When Were You Persecuted?

"After all, when the progressives kicked God out of the schools, we Christians did nothing, so they started teaching lies to the kiddies, we Christians did nothing, then they said we can kill babies, and we Christians did nothing."

Don't feel too badly about this Sham, I mean if you want to get technical about it, it did happen over 200 years ago.

It also occurred to me Sham, and I wanted to mention this to you, I think you would absolutely LOVE Spain, you should move there. You could drive a truck (though it would be considerably smaller than what you are used to); they spend a ton on infrastructure in Spain, and their roads are probably some of the best in the world, something I am sure you can appreciate.

I think you'd really whoop it up there "pal," I mean it is 94% Christian which you will love. And they teach about Jesus in the public schools. But there are enough Muslims in the south around places like Cadiz, Granada, Seville, and Cordoba that conceivably, if you were enough of an ass, you could get yourself some of that inter-faith persecution you so desperately seem to desire.

Also, they have some fairly tough abortion laws (though admittedly Madrid and Barcelona don't do much to follow them), but certainly they are much more stringent than those in the US.

They do have cradle grave health care for all their citizens free of charge, but if you feel a bit recreant about that you can still pay for a private doctor. And you can bring your guns but you have to have a special permit for each one that requires an annual reregistration fee, so you might leave a few behind. Not to worry though, you would be very hard-pressed to discover an armed citizen, so you will be sittin' pretty. After all, "in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king."

Sham, King of Spain. You should do it. America isn't right for you anymore, old man. Time to get old school. Time to go Mediterranean.

Gearjammer,

Religion-based mob violence is never prett,just or holy. It is always justified by religious zealots and carried out in the name of whatever GOD they claim to worship.

Ask the non-survivors of Black Kettle's Southern Cheyenne band, mostly children, women and old men who died at the hands of Chivington's bible-waving mob.

That was a village of mostly Christian converts, living with the U.S. Flag flying proudly from a 20-foot mast before Black Kettle's lodge.

Religious persecution slaughtered the Christians just as dead as those Cheyenne who had not converted.

Or the orginal inhabitants of Acre, who were slaughtered so the Christian Crusaders could use that fortress city as their headquarters.

Or the residents of many villages along the Yangtze, which were wiped out so the Christian European nations could establish a political and cultural oasis in the midst of "pagan China's" 6,000+ year old civilization.

Or in more modern times, the Islamic Arab residents of 1945/46 Palestine, who fled in the face of certain death at the hands of religious zealots from five Muslim nations, only to be stripped of everything by recently arrived refugees from Europe's Holacaust.

Those few thousand Jewish refugees, virtually the only survivors of more than 20-Million European Jews. Nearly 8-million fled Europe and dispersed around the world. 12-Million died in Nazi horror camps.

A few hundred thousand made it to Israel, where their Likud and other elements practiced unrestricted terrorism and savagery against the British occupying forces, Muslims, some Christians and even some of the region's original Jewish Sabra natives who objected to the slaughter.

Are you implying those religious zealots you list invented the entire concept of religious intolerance and savagery?

No more than the KKK Christian Savages, worshipping beneath their burning crosses, invented savagery while killing school girls, Christian ministers, women and college students in the Christian segregated South of our lifetime.

Religious persecution has always and will always cut all ways, claiming innocent victims -- always in the NAME OF SOMEONE'S GOD!

I don't know exactly how I respond to this. If I make a stand on certain issue, that will lead directly to me taking more stands on other issues. Next thing I know, I'll be living the kind of life God wants me to live.

Why do you you pick on me?

Would you like to see the list of stories/names of victims from the Spanish inquisition? How about the holocaust?

Both led by "christians" persecuting non-christians.

I know something really great.

Guillermo, HerndonHank, did you know that Jesus loves you as much as he does Sam, or myself? I agree with SWNebr Transplant, stay with an Apples vs Apples comparison, for the love of Mike.

Speaking of Mike, and History (where you are pulling up your slander), Historical Stupidity has managed to touch every walk of life. Sam is addressing this step in that walk, not the footprints long ago gone.

Argument being futile, I close, as I opened: Jesus still Loves you guys, just as much as He Loves those of Faith in Him. Eternity is going to be a very long time to wish you had turned your heart to Him.

In Messiah, Jesus, His Blessings on you that you see His Truth, soon. Arley

PS: Well Said, Sam, Well Said.

mcookreader - you may seriously need to examine if you are even a Catholic.

As with the dense Guillermo, you showed no concern whatsoever for Christians around the world that are today suffering, and dying for their faith. Instead you choose to marginalize and equivocate, and using the typical pretending atheist talking points about the Spanish inquisition?

Are you freaking kidding me? C'mon dear, you cannot have been this brainwashed. Are you blaming Christ for every sin that man commits?

Are you further saying that Christians deserve it, because ma'am, get this, I am gonna lay some truth on you, hope your polluted thinking can handle it, but..........WE ALL DESERVE IT!!!!

Do you want from God what you deserve? Are you nuts?

I would love to understand this animus you have against a religion you say you are a part of. Good Lord, you are expecting perfection from us, from Christians, and yet you are so very tolerant of everyone else.

