this upon you. What do you use for that justification, FCC indecency fines? If anything, espousing religous views is being limited by non-evangelicals. You can't even have a non-denominational voluntary prayer at some public school graduations any longer.

You're looking at Fundamental Christianty as a threat. You really can't make that case based on the behavior and beleifs of the vast, vast majority of christians though. Contrast this with Islam, where even moderate muslims can be sympathetic to radical's hatred of the West and statements of violence against it. Any true Christian does not support terror tactics to advance their evangelical views.

I really think you are ignorant of evangelical Christians' beliefs in general. Your misinterpretation of the phrase "soldiers in God's army" is a prime example. I think you have an irrational fear of evangelicals, that you tend to look down on them as peons or lemmings of a sort, and that you ironically resent their ability and right under the Constitution to evangelize their views.

But rest assured, no one is going to rush into your house and confiscate your porn, liquor and Noam Chomsky books, leaving crosses and bibles and "What Would Jesus Do" stickers in their places.

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
But rest assured, no one is going to rush into your house and confiscate your porn, liquor and Noam Chomsky books, leaving crosses and bibles and "What Would Jesus Do" stickers in their places.

Strange, because I grew up with evangelicals and have lived with them all my life as my father is a televangelist of sorts (you might even be familiar with him if you are into that sort of thing) and you know what? That's exactly what he did do very often to both me and members of his congregation.

I would often look out of my bedroom window as a child and see him and his cronies throwing albums, cassettes and books on to a very large fire....

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by segovius
Strange, because I grew up with evangelicals and have lived with them all my life as my father is a televangelist of sorts (you might even be familiar with him if you are into that sort of thing) and you know what? That's exactly what he did do very often to both me and members of his congregation.

I would often look out of my bedroom window as a child and see him and his cronies throwing albums, cassettes and books on to a very large fire....

And...our hour is up. I'll see you next week at the usual time. Here is your prescription for Lithium....

Seriously, you don't think your personal experience might be tainting your objectivity on this? I have never encountered anything like that...and certainly not on a significant scale. One of my wife's uncles is a conservative baptist pastor. While I have to chuckle at some of his behavior (and his family's), I've never seen anything that would indicate he or anyone he knows is into the things you've mentioned.

The problem comes when you take your childhood experiences and conclude that somehow they will become part of a national movement to limit your behavior...or that those experiences will morph into a violent ideology...or both. It's a faulty comparsion as there is nothing to indicate either of those happening. The only indications are apparently in your mind.

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
And...our hour is up. I'll see you next week at the usual time. Here is your prescription for Lithium....

Seriously, you don't think your personal experience might be tainting your objectivity on this? I have never encountered anything like that...and certainly not on a significant scale. One of my wife's uncles is a conservative baptist pastor. While I have to chuckle at some of his behavior (and his family's), I've never seen anything that would indicate he or anyone he knows is into the things you've mentioned.

The problem comes when you take your childhood experiences and conclude that somehow they will become part of a national movement to limit your behavior...or that those experiences will morph into a violent ideology...or both. It's a faulty comparsion as there is nothing to indicate either of those happening. The only indications are apparently in your mind.

Not so - my family were not Baptists btw and I would not include them (Baptists) in my negative analysis - the network of extreme Pentecostals exists and is rampant.

I could give you at least 20 links of extreme examples off the top of my head right now....

I'm watching Brazil though so I won't.....

[Frank777]

Originally posted by segovius
Strange, because I grew up with evangelicals and have lived with them all my life as my father is a televangelist of sorts (you might even be familiar with him if you are into that sort of thing) and you know what? That's exactly what he did do very often to both me and members of his congregation.

I would often look out of my bedroom window as a child and see him and his cronies throwing albums, cassettes and books on to a very large fire....

This explains a lot. At least now we know your weird, constant rantings against Evangelicals are based on personal issues between you and your father.

Of course, the best way to deal with this sort of thing is through personal counselling with a professional. Not by starting thread after thread accusing Evangelicals of having some sort of secret, violent agenda.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Frank777
This explains a lot. At least now we know your weird, constant rantings against Evangelicals are based on personal issues between you and your father.

Of course, the best way to deal with this sort of thing is through personal counselling with a professional. Not by starting thread after thread accusing Evangelicals of having some sort of secret, violent agenda.


Heheh :D

I've done the counselling and cult de-programming already. In fact I resolved all my psychological issues years ago and now am here to help others...

Btw, is there anything you need a helping hand with Frank - PM me in confidence or even anonymously if you feel more comfortable.

I'm listening......

[tonton]

Originally posted by segovius
I would often look out of my bedroom window as a child and see him and his cronies throwing albums, cassettes and books on to a very large fire....

