Israel by Wulfenstar

Religion. Everyone needs allies. People of faith tend to stick together. I have my own personal reasons, but most supporters are Christian, and I think it's a solid idea.

Yes, sure, Israel can also be seen as a beachhead colony invading the middle east. It's also a nation of 6 millionish, and a lot of those people are/were Americans.

Might as well ask why people on the right support the troops. IMHO.

I also think there's some propaganda there. But there's no reason to make an enemy of an ally.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 6, 2011 4:50 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Politics, religion and history, is my guess.

Israel is by far a more more free and open country than it's surrounding neighbors. It's a democracy, and for that, we should stand with it.

How much and to what extent, remains debatable. I don't understand the " at any cost " mentality. I don't see why we need to give Israel a blank check , after all we've done for them. I think they should carry the burden on their own a bit more. A lot more, actually.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 6, 2011 7:47 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Well I'm a Christian and I think a lot of us Christians tend to support Israel, we want to protect them etc. As for why America supports them, I think it has to do with the democracy thing as mentioned above. That's a legitimate question you ask though, when you want to know an answer to something asking is the best way to find it.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 2:45 AM

I USED to support them.

Then I read a book called Blood Brothers by a Palestinian Christian priest named Elias Chacour. He described how Zionists came in and scared everyone away from his village; when they returned from hiding, the land had been confiscated and given (or sold) to new Jewish immigrants. His olive orchard, which had been in his family for 3 generations, now suddenly had a new owner. His father had to get himself hired as a worker on his own land so he could continue to care for his own orchards. Being Christian, they were pacifists and did not believe in fighting back violently. Chacour, actually, was very much a turn-the-other-cheek kind of guy.

So then I did more research and discovered the inhumanity of the policies of the govt of Israel (GOI). I cannot imagine God or anyone justifying support of such oppression. Neither can many Israelis.

Soldiers who refuse to serve in the occupied territories. Read the letters.
http://www.seruv.org.il/defaulteng.asp

Btselem, Israeli human rights watch group
http://www.btselem.org/English/index.asp

Breaking the Silence: stories by Israeli soldiers
http://www.shovrimshtika.org/index_e.asp

North American Jews who oppose Zionism: Not in Our Name
http://www.nion.ca/

The GOI is not an ally. It is a leech. A leech that is willing to attack and kill Americans when it suits them.

See USS Liberty. Email and talk to the veterans that survived that attack.
http://www.gtr5.com/summary_of_events.htm

I am still a Christian, but I cannot, in good Christian conscience, support what the GOI has done and is still doing.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 3:36 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

A couple of things.

1. Democracy. There were plenty of other countries in the Middle East, who had close to (if not complete) representative democracy.

If support for democracy was the goal, then why did we blow it with them to support Israel?

2. Im kind of a Christian myself. I can't in good faith support what Israel has done. If its the end times thing, where israel is suppossed to play a key role... then shouldn't God take care of it Himself? Why do we have to keep it open and ready?

3. I think it has to do with money, and influence. LOTS of money, LOTS of influence.

There just really isn't any other explanation.

And that really bothers me.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 4:19 AM

CTS

Nice delineation. I might steal it. I would say that GOI is potentionally a problem, but more I think it's who is in power. There is an actual difference, but the extremists have a lock on power, and they keep this lock on power by keeping everyone afraid.

The more acceptance Israel has, as a state, the more it will weaken those extremists, IMHO. I mean, "nuke israel" and rebel and terrorist leaders chanting "death to israel" is not helping.

Again, of course, it's hard to find a govt. on earth to agree with. I'm very fond of Japan, and would support Japan, but I'd have some doubts about GOJ, and that's far better than most of the competition. Picture the dilemma facing all of my chinese relatives re:GOC.

Jews kick out arabs still happens today, and will keep happening until some system is set up where things can be peacefully negotiated. It's not like this doesn't happen with the US, everywhere, or even Peru. Admittedly, it's not as bad as it is in Brazil (apocalyptically bad, like the CAR,) but it still happens, the GOP (not the GOP, govt. of Peru) is still kicking out amazonas clearing forest and setting up spanish speaking settlements.

To quote Spike "It's what conquering nations do" but if we want it to stop, we need to change the level on which they do it.

Consider this, what if Israel were to take Gaza by purchasing the entire damn thing at fair market value? Then the palestinians could stay, and be muslim israelis (there are already hundreds of thousands of those) or they can move if they feel uncomfy to anywhere else, and not end up slaves or in refugee camps, etc. (And we all know that Israel has plenty of cash to do this with, and we also know why GOI doesn't do it: It would kill the fear they use to stay in power.)