The Spanish inquisition!!! I am amazed!

A big difference between wars fought in the name of Christianity and wars fought for Christianity. It will be interesting if any of us actually make to Heaven, we might be surprised to seen who made it, and even more surprised to see who didn't make it.

Yet another great post Sam.

And also, Sham, you saying an argument is irrational without any examples as to WHY it is irrational does nothing to further your pathetic belief system, or political opinions. It simply proves to this very public board that you do not have enough skill in argument to debate properly. Typical of the right.

Sam 14 - atheists 0

As an agnostic I feel saddened by anyone who is persecuted and/or killed over differing religious beliefs. Sam's post reflects an often untold side of religious persecution. Growing up in the church I remember hearing of Christians in China being sentenced to prison for merely getting together and worshipping their god.

As Sam's post shows, it would be scary to live in the middle east as a Christian during these turbulent globalized times, especially with the accelerated development of violent radical organizations..

Us vs. Them. That's human nature obviously and it will always be the problem here. People like Husker23 spell that out. As far as abortion goes I understand Sam's position but as a pro-choicer I simply don't have the chops to debate abortion like the foolishly brave GI.. but to live in a mixed society during modern times, post globalization, under the Consitution of the United States of America, there is going to have to be more tolerance of different areas of society that we do not understand or feel are simply wrong. Coexistence is going to have to prevail, lest we spill more blood.

You cannot fight abortion, except to reject it and teach against it. In this regard Sam is doing the right thing, by using his message to reach others in his same belief system, and maybe those on the fence, and having a little fun along the way bickering with people who's beliefs differ. There's not much else you can do besides start harassing young women who walk into abortion clinics, murder doctors, or move to the forest and live in a tree.

Mark,

I gave you a premise on the other blog, you chose not to, or were unable to, argue against it (I'd guess the latter). If I offer the premise, by definition it cannot be a strawman argument, as that is a counter-argument tactic.

In fact, a good example of a strawman argument is you claiming, with no evidence whatsoever, that I hate the concept of a creator. This is patently ridiculous, and nowhere have I even mentioned anything of the sort, and then you have preceded to attack me on those grounds. This is of course illogical and a losing tactic. Your complete lack of skill and ability, as well as your scant knowledge of logic in argument and rhetoric, is quite obvious.

You have made no attempts whatsoever to engage me in an honest debate, Mark. In fact, the only thing you actually have done is whined incessantly about how you never debate anti-abortionists, or leftists, basically anyone with whom you disagree...and for your part I think it shows. When and if you want to step up and actually try to debate, I will be here. Until then, you can keep your prayers focused on me if you like, but I assure that I do not need them.

Guillermo,

Sorry to come in late to the conversation, but leaving aside Marks questions about your religious beliefs; he does seem to have you pegged fairly neatly in other ways. You do have a tendency to attack and often belittle or insult those who disagree, as shown in your retort to Mark above. You begin by belittling then proceed to reply to his criticism by calling him stupid and then continue to insult. Your juvenile behavior are in large part why I generally chose not to respond.

You decry Mark for failing to engage in honest debate, but I have never seen you do so either. What good is trying to debate with you Guillermo? You repeatedly point out how you are so smart and that anyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid. Please feel free to point out how stupid I am as well as all of the flaws in my arguments; after all, none are so erudite as you.

Also, SW:

"You begin by belittling then proceed to reply to his criticism by calling him stupid and then continue to insult."

Can you please point out where I called Mark stupid?

And can I expect that your admonishment of Mark for his insults of me is forthcoming?

And...

"You repeatedly point out how you are so smart and that anyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid."

I have never pointed out anything regarding my own intelligence, people such as yourself imply that I think highly of myself because I choose to adhere to academic standards of discourse and logic. I simply let you think what you want about me because I truly don't care. If you think that I am one way or another, and you let that cloud the way you address an argument I have presented, rather than examining the logic of the argumen on its own terms, then you are guilty of committing a very typical logical fallacy, and thus you invalidate your own position. This is just fine with me.

Guillermo,

"Smart people (libs): every important issue we want eventually comes to fruition - The uneducated (Cons)"

Do I really need to go into more detail here?

Calling Mark stupid only in the recent post:

"or were unable to, argue against it (I'd guess the latter)" maybe you meant he didn't have access to a computer that day.

"Your complete lack of skill and ability, as well as your scant knowledge of logic in argument and rhetoric, is quite obvious."

I don't know maybe you don't truly think highly of yourself, if so that's a shame in my opinion. I think very highly of myself and feel everyone should think highly of themselves. Kinda like Del, "I like me"

I choose not to adhere to academic standards of discource and logic, I choose to talk to people.

If you did care, would you have control over what I think?

Have I addressed your arguments based on the way I think you are rather than on its arguments? Maybe, I dunno. The real problem I usually see on these boards is NO ONE actually takes the time to debate an issue we all just change the subject and try to get out zingers in whenever we can.

Sure, I'll admonish Mark when I see he insults you. I try to be an equal opportunity hater.

