Note: TBV reserves the right to ignore, block or delete abusive/disruptive comments.
And here we are calling Tom Cruise crazy for being a scientologist. What the hell is the difference? I'm an atheist. I know some people need "faith" to get through life when they don't want to face reality. But these people are dangerous. Their apocalyptic vision of the future is screwing up our present. We need to fight them and challenge their beliefs. They are wackos.
Excellent post, BTW.
I understand the dislike of Robertson, and the extremist Right. But, the way you've written this article it's like yout saying that if you are a conservative, then you are a radical christian.
I being agnostic, because I like to keep an open mind, get very frustrated by angry missives such as this labeling an entire party as radical. You call them the christian right and Republicans. It's one or the other. The christian right are Republicans, but all republicans are not chritian, nor are they extremists. Me for example. While I do carry some very strong view points, I hardly call myself an extremist.
While on the subject of labeling, which I myself am guilty of at times, you need to consider that your "party" has some real whack jobs also. Now, now, calm down, if I can aknowlegde our whack jobs, you all can be big enough to aknowledge yours.
Michael Moore, Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton, George Soros, The Media, to name a very small few.
So in your anger, remember we've all got our crosses to bare.
Oh, and Kate, while I am not religious, I know many that are because it gives them hope, and they find good friends there and love from others (please no priest comments). Being christian doesn't mean you are a "wacko". It simply mean you believe in something.
I'm sure many of you here have beliefs you feel strongly about, would you like it if I called you a wacko because of them.
Hey, Dave, buddah was an ugly old teacher, waste of your time, wacko!
Tankwomen, you believe in naked warm weather dancing rituals, therefore, you are a wacko! Kate, you lack beliefs, as an athiest, so you are a wacko!
Kinda sucks huh?
I never said all Christians are wackos. Pat Robertson and his ilk are wackos. Even worse, they are dangerous wackos. They want to impose their RELIGIOUS beliefs on the rest of us. It shows how out of touch you are that you put a philanthropist, a filmmaker, a doctor, and a senator in the same category as a religious fanatic. Recognize Robertson for what he is: a nutcase religious fundamentalist with crazy conspiracy theories. My guess is you think Islamic fundamentalists are nutcases. I think religious fundamentalists are nutcases regardless of which god they worship. Of course, Islamic fundamentalists and Pat Robertson worship the same god. It's just Jesus they're in disagreement about!
Jenn - I don't believe that Bruce's post equates all republicans as right-wing christian wackos. republicans, however, have to take responsibility for the shameless way their party has courted this extreme religious element. No one can deny the truth of this - from a portion of the book quoted in Bruce's piece, I offer you this:
"Among the conservative politicians and polemicists who have addressed the Christian Coalition's "Road to Victory" conferences are Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Jack Kemp, Oliver North, William Bennett, William Kristol, Jesse Helms, David Brock, and Dinesh D'Souza. Not only do mainstream conservatives avoid criticizing Robertson and his movement, they rush to their defense in print. When the Anti-Defamation League, in 1994, issued a report critical of the religious right, conservatives like William Bennett, Irving Kristol and his son, William, and Midge Decter denounced the supposed "anti-Christian" and "anti-religious" bias of the ADL and of the media in general. Bennett, for example, has written that "'Christians active in politics are now on the receiving end of an extraordinary campaign of bias and prejudice.'"
And this....
"The chief motive for conservative appeasement of Robertson and the religious right is strategic; as the editor of a leading conservative magazine explained to me in 1992, "'Of course they're mad, but we need their votes.'"
It may not be the religion that matters to some of these republican heavy hitters, but it is the political power associated with the Christian Coalition. That the republican party has gathered this brand of religious fanaticism into its fold shows the dangers of power-seeking politicans- to unite political power and religious fanaticism is to create dangerous theocracy. Iran under the Ayatollahs, Afghanistan under the Taliban, England under Cromwell, historical example after historical example.
If you are truly a conservative, you will soon abandon the republican party. nothing about it in its current incarnation can be seen as conservative.
Jeepers, Jenn is a flake.
She mentions the progressive "whack jobs" (her words) and then mentions:
"Michael Moore, Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton, George Soros, The Media, to name a very small few."
LOL
A documentarian, a former governor and the current head of the Democratic party, a former first lady and current Senator, and "the media."
All the media? LOL
Well, certainly there are a lot of whacko media - Fox News, Hannity and Limbaugh come to mind.
"the media..."
What a laugh - these people from "red voice" are highly amusing!
Jenn,
You're my favorite Red Voicer! As far as the Buddha being ugly and old, that doesn't bother me. And I can't imagine it bothering any Buddhist, really. He started teaching when he was 35 to the ripe old age of 80. Rumor has it he was pretty damn good looking, but for some reason nobody thought to take a picture.
I certainly don't think all Christians are wack jobs. Nor do I think that all Republicans are nuts.
dave
Mari has already given the response I intended to give to Jenn's comment.
To repeat with slightly different wording, the Christian Right has become the strongest influence in the Republican Party today.
Ronald Reagan when he first ran for California Governor dealt with the potential embarassment of being endorsed by the John Birch Society by saying that if someone endorsed him, it meant they were buying into his agenda, not that he was buying into theirs.
In 1980, he and his party could still apply something like that attitude to the Christian Right. After decades of this alliance, though, the agenda if the Christian Right *is* the agenda of the Republican Party.
Bologna!
So now ya knock everything about his Old Right stance.
Poop!
Commenting by HaloScan