Oh, and the panic that one day a muslim might be elected head of state. But, that happened here, and I didn't notice any change (snark at obama, but I don't get this sercret muslim thing, you can't be an ex-muslim, just like you can't be an ex-catholic or an ex-jew, they'll never let you go ;) )

But really, it's a problem not being solved because TPTB don't want to it solved.

That's why I always say I support Israel, but not Netanyahu, he's a nutcase. But then, so is every US president.

All I ask of a world leader is that they a) look after their own (people, environment, country, whatever,) and b) that they be reasonable. Sure, no one since Rabin fits that criteria, but it's been a very long time since any US president did. (Maybe Nixon, but that's a very tentative maybe. Possibly even Carter or Reagan, but we're getting onto a slippery slope.)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 6:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Again, of course, it's hard to find a govt. on earth to agree with.

Yes, true, anything with G in it is not something I can support. But some G's are worse than others. I esp resent G's that take MY money to do their crap.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 8:35 AM

Yeah, not a fan of the G-thang either. I go back and forth on GE, but not GM, I'm also having some serious doubts about GMO, which I used to support, but now that I see what they're doing with it, I'm worried. I see potential for great good, but its not happening yet. I have serious issues with G's with numbers, like G7, G8 and G20. Also GATT, GWB, GHWB, And I I'm not so sure about the changes to the GRE. I like the introduction of GUI to computers, though I was happy with shell. I remain undecided on GQ and worry about my GP. Though not my GPA, but I'm not real keep on the concept.

Oh, you meant govt.

yeah, you Got a point there.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 9:24 AM

BYTEMITE

Missed one: GPS.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 4:14 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Interesting; as to Wulf’s original question, I looked around, 'cuz I don't understand it either. From a purely rational point of view, I don't understand why we support them NO MATTER WHAT they do.

I found a lot of differing opinions on line:

I found the prejudiced:

Quote:
It is often said that America supports Israel because the Jews in America are better organized, more vocal, contribute money to political candidates and vote for candidates who support Israel.

This argument seems unsupportable. As far as giving money to political candidates, Jews are notoriously tight-fisted when it comes to money. It seems unlikely that they give significant amounts of money to any political candidates.

As far as their voting power is concerned, Jews are mostly concentrated in New York City. In the other 49 states, their vote would not be enough to swing an election. Moreover, the anti-Israeli voters are unquestionably in far greater numbers than the Jews.

As to the other points, it is not correct that all American Jews support Israel. Many American Jews are strongly opposed to Israel and to the policies of Israel.

There must be some other reason why America supports Israel.

The answer is obvious to almost everyone who had studied the subject. America supports Israel because Fundamentalist Christians in America support Israel.

Whereas Jews are tight with their money, Fundamentalist Christians are required by their religion to donate ten percent of their income to religious causes. A surprisingly large number of Fundamentalist Christians follow this rule exactly, especially since they have been taught that they will burn in Hell for all Eternity if they do not do so.

Fundamentalist Christians constitute the biggest voting block in the USA. No political candidate can get elected if the Fundamentalist Christians are opposed.

http://www.anusha.com/usisrael.htm

The rational (sort of):

Quote:
The United States and Israel have many mutual political interests. Ethical and altruistic considerations aside, this is the primary impetus behind international alliances. Geopolitical maneuvering and backroom deals are part and parcel of the international political landscape.

http://christianactionforisrael.org/isreport/julaug04/why.html

And the nationalistic/humanistic (sort of):

Quote:
Because we have a tradition, a bond, alot in common with Israel, we are allies, it's good to have friends in the right places, we're proud of our moral fortitude to support Israel.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090321095704AAF84aF

Then there's the answer from a politico (Inofe):

Quote:
I would like to emphasize seven reasons why Israel has the right to its land.

1. Israel has the right to the land because of all of the archeological evidence.

2. The second proof of Israel’s right to the land is the historic right

3. The third reason that land belongs to Israel is the practical value of the Israelis being there.

4. The fourth reason I believe Israel has the right to the land is on the grounds of humanitarian concern.

5. The fifth reason Israel ought to have the land is that she is a strategic ally of the United States.

6. The sixth reason is that Israel is a roadblock to terrorism.

7. The seventh, and most important, reason why we ought to support Israel is because God said so.

All the details on the reasons at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/660883/posts

I gotta say Inhofe’s “reasons” are mostly reasons I don’t agree with, but that’s just my opinion.