Mark: In your recent post about Guillermo, I see no reason for you to question his anger towards a Creator, that's just silly. He is clearly not in favor of organized Christianity but I don't think he has ever claimed to be an athiest. Furthermore, what does it matter what his beliefs are? As for his arrogance and pride and hate, if you believe him guilty of those faults it is still not your duty to judge. Argue against his statements not his person.

I'm sure there are lots of other times BS like this happens I just don't get the chance to read and reply every day.

Husker23,

I am not nearly as predictable as Sham, or you, or any other mouth piece who has their beliefs fed to them by a book, a pundit, or a news organization.

"Granted...you used a bit more articulation and description (as you always do), but I believe the "stupid" was implied in your post."

An implication is an interpretation, and does not amount to verifiable evidence of anything other than what you thought I meant. The charge was I called Mark "stupid." Clearly, that is not the case.

Guillermo:

Since you insist on playing word games I'm almost done here.

The quote about libs being smart was not in response I must not have made my self clear, which in no way calls for implying that I lied in my opinion. (Before this comes back and I'm done responding, stating that I am making things up means that I am lying). That quote was in response to my charge that you say you are smart while those who disagree are not, I thought that quote needed no other explanation. I was addressing your questions in reverse order and I apologize for any confusion.

I thought by setting off with breaks and a colon that you would be able to understand that that is where I was addressing your points toward Mark. If you continue to insist that you only meant Marks ability to argue then techninally you did not overtly call him stupid. However, I don't believe a reasonable person would view your remarks and not infer that you were insulting his intelligence.

Please clarify three things for me:

You do believe that Conservatives are intelligent.

You do believe that NebraskaMark is intelligent.

You did not intend by implication, ommission, or circumlocution (I can't wait until tomorrow to see what the next word on my calendar is) to state that Mark is "stupid"

I look forward to a simple straightforward answer and not another semantic argument that shifts focus. I think you get too much enjoyment from playing little semantic games and that by spending so much time with these you don't debate issues, merely language in many cases.

SW,

I have other things to attend to tonight, but just wanted to clarify that from what I have read, it seems only logical that Guillermo would consider himself an atheist over another view, and that is his right. If he is not, then maybe it would be helpful to all if he made some kind of attempt to clarify his worldview. Although I think this thread shows this to be true, along with anger towards the concept of God and Christianity, I was also referring to his posts in the Bonhofer thread. I don't know if you followed that, or just took them a different way, but I don't think it is "silly" to come to that conclusion. What does it matter what his beliefs are? They don't, as far as how they affect my faith and convictions, but I do believe in using a meaningful term to describe oneself, and if he is an atheist then he shouldn't take offense at that term. I thought "atheist" was politically correct and a proud moniker nowadays? If not, what other term is acceptable? Until next time, and good evening.

Actually Mark, I went through and responded to each paragraph. You had nothing to say in response, which was predictable. Try to actually read, it will help you keep up. Seriously.

And it was you who stated that you were leaving, I merely wished you a fond farewell. If you stay my assurance to you is that you will get better at argument most naturally, that is a great thing.

Sam,

The point you and other here seek to avoid is that Christians are not the only victims of religious persecution.

Obviously the reality of Chivington's slaughter of Cheyenne is known to more than a few.

As with the slaughter of every living soul in one Asian city as a means for Genghis Khan to avenge the death of a son -- who was taunting defenders of that city under seige from horseback, when the horse fell and the son was killed.

One million people died in that vengeance.

You can only understand the enormity of persecution of Christians.

My position is all religious persecution and indiscriminate violence for political, religous, ethnic or any other reason is horrific.

A beast named Brian Beckwith detonates a bomb in an Alabama church and children die.

A mob of beasts shouting Zieg Heil!! slaughter thousands of victims.

Stalin's bullies kill gulag prisoners for fun or for any reason -- and the world ignored it.

Idi Amin caused hundreds of thousands to die and the world yawned.

Persecution feels the same to all victims.

The constitution did NOT kick God of out public schools, or Jefferson (the author of the much-quoted "separation" phrase, which does not appear in the constitution) would not have purchases BIBLES FOR HIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

A few MEN made the horrible decision to let ordinary, mortal humans murder unborn children, and the decision to make secular humanism our official religion.

mccookreader,

As the child of a WW2 survivor, I'd like you to read up on your history. The Nazis were not only not Christian, but actively murdered outspoken Christians along with the handicapped, the gypsies and the Jews.

I know this because one of them was a relative.

Some of these letters make me wonder how many of you took History under Mike. That could explain your severe lack of knowledge in specific areas.

Sam, I ran a search on msnbc.com with the following words: "Christians killed Iraq." I came up with 11,400 results. I ran a search for "Christians killed Iran." That netted 9,740 results. I ran a search for "Christians killed Pakistan." 6,260 articles for that one. And "Christian killed China" was the least amount at 6,410. NBC also covered the riots in Egypt after the shooting at a church there. ABC and CNN both covered the attacks on Christians by Muslims in Pakistan. Saying these attacks were not covered by the MSM is a little disingenuous.

Mark,

"Even for someone who who professes to be "roughly agnostic", I know something "Spiritual" like "Faith" in the God of the Bible is a foreign concept to you."