LOL Cat Stevens, no doubt.

[segovius]

Originally posted by tonton
LOL Cat Stevens, no doubt.

Heheh - not sure - I remember a copy of George Harrison's 'All Things Must Pass" (box set) flying towards the pyre but that's fair enough really....can't argue with it......

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by segovius
Not so - my family were not Baptists btw and I would not include them (Baptists) in my negative analysis - the network of extreme Pentecostals exists and is rampant.

I could give you at least 20 links of extreme examples off the top of my head right now....

I'm watching Brazil though so I won't.....

No really, I insist. I would like links. I'm not saying you can't find them, btw. I'm saying that there is no widespread movement that can be compared to radical Islam, and no danger of one forming.

[Frank777]

Originally posted by segovius
Heheh :D

I've done the counselling and cult de-programming already. In fact I resolved all my psychological issues years ago and now am here to help others...

And your idea of "helping others" is starting thread after thread claiming that Evangelical Christians are potential terrorists and a danger to society?

Sorry, I don't buy it. You're clearly still grappling with issues from your childhood experiences.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Frank777
And your idea of "helping others" is starting thread after thread claiming that Evangelical Christians are potential terrorists and a danger to society?

Sorry, I don't buy it. You're clearly still grappling with issues from your childhood experiences.

Not at all. I am very close to my father and we get on well - despite his support and assistance to the Bush cabal.

He perhaps is as supportive of my views on Islam as he might be but I have managed over the years to demonstrate the falsity of much propaganda and he - being an intelligent man - has not been slow to adjust his views in certain regards.

Even he is disillusioned with many of the hucksters he has had to continually meet - I think it was a process that started with Bakker and Swaggart who we both knew well and continues with idiots such as Hinn and Robertson who he has also worked with extensively.

He sees them for what they are - how could you not if you know them? And I agree with him - they are shysters (though he doesn't frame it like that - some have even ripped him off personally but that is another story and not for here). So you are wrong - there is no conflict.

It's just that he is a Christian - a real one - so he forgives while I do not have that luxury. But we both agree on what many of these people actually are.

And yes - I am going to say it again: people who bomb abortion clinics, people who support the mass killing of innocent Iraqis, people who support a President knowing that he lies and that his lies are responsible for thousands of deaths, people who want to impose their extreme views and pass legislation to do so, people who argue against science, people who hate gays - these ARE potential, and in many cases ACTUAL dangers to society.

No other word. Well, there are some but there could be kids reading.....

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
No really, I insist. I would like links. I'm not saying you can't find them, btw. I'm saying that there is no widespread movement that can be compared to radical Islam, and no danger of one forming.

What would the links have to say to convince you? I ask this as an aid to help me find the right ones and not for any other reason.

No point me posting some to have them batted back.

You name your criteria and if I disagree I will prove it by links. If not I will agree you are right.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by segovius
What would the links have to say to convince you? I ask this as an aid to help me find the right ones and not for any other reason.

No point me posting some to have them batted back.

You name your criteria and if I disagree I will prove it by links. If not I will agree you are right.

Sounds like a certain someone is asking me to prove a negative. Hmm? My, how the tables have turned. But I'll play...

I want to see evidence of the kind of fundmental groups you are talking about, groups that are violent and preach violence in the name of Christianity. I would also like to see examples of Christian beliefs that mirror those of Radical Islam (harsh penaties for things like shaving a beard, listening to music, etc.). Finally, would like to see something to suggest that, even if these groups actually do exist, the movement is growing in popularity to the point of it becoming a real threat to your way of life.

[hardeeharhar]

Originally posted by SDW2001
I would also like to see examples of Christian beliefs that mirror those of Radical Islam (harsh penaties for things like shaving a beard, listening to music, etc.).

This in and of itself is a stupid request, you have no evidence that these things occur on a regular basis AND at least as far as music is concerned, it is explicitly verboten in Islam.

The Christian equivalent would be a minister's daughter having sex before marriage. Yeah there would be a "penalty" for such an act, and certainly it would be harsh, disownment etc etc etc...

[hardeeharhar]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Finally, would like to see something to suggest that, even if these groups actually do exist, the movement is growing in popularity to the point of it becoming a real threat to your way of life.

You can't seriously be attempting to separate segovius' way of life from yours can you?

[Frank777]

Originally posted by hardeeharhar
The Christian equivalent would be a minister's daughter having sex before marriage. Yeah there would be a "penalty" for such an act, and certainly it would be harsh, disownment etc etc etc...

Yeah, right. My invitations to all the stonings and honour killings must have gotten lost in the mail.

Darn Canada Post!