So I guess there are as many answers as there are people answering. I did find this interesting, tho’; apparently from John Adams forward, EVERY President has been effusive regarding “our” support of the Jews and, once created, Israel.

Quote:
John Adams, 2nd President of the United States
I will insist that the Hebrews have done more to civilize man than any other nation. (Letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson)

John Quincy Adams, 6th President of the United States
[I believe in the] rebuilding of Judea as an independent nation. (Letter to Major Mordecai Manuel Noah)

Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States
Not long after the Emancipation Proclamation, President Abraham Lincoln met a Canadian Christian Zionist, Henry Wentworth Monk, who expressed hope that Jews who were suffering oppression in Russia and Turkey be emancipated “by restoring them to their national home in Palestine.”€ Lincoln said this was “a noble dream and one shared by many Americans.”€ The President said his chiropodist was a Jew who “has so many times ‘put me upon my feet’ that I would have no objection to giving his countrymen ‘a leg up’.”

Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States
The allied nations with the fullest concurrence of our government and people are agreed that in Palestine shall be laid the foundations of a Jewish Commonwealth. (Reaction to the Balfour Declaration)
To think that I, the son of the manse, should be able to help restore the Holy Land to its people.

Warren Harding, 29th President of the United States
It is impossible for one who has studied at all the services of the Hebrew people to avoid the faith that they will one day be restored to their historic national home and there enter on a new and yet greater phase of their contribution to the advance of humanity.

Calvin Coolidge, 30th President of the United States
Coolidge expressed his “sympathy with the deep and intense longing which finds such fine expression in the Jewish National Homeland in Palestine.€ The Jews themselves, of whom a considerable number were already scattered throughout the colonies, were true to the teachings of their prophets. The Jewish faith is predominantly the faith of liberty.

John F. Kennedy, 35th President of the United States
Israel was not created in order to disappear. Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and home of the brave. It can neither be broken by adversity nor demoralized by success. It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom.

Lyndon Johnson, 36th President of the United States
The United States and Israel share many common objectives...chief of which is the building of a better world in which every nation can develop its resources and develop them in freedom and peace.

Ronald Reagan, 40th President of the United States
America has never flinched from its commitment to the State of Israel--a commitment which remains unshakable.

George H W Bush, 41st President of the United States
The friendship, the alliance between the United States and Israel is strong and solid, built upon a foundation of shared democratic values, of shared history and heritage, that sustains the life of our two countries. The emotional bond of our people transcends politics.

Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States
Our relationship would never vary from its allegiance to the shared values, the shared religious heritage, the shared democratic politics which have made the relationship between the United States and Israel a special even on occasion a wonderful relationship.

George W Bush, 43rd President of the United States
The alliance between our governments is unbreakable, yet the source of our friendship runs deeper than any treaty. It is grounded in the shared spirit of our people, the bonds of the Book, the ties of the soul.

Barack H Obama, 44th President of the United States
"The United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction."

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 5:22 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Niki, how are you defining "fundamentalist" Christian here? I think generalizations, though really hard to avoid, can be problematic. I guess depending on how you define it, I'm a "fundamentalist" Christian, I'm certainly a Christian either way. I recently started giving 10 percent, for the longest time I was being lazy etc. But no one, no where ever said that I'd burn in hell if I didn't, it just makes sense to, to keep things at church running etc. Plus I believe that God blesses us and we should give back etc. I think you might be thinking of Mormons who come around and enforce the rule more severely, though I'm sure some Mormon among us might dispute that, but anyways. Just sayin.

Just how much I should support Israel is a question that I wonder about and struggle with a bit. But I do believe they have the right to be there. Its a really hard situation, so many people want that land and believe they have the rights to that land, its so complicated.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 5:41 PM

THEHAPPYTRADER

Right on Riona!

Most folks here likely assume near abouts all fundamentalists are of the the westboro 'ilk.' The kind who cherry pick a few verses in Leviticus to spread hatred rather than focusing on Jesus's inclusive message. Ironically, this would make those labeled decided "unfundamentalists" in practice.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 7:15 PM

The fundamentalists around here are adorable. The Amish and other Mennonite sects. They're very charming and not at all obnoxious. The rest of the christian community is mostly just nominal. They're not really religious at all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 7, 2011 9:21 PM

DMAANLILEILTT

I think during the Cold War it was due to the Soviets supporting the Arab states. When the USSR collapsed, the US government couldn't really just cut all ties and probably didn't want to.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 2:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
But I do believe they have the right to be there.

I don't believe they HAD the right to begin with. But they are there now, and driving them out is out of the question. It's not so much about "rights" as it is about "peace."