Bad assumption. I was raised very much a Christian. I simply grew out of it naturally as I developed a desire to think critically.

"am here to counter humanism in all its forms including euthanasia and the genocide of the most defenseless and unprotected people on the planet, the preborn."

One woman having one abortion cannot be genocide, by definition!, time to find a new way to sensationalize your argument because anyone who claims to be a thinking person will not fall for that garbage.

I am here to challenge your (Conservative) thinking. The only person shutting down debate is the cowardly poster walking away from me, "because they have tried before and found it futile." You cannot accuse me of something that you were willing do on your volition, it won't wash.

MrsSmith,

"...how has such a "smart person" managed to remain completely ignorant of the 99% of Christian history that has encompassed healthcare, education, disaster relief, orphan care, elderly care, food for the poor, missions to build homes and drill water wells, etc. etc."

You are assuming that because I am critical of Christians that I do not recognize the genuine kindness and generosity of spirit that many Chrisitans exude. Nothing could be lees true. I feel the same way about Muslims, despite the fact that I am critical of the 1% of Muslims who are (like their Christian counterparts) TERRIBLE blights on humanity and progress both historically and presently, I know 99% of Muslims are peaceful, generous people. Muslims and Christians are a lot alike in that way (and many others).

So no, I am not intentionally ignorant, I have been Christian, I now what it is to believe in God, I am friends with Christians, I still believe that much of Jesus's teachings are valuable to human morality. But I will not go blindly into the night singing kumbaya with myrmidons either. I am perfectly capable of thinking for myself.

Guillermo,

By the logic of your attack against all Christians because of what Pat Robertson said (and we don't even know the context, only what you heard on MSNBC), I could retort by saying that because you are for genocide and are a leftist socialist that you are a Nazi! Now you may be the first two, but that doesn't of necessity make you the latter...

Christianity: I am not sure what you think "Christian" means. If your definition is darkening the door of a Catholic or Protestant church every so often, or having parents that claim to be "Christian", or because of birth, then once again we are not on the same page. True Christianity is not about being born into something (except the new birth that Jesus talked about in relation to repentant faith), attending certain rituals, membership, or attendance.

So from what you have said you never were truly a Christian, but possibly in name only (CINO). I don't say that to put you down, but simply to state a biblical fact. Being "raised a Christian" doesn't mean anything without ever having had a spiritual encounter with God (by that I mean experiencing repentance for sin, His love and forgiveness, and accepting that by Faith). Christianity is not passed on by birth, nor is ita card-carrying member's club.

Genocide: I sometimes use the term "feticide" for the premeditated murder produced by abortions, but since tens of millions have been murdered since Roe v Wade, many pro-lifers have taken the truer definition of genocide. Although I occasionally fall back to using feticide from an old habit, feticide no longer conveys the true meaning that it is a human who is being murdered and not just what you call a "fetus". Fetus in abortionist usage has taken on the connotation of what you previously called a blob of tissue and nerves. To me a fetus is basically a synonym for a preborn/unborn child. Only under a secular humanist definition would the wholesale slaughter of innocent, unborn, defenseless babies in the name of "Choice" through abortion not be genocide.

In any case, one of my dictionary definitions (Webster unabridged) of genocide is:

"The deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group".

By that definition babies of "national" (American in our case), "racial" (Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, etc), and cultural (again multiple) are "deliberately" and "systematically" being "exterminated" by abortionists. Wow, that wasn't so difficult! So it is quite evident that you are the one who needs look up the term.

McCook Reader - Sorry about the gender thing. You know, I honestly thought I knew who you were! I thought you were my neighbor lady, and I apologize.

My mistake. Thank you for your kind response. I get a little caught up in the heat of battle. I am intense about my beliefs. I held one of my grandsons this afternoon, and I cannot tell you the feeling that comes over me about his future.

Not that I, one redneck trucker in nowhere Nebraska, can really do all that much, but I am so concerned about the future of our country, that I have to speak out, even in my own limited way.

The little guy is not even 6 months old, he owes $344,000 for government. That is just what he owes, even if he pays allot of taxes in his life, he still has this debt, on top of his taxes, plus interest.

My God! This is abuse. This government of Democrats and Republicans is run amok and out of control. The driving force behind this evil is libs and progressives. They are con artists, and using emotions, they manipulate voters to vote against this group or that group. It's sad.

I am still hoping that you and I will find common ground.

Jaded,

Thanks for your input. I too found you boring at first, but may have been wrong. I guess we are even.

I'll admit that after reviewing many of the left-wing posts on various threads last night, I began to feel a little impish and decided to spice things up a bit and even try out some of those Alinsky Rules for Radicals methods. I hope I didn't cross any lines, but I do stand by the essentials of my remarks on faith, euthanasia, abortion, and the general leftist/statist agenda.

As for Pat Robertson's remarks, I have never claimed that he represented me, and I dispute your claim that he is "America's top Evangelist", or even represents a majority of Christianity. For what it's worth, I rarely even watch his network on T.V.

