I can't help but this odd melding between hate christianity and
corporate greed is some kind of natural order of things. When species
overpopulate they self destruct.

A world-wide killdown of perhaps 50% of all humans would certainly be a
positive step from an evolutionary standpoint.

I'm just glad that I don't have kids.

Let me pee on your parade.

Guys, I've grown up in the Bible Belt and have probably heard just
about every protestant religion at some point or another, and I have
never heard anyone in any of these religions spew such unadulterated
crap. In fact, quite the opposite, many protestant religions are quite
active in the environmental movement. I'm not talking about some wacko
the has a congregation of 6, but any viable and active large
congregation. Is this part of the creed of the Southern Baptist, the
largest single protestant group in the the US? I can tell you that it
isn't.

I've come to the conclusion that the current fad of the left of blaming
all the ills of the country on the Christian Right as an act of mental
masturbation of a group that lost contact with the mainstream in 1968
and never has caught up. Even in this election, the percentage of
"Christian" voters was nearly the same as in past elections. But it's
easier to blame the "Christians" than to admit that the party supported
unpopular social views while failing to articulate a clearly defined
alternative to the present administration.

I personally feel that mindless superstition and senseless rituals are
all that seperate us from the animals, but blaming the "Christians" for
the failure of the Democratic party and the percieved lack of
environmental concern of the present administration is laughable.

"Larry C" wrote in message
oups.com...
Let me pee on your parade.

Guys, I've grown up in the Bible Belt and have probably heard just
about every protestant religion at some point or another, and I have
never heard anyone in any of these religions spew such unadulterated
crap. In fact, quite the opposite, many protestant religions are quite
active in the environmental movement. I'm not talking about some wacko
the has a congregation of 6, but any viable and active large
congregation. Is this part of the creed of the Southern Baptist, the
largest single protestant group in the the US? I can tell you that it
isn't.

I've come to the conclusion that the current fad of the left of blaming
all the ills of the country on the Christian Right as an act of mental
masturbation of a group that lost contact with the mainstream in 1968
and never has caught up. Even in this election, the percentage of
"Christian" voters was nearly the same as in past elections. But it's
easier to blame the "Christians" than to admit that the party supported
unpopular social views while failing to articulate a clearly defined
alternative to the present administration.

I personally feel that mindless superstition and senseless rituals are
all that seperate us from the animals, but blaming the "Christians" for
the failure of the Democratic party and the percieved lack of
environmental concern of the present administration is laughable.


Larry, its your assertation that YOU know mindset of the 'mainstream' that
is precisely the core of what is so distasteful ABOUT the Christian right.
The 'moral majority' was neither moral nor in majority back in the 1970s,
nor is it today. And the entire 'we have Bush because of a failure of the
democratic party' line is precisely what your political leaders are telling
you to believe while they manipulate the media and the laws to their own
benefit, not yours. You'd be much more accurate to say "we have Bush because
a lot of gullible people voted without looking too deeply into the
situation, exactly as they were told to do."

Maybe mindless superstition and senseless rituals are all that separate YOU
from the animals, but I like to think that we have the ability to reason and
make judgements. Based on that last election, though, I'm not so sure.

--riverman

Larry C wrote:

....stuff deleted
I've come to the conclusion that the current fad of the left of blaming
all the ills of the country on the Christian Right as an act of mental
masturbation of a group that lost contact with the mainstream in 1968
and never has caught up. Even in this election, the percentage of
"Christian" voters was nearly the same as in past elections. But it's
easier to blame the "Christians" than to admit that the party supported
unpopular social views while failing to articulate a clearly defined
alternative to the present administration.

I personally feel that mindless superstition and senseless rituals are
all that seperate us from the animals, but blaming the "Christians" for
the failure of the Democratic party and the percieved lack of
environmental concern of the present administration is laughable.


Larry,

Sadly, this agenda is real. It was first expounded by James Watt about
20 years ago, and there are individuals in Bush's cabinet who also hold
this view. Nobody said that this was a mainstream movement, nor that it
was the agenda of all protestent religions, just that it exists. Sadly,
these cultists are in positions of power in our government. Moyer is not
the only individual who has stated this, he is just one of many
competent journalists who have.

Rick

"riverman" wrote in message
...

"Larry C" wrote in message
oups.com...
Let me pee on your parade.

snip



Larry, its your assertation that YOU know mindset of the 'mainstream' that
is precisely the core of what is so distasteful ABOUT the Christian right.
The 'moral majority' was neither moral nor in majority back in the 1970s,
nor is it today. And the entire 'we have Bush because of a failure of the
democratic party' line is precisely what your political leaders are
telling you to believe while they manipulate the media and the laws to
their own benefit, not yours. You'd be much more accurate to say "we have
Bush because a lot of gullible people voted without looking too deeply
into the situation, exactly as they were told to do."

Maybe mindless superstition and senseless rituals are all that separate
YOU from the animals, but I like to think that we have the ability to
reason and make judgements. Based on that last election, though, I'm not
so sure.

--riverman


And here you have the arrogance of the democratic party. If you don't agree
with me, you must be "gullible", you must be dumb and you must must be
wrong.

Idiot.