Elias Chacour, the aforementioned Palestinian Christian, titled his book "Blood Brothers" because he believes that Jews and Arabs are blood brothers who have historically shared that land, and they can share it again.

But I believe, for them to share it peacefully, the GOI has to change its policies toward Palestinians and start treating them like human beings. That is not negotiable.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 4:24 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
But I believe, for them to share it peacefully, the GOI has to change its policies toward Palestinians and start treating them like human beings. That is not negotiable.

They do treat them like human beings...human beings that want to kill them and take their land.

Here is a comparison of Palestinian attitudes that exist today and that would exist if your scenario was to happen:

Today's world:
Jew: "You Palestinian dude, stay in your designated, walled off compound and if you want to work you have to pass through a check point and show your papers."
Palestinian: "Ok, I kill you."

Your world:

Jew: "My Palestinian brother, welcome to my home and all that I have is yours to share."
Palestinian: "Ok, I kill you."

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 5:16 AM

Hero,

You're still an idiot. Some things never change. How many Palestinians do you know? Or Muslims at all?

My solution: Make it economic. And fair. That will stop the violence. Anyone can live anywhere they can afford to. Smart Palestinians will hold out in Gaza until the prices skyrocket. I've seen Gaza, it's not a pit. I get why they don't want to move. But the way things are going, they're going to have to move, because it's about guns, and the Israelis have all the guns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 10:53 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Rion, I’m not defining “fundamentalist Christian” at all; it was a quote. I’m not sure how one would define it, as there are fundamentalist Christians who actually think and behave as real Christians, and those who are convinced anyone who isn’t like them are going to hell and want to “control” others.

I should tell you, since I don’t know you and you haven’t been on RWE in the time I have been, that I am a buddhist and have a lot of prejudice against “organized religion”. So that’s where I’m coming from. We have no “god”. So while I respect and admire anyone of ANY religion who practices what that religion was founded on, I have a real chip on my shoulder about those who call themselves one thing and behave otherwise. That’s all I can say about the term “fundamentalist Christian”, which is bandied about and which I feel is too general a term to denote those I disrespect for their attitudes and actions.

I guess Happy said it best for me, with far fewer words. The Westboros are exactly that to which I was referring, and I despise them. Also, being buddhist, I have been the target of those kinds of people, who believed I was going to hell unless I was like them, and who have attacked me and said and done things to me which in my view have NOTHING to do with Christianity. Buddhists aren’t allowed to proselytize, to the point where we’re not supposed to talk about buddhism unless someone asks three times, so it indicates they’re really interested, not just casually curious.

I agree with DT in that the Amish and other Mennonite sects are usually what I’d consider “real” Christians, except insofar as their strictures and shunning and so forth kind of offend me. I have a couple in Washington who are good friends who are “friends” and don’t believe in that aspect of the faith, and I respect them highly.

As to Israel, yes, it’s complex. To me, however, it’s pretty simple; both Israelis and Palestinians have rights, and when EITHER commits atrocities, they should be held accountable. Gawd how I wish

Quote:
Jews and Arabs are blood brothers who have historically shared that land, and they can share it again.

were possible. Jews and Arabs---and Christians---all began as “blood brothers”, and the virulent hatred of any of them for either of the others has always mystified me and made me sad. Like I said, I’m an opponent of organized religion, in that I think it has done FAR more harm than good over the ages.

Ironically, if we got uncensored, accurate news about the issue, what Hero said:

Quote:
They do treat them like human beings...human beings that want to kill them and take their land

goes just as much for the Palestinians as it does for the Israelis. We just don’t hear about it and America stands by Israel, “right or wrong”. I agree with DT, you’re an idiot, and you reflect far too many idiot Americans.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 12:50 PM

Quote:

I agree with DT in that the Amish and other Mennonite sects are usually what I’d consider “real” Christians, except insofar as their strictures and shunning and so forth kind of offend me.

Niki, sorry their way of life offends you. They did choose it, you know. It's not a mandatory thing that you must join the church when you come of age.

Mostly, from what I've seen, shunning, which involves not talking to people except on a cursory level, mostly comes about because someone has tried to destroy the community. Occasionally it's a personal spat with no real legitimate grounds.

The two notably examples I recall are one man who tried to introduce television into the community, and the other, two guys who tried to introduce cocaine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 1:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Mostly, from what I've seen, shunning, which involves not talking to people except on a cursory level, mostly comes about because someone has tried to destroy the community.

In my shunning, they *accused* me of trying to destroy the community. They always use that as their reason. Whether it is actually true or not is another question.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 6:16 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

CAntt, I imagine shunning is a depressing experience, do you have contact with your family now at all?