Let's also be clear, the man, like all men, is not perfect, and is not getting any younger. What he said about Chavez's death a few years ago got a lot of missionaries kicked out of Venezuela, and I think it was wrong. I watched the video, and in the context of biblical Christianity, Robertson did make a point about how the choices nations make can come back to haunt them. Do I believe in Biblical prophecy? Yes I do, but perhaps not exactly as Robertson does. I do believe by faith that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and inerrant in the original manuscripts. So, I do take it more or less literally, based on context and grammar. Without this basis, it becomes just a bunch of allegories that can be miss-interpreted/misrepresented to evil ends.

As someone who has worked in French-speaking countries I know for a fact that Haiti does have a dark past which has a foundation based on spiritism/animism, and a syncretism of Catholicism/animism. That is why Robertson contrasted Haiti and the D.R., which share the same landmass. You might want to consider that before jumping to conclusions. Like Harry Reid's remarks about Obama being a light skinned negro without a negro accent, unless he wants it, Robertson's choice of words may not have been helpful. You probably didn't see where Robertson continued on to ask for prayer for Haiti and was helping to raise funds for relief efforts. As I feared from the first posting, you too failed to mention the whole story and context.

and by the way, what makes animism a "dark past?" Oh that's right it's not the bible so it's wrong. I used to wonder when I was growing up and learning in Sunday school that you go to hell for not being a Christian: does that mean that 3/4 of the world is going to hell? What about the people that Jesus didn't visit? Or the millions of people that never heard his message around the world that died in the millenia between Christ's walk on Earth and the arrival of European missionaries? Do the millions of indiginous people living today that have never even heard of the bible get to burn for eternity?

I am not mocking, I am interested in your opinion on this, Nebraskamark, because you seem to have a pretty solid grasp on what you believe.

I'm a little bummed that my question was not taken seriously. It's something I honestly wondered when I began to question religion as a young teen. (sigh)

Hmmm, interesting. Thanks for your response. I read Romans ch. 1 in the New American Standard Version and from what I can understand verses 1-17 are basically a greeting to the church Paul is writing to, starting with his introduction and moving into blessing the believers by describing what a good believer is.

It takes a tough tone starting with verse 18 and going to the final verse, 32, describing unbelievers and the consequences they face.

I'm going to paste a verse here:

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,

19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.

My question has always been (and I'm surprised I've never heard anyone else wonder the same)

What about the millions of people that God did not make this evident to them? I think it's a strange inconsistency that God so loved the world that he sent a savior to one little part, and only the ones who follow this one savior get saved. It has been 2,000 years and there are still parts of the world that don't know the message of Christ. I mean at least us agnostics had a chance. What about the many millions that have died since Christ that never knew about Christ. But God so loved THE WORLD. Even though there are millions of Christians it still seems like an exclusive club and everyone else goes to hell just for being born and never hearing about Jesus.

"Your veiled, generalized attack on Christianity in Robertson's remarks did not go unnoticed, but that's Ok."

Please explain to me (WITHOUT PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH) for future reference how my writing LITERALLY "1% of religious goons..." is a generalized attack on Christianity, rather than an attack on the 1% of religious to which Pat Robertson clearly belongs. Or are you being intentionally obtuse?

"Your definition on the meaning of genocide is noted, but I have read much better stated apologies by pro-abortion groups."

I am not sure what you are implying here. What apologies (please be specific and cite)...and how do they change the real definition of genocide?

"...and abortion's horrible ramifications on society."

You will have to do better than you are, because there are millions and millions of strong voices that share my belief that abortion rights are essential to a free and progressive nation, strong voices that have already won the debate, and will fight to keep America moving forward, rather than leaving it mired in the past.

"Yes, there is no doubt that abortion is a form of genocide."

Not only is there doubt, there is no way in the world an intelligent person can even make this statement without hiccuping profusely from the massive amount of propaganda they have swallowed. Sorry Mark, abortion rights are a necessity (and therefor good) for any modern society concerned with the health of its citizens. You and yours have lost this debate, condolences.

Let's be clear: If you think abortion is genocide you are either a) being obtuse on purpose; b) a smart person who has been inundated by propaganda and sensationalism; c) a person with no idea what genocide means; d) a complete idiot.

My guess is you are reasonably intelligent, therefore you are either being obtuse, or you are, as I said, "hiccuping profusely from the massive amount of propaganda they have swallowed."

If Haiti were full of white Christians, or had New Orleans' slums been full of the same, the "concern" from the right would have been vastly different. I guarantee you that, Carl.

To clair up my earlier statement that has caught some heat...

I know that the Nazi party did not exemplify the attributes of true followers of christianity. My comment probably wasn't the best. I meant if as more of a cultural/ethnic classification than a moral/idealogical classification.

And I also know christians were persecuted during WWII. My point was that most german soldiers were born to christian parents, and went to christian churches. Hitler was raised catholic and actually attended a catholic seminary.

I simply wanted to reinforce the fact that christians are not the only people persecuted. But I do see how that seems cheap. I didnt properly acknowledge the loss and suffering of those christians persecuted in sam's blog. I do pray for their families, and can't imagine the loss.

