Today’s “christians” have little, if anything, to do with Jesus Christ, and it has become all but impossible to distinguish them from any other hate group.

Some people excuse almost anything from their fellow religionists. They don't speak out about people who "believe," for some reason or another. Instead, they make strange, logic-free arguments and cast all religion as a "good for society" sort of thing.

Any argument to the contrary results in accusations of "ganging up" on religion by those who disbelieve. You won't find those people saying that those conservative, right-wing Christians are wrong, even. They won't fight their destructive ideas, but will make some sort of generalized argument in favor of religion. Any religion. Whatever religion. It's all "good," see.

Actually, such folks are outnumbered in this open forum designed for the discussion of Religion, but they're vocal as can be about their "tolerance" for anything religious in nature. Some regular visitors to this Group point that out to them, and get called names for doing so.

Thanks for stopping in. Pull up a pew and have a seat. Join in the conversation. We have openings in the "choir," too, if that interests you.

They don't hide it anymore.

But take away their tax exempt status and you can bet they'd scream to high heaven.

It's all well-engineered this campaigning from the pulpit. They know exactly where the lines are and exactly how to stay within them, while making their message crystal clear.

And the rest of Christendom doesn't protest any of it. For me, that makes them complicit in it, frankly.

I'm sure I'll get an argument, but it's been going on for years without any protest from the denominations that don't engage in such activities. "Thou shalt not judge."

are leading the charge to create a fascist talibornagain theocracy. Won't work though, the billionaires and Nazis will discard them when their usefulness is gone.

When the billionaires find that the religious kooks are no longer useful, and jettison them, it is going to be one ugly divorce.

maybe you could explain further.

Last edited Thu Nov 8, 2018, 10:04 AM - Edit history (2)

up and making a statement. It does not contradict what I said in my OP at all. Perhaps you can address some of the things I raise in my post and in the New York Times article, rather than simply referring to a post you made that has little to do with what I said.

The influence and cooperation between conservative, organized Christian groups and conservative politics is extraordinary. If you are not aware of it, then you're not paying enough attention.

What you said does not contradict what I wrote. In fact, it has little or nothing to do with my position, nor to the NYT article I excerpted.

If you want to make a point, at least try to write something substantial in the attempt. Your one-liners and links to irrelevant posts are not responsive.

if you have not seen many such examples that disprove your attempt at analysis, you are not looking.

the same way he has his own personal, unique definitions of words. In Gil's world, one progressive theist outnumbers multitudes of conservative theists.

The number of posts I make, for example, in the Religion Group. He apparently thinks I post too much, since he sometimes writes down the number of my original posts that appear on on the Group's thread list, as though that has some sort of meaning.

It's an odd sort of statistical record-keeping, I think.

As unique as your analysis.

Take note.

Do you honestly think anyone is buying what you're selling?

You keep bringing that up. What do you think the significance of my posting frequency is? You, too, are a frequent, prolific poster. What should I assume, based on that?

I have been posting here since 2008. That's seven years more than you have, unless, of course, you posted under a different name before that. I don't know about that. Seven years from now, no doubt, your post count will be much higher than it is now, assuming you continue to post here.

References to the number of posts a DUer has are always suspect, whether it's a low or high number. It's, you know, sort of rude and irrelevant to do that.