Its a lot easier to talk about peace than to actually find it or achieve it.

I do think that introducing cocaine into the community does sound destructive, I think that, for some, being shunned would indeed make them want to behave more in accordance with what people are asking of them. Is it fair? Well personally I'm not so sure it is, but I'm not in charge of how they do things so it isn't really my place. At least the Amish are willing to use medicines/hospitals when its necessary, some people won't do that and I think that can be a problem.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 2:04 AM

KANEMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by dmaanlileiltt:
I think during the Cold War it was due to the Soviets supporting the Arab states. When the USSR collapsed, the US government couldn't really just cut all ties and probably didn't want to.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

The US gives more aid to arab nations than to Isreal...almost two fold. Egypt and Jordon(combined) alone get equal to what Isreal gets. This has always been one of Ron Paul's pet peeves. Cut foriegn aid to all of them. And Isreal would be stronger for it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 3:46 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Hell, I had one PA community of em shun me after one of them tried to attack me with a shovel from behind for no reason I could ever determine, and I beat the crap out of him - kinda pissed me off too, cause I had a good trade relationship goin on with em up to that point.

Far as Israel goes, I got nothin nice to say about em, but I do take issue that when an American politician feels his first campaign stop should be to go prostrate hisself before a foreign power which "rewards" our bend-over-backwards efforts to lick their boots with sabotage, espionage and deceit - any candidate for a public office HERE should not be required to kowtow to them, and any who does should be suspect in their priorities.

Funny thing related to that, though, I stopped at a local barbershop for a trim, and when I noticed the barber wearing a yarmulke (sp?) - I slowly turned away to leave, not wanting to ask and possibly offend the guy, but not wanting to do biz with a possible zionista either, and so he asks me (and he didn't sound upset, just dissappointed)...

"You are anti-semetic ?"
"No, got no problem with your people, just your beliefs."
"You dislike Judaism ?"
"And Christianity, and Islam, yes."
...
"Wow, you must hate everybody, then."
"Don't hate everybody, ain't MET everybody..."
"Ha! well, I am a barber as well as a jew, can you not compromise ?"

Smart guy, I let him cut my hair, most folks once they realize you dislike thier beliefs get all offended, but he didn't see any reason that should get in the way of biz, and neither did I.

Amazing how PEOPLE can always seem to work it out, once you remove God and Government from the picture, yes ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 10:28 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
You're still an idiot. Some things never change. How many Palestinians do you know? Or Muslims at all?

Its not the ones I know that are the problem.

Its the ones dancing in the streets on Sept 11, 2001. I note for the record that it is not Allah that saved those people from death that day...its the mercy of the American people. If the roles had been completely reversed and we'd been gathered in our streets celebrating like that and they were the wounded superpower, they'd have been dropping daisey cutters on Main Street, USA to that us for our support.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 11:12 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Never had any problem with Muslims.

Had a real problem with the "Nation of Islam" monkeys.

But thats a more personal war.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 11:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Its the ones dancing in the streets on Sept 11, 2001.

Yanno, there were Israelis dancing on 9/11/01 too.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html

At some point, one has to ask, do these dancing fools (or bombing fools or whatever fools do) represent all of Israel or all of Palestine?

If not, why penalize those who WEREN'T dancing (or bombing etc)?

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 11:17 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

DT, how about those who are BORN INTO the community? Their only choice is to be cut off from all friends and family if they don’t “play by the rules”. That’s pretty harsh. And yes, the “reasons” for shunning are sometimes questionable. I admire their sense of community, but I did the Mormons, too, until I learned more.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 11:20 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

.....

Why the fuck do we care about Israel? Or China? Or Palestine? Or Europe?

Call me naieve (and Im sure you will), but really?

They are not our kin (to bogart a southern term).

So, unless they mess with us, why do we send money to them, bother with them, or consider them a threat?

I mean really.

Can China hurt us? North Korea? If we were actually self-sufficiant, what threat are they to us?

I mean, come on.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 9, 2011 11:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
CAntt, I imagine shunning is a depressing experience, do you have contact with your family now at all?

I was shunned by my church, which was like family to me. It was very depressing at the time. One day, they were hugging me and telling me they "loved me in the Lord." And the next, they wouldn't even say hi on the street.

Many of them, 20 years later, are now "friends" with me on Facebook, but really, we have nothing in common anymore. We never had, truth be told.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 10, 2011 2:11 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
Niki, how are you defining "fundamentalist" Christian here? I think generalizations, though really hard to avoid, can be problematic. I guess depending on how you define it, I'm a "fundamentalist" Christian, I'm certainly a Christian either way.