And Mrs. Smith,

I respect what your father did for our country. I have nothing negative to say about him. I do not know him. But I too, have a reference point for WWII aside from what history books print.

I am Polish, and as a matter of fact my last name is the name of a street in Warsaw, that was in the heart of the ghetto during Nazi-German occupation of Poland. My family were polish jews. Again, my only point was that all religions are persecuted, and that is wrong. We need not focus on one religion while ignoring others.

I vow to show the same concern for Robertson's statement, and denounce it just as loudly, as you have been concerned and have denounced the preacher shouting "Goddamn white America," or the looney who yelled "kill all the white people," or even some of the remarks from Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or Charlie Rangel!

"If Haiti were full of white Christians, or had New Orleans' slums been full of the same, the "concern" from the right would have been vastly different." Yeah, right! A perfect example of your best efforts at generating bovine excrement! And we wonder where the polarization comes from!

Chunky, I never thought I would say this but...good post, you are, thus far, the only right winger to admit Robertson's statement was wrong.

God bless America

For the record Carl I absolutely condemned Robertson's statement earlier today on this thread. Nebraskamark defended it because of a "dark past of animism"

Would someone please give me directions to a slum, inhabited by white christians? And Oklahoma doesn't count!

Joe Buck,

Are you serious? It depends what you consider a slum per say. But there are many areas in sw nebraska and se colorada that are living under the poverty line and they are composed of a vast majority of white christians.

And the first slums in America were inhabited by european immigrants in New York city.

Jaded,

Please let my remarks on Pat Robertson be read by the individual posters. I think you may have used a little slight of hand in trying to clarify my remarks...thanks. Remember what happened when you didn't watch the whole video of the remarks Robertson gave? I still made no excuses for what he said, just tried to put them into context and show the whole story for everyone else. That's Fair & Balanced. Watching video edited by people with an agenda on the MSMs is not helpful, but Fox can do it too.

You said - "And if a people made a choice to turn from God a thousand years ago, are their entire future generations damned?"

I say - You need to revisit my remarks on direct and indirect revelation in my bloated post to you. But, generally speaking, Yes and for the reasons I gave. It as best as I can do given from what we know directly from Scripture. Anything more would be venturing into speculation for my convictions and possibly belittle Faith.

You said -- "When there was a direct knowledge of God among all peoples after Babel, isn't it arguable that every world religion is based on the same god? Even animism?"

I say - If you mean does every "god" have some sort of a basis in the God of the Bible, then, yes, in that God says He created all humans in His image, and with an innate desire to worship Him. Of course, that has been corrupted in the Fall, and people have since worshiped, demons (Satan & fallen angles), false gods/idols, themselves, and material things.

Methinks Joe is starting to show his true colors (no pun intended)! I guess it isn't European immigrants who run investment firms and banks who gladly took billions of dollars to give their executives bonuses, or farmers who were paid to not grow stuff when Uncle Ronnie was president.

Joe,

The county in Nebraska with the highest poverty rate is Dawes County, in which white people make up 93% of the population.

And many of those immigrants never made it out. Hell's Kitchen is one of the worst parts of new york and is nearly all white. South Boston is the worst part of Boston and there are Irish families there that have been there since 1800.

Excuse me, 9000 people in 1400 square miles hardly qualifies as a "slum." Seeing as how I am somewhat familiar with Chadron and Dawes County, I would certainly not describe it as a slum, but I am sure the folks there will appreciate your sentiment.

Hell's Kitchen? You must, like Crank, still live in the past! Better research your facts a little better there, dog. South Boston? More of the same! Working class neighborhood! Maybe you consider the working class neighborhood to be a little beneath that of an "intellectual?"

Come on, you can do better than that! A "slum" not a working class neighborhood, that is full of white christians, whom Iggy seems to despise so much! That is what we are looking for!

Hmmm... Interesting conversation Nebraskamark, thanks for talking with me. I guess there's really no other option for me than being agnostic but it doesn't hurt to discuss these things with someone who knows what they're talking about. Again, thanks

Jaded, may God bless you with "eyes to see and ears to hear" the truth. Enjoyed typing with you.

Jaded Anti-American, I refer you to my earlier post:

I vow to show the same concern for Robertson's statement, and denounce it just as loudly, as you have been concerned and have denounced the preacher shouting "Goddamn white America," or the looney who yelled "kill all the white people," or even some of the remarks from Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or Charlie Rangel!

"If Haiti were full of white Christians, or had New Orleans' slums been full of the same, the "concern" from the right would have been vastly different." Yeah, right! A perfect example of your best efforts at generating bovine excrement! And we wonder where the polarization comes from!

-- Posted by Joe Buck on Thu, Jan 14, 2010, at 5:22 PM

When you are ready to denounce the above-mentioned preachers, politicans, and assorted hate-mongers as "racists", then we can talk!

Joe's not a racist. He's more of a white supremacist.

From USA Today:

"Corporations have donated $16 million so far to earthquake-ravaged Haiti, using experience from other recent natural disasters to make this a more-coordinated and streamlined effort."

What were you saying about greedy corporations?

"What were you saying about greedy corporations?"

Nothing, nobody mentioned corporations. I called you greedy though, but you are, so that should be okay, right?