If you were willing to get your head out of... the sand, you'd see that
there are extremists on both the left and the right. There are intelligent
well-meaning people on both sides. Unless you got your opinions from a
mountain top, they aren't perfect and subject to be dead wrong.

It is perfectly acceptable for others to look at the facts and come to
conclusions that differ with your point of view. No matter how precious it
is to you and no matter how sure you are that your opinion must be the Only
One, there must be room for disagreement in any great country.

Lord Monkey Fist wrote:
"riverman" wrote in message
...

"Larry C" wrote in message
oups.com...
Let me pee on your parade.

snip



Larry, its your assertation that YOU know mindset of the
'mainstream' that
is precisely the core of what is so distasteful ABOUT the Christian
right.
The 'moral majority' was neither moral nor in majority back in the
1970s,
nor is it today. And the entire 'we have Bush because of a failure
of the
democratic party' line is precisely what your political leaders are

telling you to believe while they manipulate the media and the laws
to
their own benefit, not yours. You'd be much more accurate to say
"we have
Bush because a lot of gullible people voted without looking too
deeply
into the situation, exactly as they were told to do."

Maybe mindless superstition and senseless rituals are all that
separate
YOU from the animals, but I like to think that we have the ability
to
reason and make judgements. Based on that last election, though,
I'm not
so sure.

--riverman


And here you have the arrogance of the democratic party. If you don't
agree
with me, you must be "gullible", you must be dumb and you must must
be
wrong.

Idiot.

If you were willing to get your head out of... the sand, you'd see
that
there are extremists on both the left and the right. There are
intelligent
well-meaning people on both sides. Unless you got your opinions from
a
mountain top, they aren't perfect and subject to be dead wrong.

It is perfectly acceptable for others to look at the facts and come
to
conclusions that differ with your point of view. No matter how
precious it
is to you and no matter how sure you are that your opinion must be
the Only
One, there must be room for disagreement in any great country.

And as long as they keep making the same conclusion about our
gullibility, they will keep seeing the same results. Out of touch, and
out of office! TnT

On 6-Feb-2005, "Larry C" wrote:

I've come to the conclusion that the current fad of the left of blaming
all the ills of the country on the Christian Right as an act of mental
masturbation of a group that lost contact with the mainstream in 1968
and never has caught up.

And yet the anti-liberal stance is just the right blaming the left for
all the ills of the country.

Mike

On 6 Feb 2005 07:29:22 -0800, "Larry C" vaguely
proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Well that says it all about your opinions.

I personally feel that mindless superstition and senseless rituals are
all that seperate us from the animals,

On 6 Feb 2005 07:29:22 -0800, "Larry C" vaguely
proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Let me pee on your parade.

Now _that's_ going to get you listened to!

Guys, I've grown up in the Bible Belt and have probably heard just
about every protestant religion at some point or another, and I have
never heard anyone in any of these religions spew such unadulterated
crap. In fact, quite the opposite, many protestant religions are quite
active in the environmental movement.

Well I have. I have heard from an otherwise quite sensible Catholic
that world population should not be controlled, because when the
crunch comes, it's simply God's will. ALl the suffereing (which we
already see) is OK. Watt's ideas are only just a bit further around
that bend.

I've come to the conclusion that the current fad of the left of blaming
all the ills of the country on the Christian Right as an act of mental
masturbation of a group that lost contact with the mainstream in 1968
and never has caught up. Even in this election, the percentage of
"Christian" voters was nearly the same as in past elections. But it's
easier to blame the "Christians" than to admit that the party supported
unpopular social views while failing to articulate a clearly defined
alternative to the present administration.


but blaming the "Christians" for
the failure of the Democratic party and the percieved lack of
environmental concern of the present administration is laughable.

Now here I agree with you. But I don't think the "Christians" are the
only ones being blamed. There are many at fault. Rampant greed is the
fault. But if a famous right Christian paints a target on the arse of
all of his ilk, they should blame _him_, not the people who talk
disparagingly about him.

Larry C wrote:

Let me pee on your parade...


Thank you for not peeing in the river.



The point is to raise environmental consciousness. What little I know
of the Bible isn't supportive of an environmental ethic.

There's the Garden of Eden, from where man was banished. There's
dominion over the earth and its creatures, ranking the environment
subordinate to man. There's the idea that Jesus can multiply fish and
bread from thin air to feed the masses. Jesus was a carpenter and hung
on a wooden cross, placing forest products in a strict utilitarian
context. There's raising the dead and reincarnation, which implies a
spiritual violation and divorce of spirit from the natural order of
things. There's the whole famine, plague, flood thing of environment
as antagonist.

Then there's the idea of hell being a volcanic, subterranean realm in
earthly bowels made of fire and brimstone. I don't know if that last
idea is in the bible, but it is certainly popular among Christians.
The point is the earth is not a happy place for Christians, and their
ultimate goal is to reach somewhere better. For Christians, the earth
is a stepping stone, a place of trials and tribulations, and in whose
bosom lay the fire and brimstone of eternal damnation. The Bible, as
used and interpreted by the majority of Christian fundamentalists, is
not a model of environmental stewardship.





--
Burn the land and boil the sea
You can't take the sky from me

- From "Ballad of Serenity" by Joss Whedon