AS Niki said, she never mentioned fundamentalist christian or otherwise, just included it in a quote.

But here is an extract from what wiki says:

Quote:
Fundamentalist Christianity, also known as Christian fundamentalism, is defined by historian George M. Marsden as "militantly anti-modernist Protestant evangelicalism." Marsden explains that fundamentalists were evangelical Christians who in the 20th century "militantly opposed both modernism in theology and the cultural changes that modernism endorsed. Militant opposition to modernism was what most clearly set off fundamentalism."[1] The name is taken from the title of a series of essays published by the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, The Fundamentals:

A third strand—and the name itself—came from a 12-volume study The Fundamentals, published 1910-1915.[11] Sponsors subsidize the free distribution of over three million individual volumes to clergy, laymen and libraries. This version.[12] stressed several core beliefs, including:

* The inerrancy of the Bible
* The literal nature of the Biblical accounts, especially regarding Christ's miracles, and the Creation account in Genesis.
* The Virgin Birth of Christ
* The bodily resurrection of Christ
* The substitutionary atonement of Christ on the cross

By the late 1920s the first two points had become central to Fundamentalism.

A fourth strand was the growing concern among many evangelical Christians with the fruits of modernism and the higher criticism of the Bible. This strand concentrated on opposition to Darwinism.

I've done a bit of snipping, but that is kind of the crux. I'd say that was an accurate representation.

Fundamentalist Christians believe in the total truth of the Bible and shun modernity in the form of evolution, in particular. Which would all be well and good if they kept it to their own sects, but they appear to be highly prominent politically in the US and push agendas such as teaching creationism in public schools, and anti gay and anti abortion based legislation.

Basically if it were all down to the 'fundies' and the 'jihadists'we'd all be at holy war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 10, 2011 2:25 PM

Niki

Not the way it works. They grow up and go to school like anyone else, and after school they leave the community for a couple years. Then they come back, and are asked if they want to join the church, get married, and raise a family. 90% do. Those who don't aren't shunned. The shunned are people who go back and then bring something viewed as a disrupting influence from the outside world into the community.... in theory.

The snag comes when there is a personal conflict. Someone with power has something against some new church member and decides to screw them over.

Given the number of problems with our society, and how we treat kids in our school, I think we're in no place to throw stones. I feel fairly certain they have the better of it, for the most part, and that life for the kids is easier than it is out here. As for the adults, they chose that community.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 10, 2011 2:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Basically if it were all down to the 'fundies' and the 'jihadists'we'd all be at holy war.

As an ex-fundie, I feel I know a lot about that subculture. I was in it for 10 years, from ages 12 to 22, when I was proclaimed "gangrene in the body of Christ" which needed to be cut off before infecting the rest of the body.

Needless to say, I am not all that fond of fundies.

BUT, there are good, decent fundies out there, who are kind and not war-mongering and judgmental. Had I not been shunned, I hope I would have been one of them. I even know fundies who are anti-capital punishment and pro-choice, gay-friendly and profanity-using. True, there aren't a lot of them, but they do hold their ground in their fundie communities.

-------
Hell, the only reason the Government hates crime at all is that it despises competition. - Frem

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 10, 2011 3:12 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Yeah, I get that CTS. But as a political force, a collective, what they stand for worries me. I don't want an extremely powerful nation to be led by people who don't believe in evolution and believe in the unerring nature and history of the Bible, and worse, welcome a world war which would herald the return of Jesus.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 11, 2011 3:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
But as a political force, a collective, what they stand for worries me.

You mean you don't want people who spend $27 million on a "Creation Museum" to be in charge of the country?

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/08/the_creation_museum_1.php

Hehehehe.

I remember seeing a dystopia movie called Rising Storm.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100464/

It was about a futuristic, totalitarian Christian fundie state. The paramilitary enforcers in the movie had to say "Praise Jesus" after everything they said, which inevitably resulted in the classic line: "Fuck your rights. Praise Jesus!"

I can totally see that happening if they should ever take over.

-------
Hell, the only reason the Government hates crime at all is that it despises competition. - Frem

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 11, 2011 1:37 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

DT, thank you for educating me, I didn’t know that. I’m not “throwing stones”, I don’t like aspects of either society, and respect other aspects of each.