Reverend Wright didn't say "Goddamn white America" he said "Goddamn America." There is a difference my racist little buddy. He did make a valid point with the wrong words about how our corrupt leaders and shameful journey to power are turning the world (and half of our own society) against America, but I give you that. Bad preacher. Bad!

The white democrat used the word negro. That is considered racist, to me. But what he said was sociologically true. I still don't like that racist old white dude using an out dated word like negro. Everyone knows that is bad. Bad racist. He didn't even know not to call us negroes....

kiiinnda like my racist little Joebuck who doesn't understand the cumulative advantages enjoyed widely by white society (thanks to years of pro-white policies) as opposed to those pesky little folks "sitting on the streetcorner waiting for Obama handouts? Are they lining up for free debit cards, and FEMA trailers, then complain that the "gubment" doesn't do enough for them while they sit on their can and bellyache"

"Gubment" haha yessa yessa Ahhm suh sarry I queshin ya suh

Joe that gave me the impression that you are racist... Sorry?

I guess it's just good that our friend Joe isn't part of the rescue effort in Port au Prince. He obviously views us "negroes" as defecating beggars (and probably something that almost rhymes with beggars) ..and the potential for abuse on Joe's part would be probably full blown.

I've seen some crazies on here that made the conservatives/republicans look pretty bad, but ladies and gentlemen I think we have a champion here.

"Wow, man. I am speechless. I don't think we are allowed to be overtly racist on this board, are we? Anyone?"

Must be OK, you are doing a great job of it! Keep bashing White America, rev Jaded!

When the residents of South Boston burn down their own neighborhood, give me a call!

I am not implying a thing, Iggy. I posed a question, you made an implication from that. You make of it what you please, I really couldn't care less.

While you have your dictionary out, please explain to Jaded Anti-American the definition of "overt"

"You "Christians" are aware that 45,000 Americans are estimated to have been in Haiti for the earthquake right?"

"for the earthquake"?

Was it on the schedule?

I didn't get the memo?

Could you possibly have meant "during the earthquake?"

"God, if you really do exist and you can tear yourself away from whichever athlete you are helping to compete at the moment"

Wow, you really have a sense for the divine! How do you ask for a second cup of coffee? Were you toilet trained at gunpoint?

"Wow, you really have a sense for the divine!"

As much as anyone else.

"How do you ask for a second cup of coffee?"

I drink just drink tea. Goodnight my implied racist confrere. Or as they might say in Haiti, Bonne Nuit.

It would be grammatical to say, for example, "I was there for the speech." It would also be grammatical to say, "I was there during the speech." Both of these sentences carry a slightly different connotation, but both are quite correct grammatically. Learn your language Buck, I have.

Hopefully, someone will shut this thread down...

I'm done with Joe. He's exposed himself for the troll he is and doesn't deserve any of our time. His posts have been more venomous than Sean McCloud and fredd combined.

Mark, I just called it out because I was directly offended. Sorry? To blame me for his remarks is insane. I feel that I can be very civil and have.

Do you really feel that I can't tell a person something they said is racist?

Who did you mean by "You are all to blame..."?

Joe is to blame, because he said it. If he has a right to say racist things against blacks, I, as a black man have the right to protest. Right?

I think Joe just really pushed some of our buttons, Mark. I apologize to you, personally, if you were offended by anything I said.

And for the record Mark my friend, I did not relish anything. I was angry. The guy was basically typing in blackface. So I guess I regret it if anyone is angry with me now, but I am not sorry for my reaction, it is deeply ingrained in us to oppose that kind of hateful display, you know, since that civil rights thing and all.. and if this wouldn't have happened you would have never had any reason to think I was black. So I am not on some chip-on-my-shoulder mission.

btw, Monday is a very important holiday to me. Probably not for some around here though....

"I think the whole thing could have been avoided by just ignoring a few posts,"

Nice suggestion Mark, lets just ignore racism. That was very productive in the early 20th century if iI recall.

Ignoring racism is tantamount to being racist, Mark.

Really? I see.

What are you implying Mark, that someone here has somehow disparaged white people? If that is your belief, would you be so kind as to point out where? Or where you just demonstrating that deftness for argument you have?

Jaded, thanks for at least trying to understand my take on this issue. Personally, I think your attitude shows more maturity than some others who relish in it. While irenic discourse about racism is fine in its place, as you can see, in the other context it can get out of hand rather quickly. What I see on T.V. of all the race baiting on both sides of late is a very troubling sign for the future of or Republic. Thanks again my friend.

Where's that Sam guy? On vacation again...

mccookreader -- if you dispute some of the dictionary definitions, then let me just say that some people actually believe that only certain peoples or ethic groups/minorities can be on the prejudicial end of racism. That is false because anyone can be a racist. Around the middle of this century, when "whites" become a minority in the U.S., will that mean they can no longer be racist?

mccookreader - If you believe it is a logical fallacy then fine. I think it is still applicable because the reasoning I mentioned is rampant and it must be acknowledged and dealt with. Finally, we are onto a civilized discussion on racism...