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by hardeeharhar
This in and of itself is a stupid request, you have no evidence that these things occur on a regular basis AND at least as far as music is concerned, it is explicitly verboten in Islam.

The Christian equivalent would be a minister's daughter having sex before marriage. Yeah there would be a "penalty" for such an act, and certainly it would be harsh, disownment etc etc etc...

That's not equivalent at all. I'm talking about violence and the militant spreading of that violent group's agenda in the name of God. As for evidence, have you heard of this little group called the Taliban?

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by hardeeharhar
You can't seriously be attempting to separate segovius' way of life from yours can you?

No.

[Frank777]

By the way, it's also quite clear you don't know any minister's kids at all.

[hardeeharhar]

Originally posted by Frank777
By the way, it's also quite clear you don't know any minister's kids at all.

Heh. How wrong you are.

I was referring to religious fanatics of the christian faith, who do disown their children should they not follow the vows of faith is jesus h christ...

[hardeeharhar]

Originally posted by SDW2001
That's not equivalent at all. I'm talking about violence and the militant spreading of that violent group's agenda in the name of God. As for evidence, have you heard of this little group called the Taliban?

Violence against whom?

Are you forgetting the fact that we "are a christian country" with christian soldiers waging war on a particular faith in the name of god or at least in the name of what one man thinks is god.

Or perhaps you are suggesting that Christians cannot possibly be terrorists.

I can easily cite every single european terrorist group of reasonable note to prove you wrong -- and some even do it in the name of god.

Here is the thing, terrorists often have religious motivations, from the IRA to Al Queda because that is the type of fanaticism you need for someone to blow themselves up. Even the american home grown terrorists have religious motivations from the atheist anarchist of the early twentieth century to timmy mcveigh to the branch davidians.

Do religious groups regardless of their particular religious flavor do violent deeds in the name of god?

Yes, all of them.

[Frank777]

Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Heh. How wrong you are.

I was referring to religious fanatics of the christian faith, who do disown their children should they not follow the vows of faith is jesus h christ...

Better than killing them, I suppose. :rolleyes:

[hardeeharhar]

Originally posted by Frank777
Better than killing them, I suppose. :rolleyes:

Since when do muslims kill their children?

[Frank777]

Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Since when do muslims kill their children?

This is what happens when someone realizes his arguments are nonsense.
It becomes necessary to invent counter-claims out of thin air.

When did I claim that "muslims killed their children" in this thread?

SDW mentioned "Radical Islam" and you mentioned Christian "fanatics".

Don't lie about what's being discussed because your arguments don't make sense.

[hardeeharhar]

Originally posted by Frank777
This is what happens when someone realizes his arguments are nonsense.
It becomes necessary to invent counter-claims out of thin air.

When did I claim that "muslims killed their children" in this thread?

SDW mentioned "Radical Islam" and you mentioned Christian "fanatics".

Don't lie about what's being discussed because your arguments don't make sense.

You make a statement that something is better than killing them. Perhaps you were pulling that comment from thin air, but its significance is far more pressing since we have claims of muslim fundamentalists using harsh punishments and violence to enforce their moral code as a counter point to christians not using harsh punishments and violence...

By making that statement, when I was discussing christian fundamentalists use of harsh punishment, you raise the false-spector of a muslim killing a child for some sin...

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Violence against whom?

Are you forgetting the fact that we "are a christian country" with christian soldiers waging war on a particular faith in the name of god or at least in the name of what one man thinks is god.

Or perhaps you are suggesting that Christians cannot possibly be terrorists.

I can easily cite every single european terrorist group of reasonable note to prove you wrong -- and some even do it in the name of god.

Here is the thing, terrorists often have religious motivations, from the IRA to Al Queda because that is the type of fanaticism you need for someone to blow themselves up. Even the american home grown terrorists have religious motivations from the atheist anarchist of the early twentieth century to timmy mcveigh to the branch davidians.

Do religious groups regardless of their particular religious flavor do violent deeds in the name of god?

Yes, all of them.

1. Violence against anyone in the name of God.

2. Not so. We are a majority Christian country waging a war, and not for the purposes of spreading christianity.

3. Yes, they can be. It's irrelevant, but true. Nice try at a strawman, though.

4. Again, that's irrelevant. I have not denied such groups exist, but they are in no way growing in influence to the point where one might suspect that they might limit our way of life at some point in the future. Certainly, they don't compare to radical Islam,

5. Another worthless point. These are groups, not large scale movements in any sense. Find me a large scale Christian movement in this country that preaches the kind of violent extremism that certain sects of Islam do.

The fact is that you and Seg are motivated by fear of what you don't understand. There is no vast Christian conspiracy trying to take away your rights.