CTTS:

Quote:
there are good, decent fundies out there, who are kind and not war-mongering and judgmental

I just call those “Christians”...or “real Christians”, however their philosophies may differ. In the vernacular of our age, “Fundamental Christian” is pretty much what’s defined in Magons’ quote...or else brings to mind “Evangelical” or “right-wing Christian”. Definitions change, and how people define things in their own minds changes, too.

Magons also spoke for me with

Quote:
Yeah, I get that CTS. But as a political force, a collective, what they stand for worries me. I don't want an extremely powerful nation to be led by people who don't believe in evolution and believe in the unerring nature and history of the Bible, and worse, welcome a world war which would herald the return of Jesus.

CTTS...that last one...

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 12, 2011 6:11 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Rrrrrgh!

Don't eeeeven get me started on religious folks today - we got another chained-to-furniture with forced scripture reading case today, with a temporary hold and likely emancipation coming out of that, as well as possible custody of a younger sibling rather than see em dumped into the meat grinder of the foster care system.

Anyone who pushes their religion with force instead of leading by example is a fucking barbarian, period, and should be unwelcome in modern day civilization - if they wanna go back to the "good ole days" (i.e. Dark Ages) fine, fuck em, let THEM live that way, even encourage it by refusing to associate with em, do biz with em, the whole nine yards, make them the outcasts they DESERVE to be.

That's a form of shunning I could get into.

Oh yes, and the management of site three has absolutely, completely ZERO problem with me going ballistic on trespassers offering unwanted religious solicitation, so long as there's no *obvious* evidence of anything really untoward, which there won't be... in fact, there might not be any evidence of anything... at all.

The local JWs cross the STREET when walking past this place, if that tells ya anything.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 13, 2011 8:05 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Well I do believe in the litteralness (I don't know if that's a word, who cares) of the Bible. I'm a creationist: I do believe in microevolution, but not the macro, I believe in natural selection, the passing on of advantageous traits and change (to a degree) based on that. I do believe that Jesus is coming back someday but I'm in no hurry to rush it, besides anything I do won't have an impact there on anyways. But as I said I'm not in a hurry, I'm young yet and hope to live a long life here first. I do not believe in forcing people to fake like they believe, because I know you can't force someone to believe so faking is all you can get from such methods. It acomplishes nothing good and does a lot of harm.

You all can call me whatever you want, I don't much care, it is the least of my concerns.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 13, 2011 10:47 PM

CTS

actually, I like what the guy is trying to do, re answers in genesis, creation museum. There are a lot of misguided efforts but he seems to be really interested in steering people to caring about the world. What do I care if people are wrong? I mean, consider how many republicans and democrats we have. Regardless of where you stand, at least one if not both groups have to be overwhelmingly wrong. Ergo, society has to survive a large portion of the population being wrong.

Oh, and have you seen Equilibrium?

Frem

Do you reserve the same contempt for socialists under a similar logic?

Riona

Double Huh? Sorry, not going to argue a belief system, I just don't follow the logical position. What do you mean microevolution/macroevolution, and what constitutes a literal word of God? If a book is culled from the Bible, is it no longer the word of God, and if so who gets to make that decision? Surely not the editors.

There was a user on the board, who may still be lurking somewhere, who was pursuing the topic and brought up some interesting points.

So, channelling Antimason for a sec. (this is basically a repost of the arguments he brought up, and yes, he's a fundie, and my apologies if i get some of these points wrong.) If the Bible has multiple versions, and they disagree, then which is right? If in the 1880s the Bible underwent 30,000 edits, then did it become wrong? How many edits can it endure through the centuries, and how corrupt does that make the text? Should we be reading it Hebrew and Greek? What about books taken out, or books that might have been put in? Some people say that John is a forgery, or that portions of Paul and Revelations were copied from older scripture. If this turns out to be true, what does that mean? (And my personal favorite question) if all of the stories in the bible were taken from somewhere else, should we not read those translations as well, the Sumerian, Assyrian and Egyptian? What if they conflict with the Hebrew text, or if those people who wrote the story worshipped a different God, or several, are those religions true as well?

Antimason IIRC also believed in the literal word, but was curious as to what this said, and he sent me searching and I found a lot of curious and disturbing things on that search. Not the least of which is that the KJV I read online is not the same text as the one I read in the book, and not because the online text is different, but because of the changes in the 18th and 19th c.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 5:34 AM

CUDA77

Like woman, I am a mystery.

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
.....

Why the fuck do we care about Israel? Or China? Or Palestine? Or Europe?

Call me naieve (and Im sure you will), but really?

They are not our kin (to bogart a southern term).

So, unless they mess with us, why do we send money to them, bother with them, or consider them a threat?

I mean really.