Chunk,

Does G5/Sceptre claiming that because he is white he is genetically superior to Spainish people count as racism?

Those are some really good points mccookreader, I appreciate your comments. I have experienced the confusion you are talking about as well. In fact, G5's genetic superiority comment was based on his assumption that I am Mexican or Central/South American because I have a Spanish name and I speak Spanish. I think for many people (not just Americans either), being Spanish is preferable to being Mexican or South American, probably because Spanish people are lighter skinned and typically have Anglo features. What kills me is that as the world quickly gets smaller and smaller, and as a result languages and cultures in contact with one another (especially in America) becomes the norm, learning new languages and cultures is inevitable. Yet some people still cling to their ethnocentrism and xenophobia out of fear and feelings of superiority, and close ethnic groups out, rather than learning from and enjoying other kinds of people. I think I just loath stagnation in general.

Surprisingly, many in Spain are the same way. Some of the people I know there complain that Americans are ignorant and racist, and yet when a Moroccan risks his/her life swimming or rafting the straight of Gibraltar, some of the Spanish tend to treat them and speak of them as though they are second rate citizens, in the same way that SOME Americans think of and treat Mexicans. Europeans have the reputation for being open-minded and worldly, and in many ways this is deserved, but honestly, Europeans in my experience are some of the most openly ethnocentric people I have come across. Sad.

No worries Chunk, hope you get to feeling better.

To answer your question, many Americans confuse Spanish people with Mexicans/Central and South Americans quite a lot, and in my experience this is not a mistake that favors the Spaniard. Meaning, many Americans are resentful of Latinos. These mistakes that I have been privy to I don't think that were caused by racism against the Spanish, but rather by simple ignorance. However, I would argue the feelings many Americans have toward Latinos are certainly inspired by racism.

Chunk, first of all I hope ya get well. Secondly, disdain and hatred don't need physical assaults to qualify them as racism. Certainly, racism carries it share of undue violence but the psychological aspect is far more prevalent and perhaps more damaging.

Ignorance like racism causes divides and inhibits cooperation between groups of people who may, without the race issues, find themselves of like minds. Racism is a learned behavior also, and it certainly is perpetuated and taught as a sick sort of family value amongst some folks, which continues the cycle of ignorance and unnecessary hatred multi-generationally.

Since almost all of us on this board seem to agree that racism is a bad thing, I have a question to pose. If racism is discrimination and racism is bad, it would seem that discrimination is bad. That being the case, why do so many conservatives insist on discriminating against homosexuality? Is the gay community's fight for civil rights really any different from women's suffrage or from the leaps and bounds that African American civil rights have come?

God bless America

Equal rights for GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender) people is the modern extention of the ONGOING human civil rights struggle.

I take it Chunky feels that racism isn't an issue unless there is a violent episode inspired by racism. And that, my black/brown/gay friends, is the reason I use the term ONGOING.

I should be sorry that the thread took this direction, but for 2 reasons I am not:

1) it was started by Joe typing in blackface, and exacerbated by certain people, who know who they are, blaming myself, GI, and reformed for the racist content because we called Joe out for it (insane logic) and secondly for this reason:

2) This is probably a healthy discussion to have, being that there are some serious racist attitudes on this board and still in our modern political and social realm.

SO, besides being very offended and angered,I guess this enriched the experience of this blog. Who would have thought that a fringe crazy like Sam would actually be doing so much good, even if on this minute level.

Good points Jaded, I agree. There are more than a few people on the right (on this board and generally) who absolutely hate it when a person tries to talk about race and/or when a person points out racism in action and speech (hence, Eric Holder's challenge last year). These people would like to shut down discussion, and obscure their feelings, rather than have their narrow mindedness pointed out to them. And I can't really blame them, they know their belief system is bankrupt morally, but that is probably a hard thing to face, so they make the deliberate decision to stay ignorant. Sad.

Yes, I hawked a big one on pat robertson, now let's focus on helping Haitians.

That's a rough story Chunk, and it saddens me to hear it. Carl's tongue is a bit harsh in his cheek, but I understand the sentiment: you get one sense of a person and it only takes a small dose of humanity to knock your senses out of whack. Focusing on Haitians....good advice.

"Distrust and caution are the parents of security." -Benjamin Franklin

You don't strike me as a fool Carl; just reasonably wary.

Carl,

I should know better than to respond, but here it is. Since I have not listen to my buy (I'll presume you meant boy) Rush in many years, I really don't know what was said on his program. If Rush said his donations are paid through his taxes, and won't donate anymore, it's his conscience he has to live with, not mine. To me, it doesn't matter who gave what, just give and make sure it is used for disaster relief.

Please Carl, tell me I am still a First Class douche-bag! PLEASE!!!

Think about what Pat Robertson said for a moment, about Haitians deserving what they are getting for making a deal with the devil, then watch the video at the bottom of the page. Pat Robertson should be castrated in public.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/18/an...

It should be required viewing for the faux Christians around here too, who really only care about the money in their bank account, the ugly muscle car in their garage, and their own petty and insipid existences.

Someone should bless Haiti, if God isn't willing to.

What do I care about a poor country sod's bank account?