Can China hurt us? North Korea? If we were actually self-sufficiant, what threat are they to us?

I mean, come on.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

For once Wulf, I am in complete agreement with you. Maybe if our money that we spend on those countries went to actual good and not just giving them more and better ways to kill the people they/we oppose, I could understand it. But basically playing armory so a bunch of various religious nuts can shoot each other to shit seems like an incredible waste of money, resources and time to me.

As for China and them, until they give me a real reason to be scared, I see no reason to fear them. To me, Kim Jong Il and family are nowhere near as scary or are a big threat to this country as some of the people we personally elected in this country to political office are.

Socialist and unashamed about it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 6:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DREAMTROVE:
What do you mean microevolution/macroevolution,

Microevolution

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_36

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Microevolution

Macroevolution

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_47

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Macroevolution

Macroevolution is about evolution of species over geologic timescales that we induce, whereas microevolution is about evolution within a species we can actually observe.

I am very uncertain about macroevolutionary theories, though I am much more certain about microevolutionary ones.

Quote:
and what constitutes a literal word of God?

This is just a matter of tradition. Everyone says KJV is the word of God, and that's the word of God. Everyone in Utah says it's the KJV + the Book of Mormon, then it's that. It's sort of arbitrary, based largely on trust in religious authorities and religious traditions.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Development_of_the_Chri
stian_Biblical_canon

-------
Hell, the only reason the Government hates crime at all is that it despises competition. - Frem

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 7:53 AM

THEHAPPYTRADER

I know this sets me apart from many Christians, but I do not believe the theory of evolution and the bible have to be mutually exclusive. After all, didn't evolution as we theorize happen in much the same order in which God created the world in genesis?

Concerning literalness, as I've said before, I believe the bible is the word of God as transcribed by man to the best of his abilities. I believe God has a plan for everything, and that human imperfections are not enough to ruin his message. A more holistic approach is necessary for true understanding of the bible. This doesn't mean we all have to be biblical scholars and read it in Greek and Hebrew, but it does mean we ought to consider the whole passage, chapter, and book rather than yank one verse out of context because it suits your agenda.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 10:29 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by DREAMTROVE:
Frem

Do you reserve the same contempt for socialists under a similar logic?

I reserve the same contempt for EVERYBODY under a similar logic - the very instant you decide to use force to ram your agenda down someone elses throat, or even suggest need or intention to do so, it's time to break some heads, and I am a big believer in deterrent force and pre-emptive action.

This mind you, *specifically* includes your pet peeve against a single philosophy you would initiate hostilities against without even fully understanding it, for reasons inexplicable to me.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 6:07 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:

This doesn't mean we all have to be biblical scholars and read it in Greek and Hebrew,

I SO wanted to stay out of this thread, because my own beliefs are a confused mess. Being unsure, I don't want to impose my ideas on anybody, nor argue with someone about their sincere beliefs.

But I want to jump on that point.

The Greek and Hebrew are the original versions. Translating anything to any other language changes the meaning. Even literal word-for-word translation changes meaning. And if you try to translate the "whole meaning" of something, you change the metaphors or the poetry. Not to mention that the politics of the translators alter the meaning, often intentionally. To do serious work, one should learn the Hebrew and Greek and read the texts in those languages.

Of course, reading it in the vernacular is satisfactory for the purposes of the average church goer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 6:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
The Greek and Hebrew are the original versions. Translating anything to any other language changes the meaning.

I agree. If one is going to be literal, then one should be well, literal. I speak at least three languages, and have had to do my share of translations. Good translations cannot be literal, and literal translations often don't reflect the intent of the speaker correctly.

That is why in Islam, one must learn Arabic to read the Qu'ran. Islam is literalist as well, but at least they do it the right way.

-------
Hell, the only reason the Government hates crime at all is that it despises competition. - Frem

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 6:23 PM

THEHAPPYTRADER

Quote:
Of course, reading it in the vernacular is satisfactory for the purposes of the average church goer.

Exactly my point. It would be good to be able to read everything ever written in the original language it was written in, but sometimes for some people that just ain't practical. The message, however, remains intact despite the attempts of political forces to bend it to there agendas.

Perhaps Jesus anticipated this when he said

Quote:
Mt 22:36 “[Jesus], which is the great commandment in the law?” And he said to him, ’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.”

In a sense, everything else is window dressing. It's kind of a built in check on 'is this right?' The whole golden rule thing, treating those as you would be treated.

Not lookin' to argue ideology too much, just stating my opinion that God's truth is stronger than man's failings

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 14, 2011 7:00 PM