Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Wait a minute. Have you forgotten all your LC prejudices which you regularly fling my way?

From my POV, when I see a comment that is consonant with LC thinking, I call it as such. If you think I'm wrong, just say so.

I get the double whammy, while you only hear about liberalism. Are you willing to reconsidering your liberal stances?

As I see it,a belief or practice is not wrong simply because such is held or practiced by the LC. I can explain why I disagree with the LC. If you hold to LC teaching, that's your choice. There's no whammy.

I don't hold any stances because you consider them liberal. I won't reconsider a stance because you label it "liberal." Now if you give me a sound argument why I should reconsider a stance I'm taking, I'll consider it.

I was a Kennedy/McGovern democrat/liberal back in my Cleveland days. Then the party left me. They kept moving left, never stopping, and I decided to stay still, considering the childhood values my parents put in me were not so bad after all. Nearly half a century later, my former party is totally unrecognizable. JFK, besides wanting to know who shot him, would be shocked with how the country has gone to, "[I]ask not what I can do for my country, but what will that effin country do for me?

Now that is surprising. On March 6, 1961 President John F. Kennedy issued an executive order, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin." I was under the impression that you thought that people should be discriminated against if they were "Mooslim" [sic]. Shows how wrong I can be.

Perhaps you might reconsider your own positions in light of where you once were.

I'm not sure how that would work. My positions have changed based on my experience and knowledge. I now see where I once was in a larger context. I think it makes more sense to go forward. You should try it.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

From my POV, when I see a comment that is consonant with LC thinking, I call it as such. If you think I'm wrong, just say so.

As I see it,a belief or practice is not wrong simply because such is held or practiced by the LC. I can explain why I disagree with the LC. If you hold to LC teaching, that's your choice. There's no whammy.

If my views are conservative or Biblical, they may seem LCish to you because that was your (only?) Christian context. Also, your leadership in S. Florida under Mel Porter took every LC problem to great extremes, almost unrecognizable to me personally. Regarding these extremes, my only point of reference is what I have read from others' similar to yours.

I don't hold any stances because you consider them liberal. I won't reconsider a stance because you label it "liberal." Now if you give me a sound argument why I should reconsider a stance I'm taking, I'll consider it.

OK. I consider the wholesale slaughter of the unborn as a liberal-defining position identified as "women's rights." I left the Democratic party over abortion back in 1973, when we organized peaceful protests and parades in Cleveland bringing abortion clinics under public scrutiny. Would you reconsider your stance on abortion?

Now that is surprising. On March 6, 1961 President John F. Kennedy issued an executive order, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin." I was under the impression that you thought that people should be discriminated against if they were "Mooslim" [sic]. Shows how wrong I can be.

That's right. Big difference between employers wrongfully treating Mooslims, and citizens like me being alarmed by their hateful rhetoric, demands for sheria law, mistreatment of women, etc. Since "peaceful" Mooslims are constantly silent about radical islamic terror, they tacitly approve of it. No other creed has these issues.

I'm not sure how that would work. My positions have changed based on my experience and knowledge. I now see where I once was in a larger context. I think it makes more sense to go forward. You should try it.

If going forward means turning hard left, then I'll pass. I've seen the damage it causes.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If my views are conservative or Biblical, they may seem LCish to you because that was your (only?) Christian context. Also, your leadership in S. Florida under Mel Porter took every LC problem to great extremes, almost unrecognizable to me personally. Regarding these extremes, my only point of reference is what I have read from others' similar to yours.

The salient characteristics of the LC are not conservative. If the LC is simply practicing conservative Christianity, then why aren't you still part of it?

OK. I consider the wholesale slaughter of the unborn as a liberal-defining position identified as "women's rights." I left the Democratic party over abortion back in 1973, when we organized peaceful protests and parades in Cleveland bringing abortion clinics under public scrutiny. Would you reconsider your stance on abortion?

I don't recall ever saying a thing about abortion on this website; so, why you think you know how I feel about it is puzzling to me.

That's right. Big difference between employers wrongfully treating Mooslims, and citizens like me being alarmed by their hateful rhetoric, demands for sheria law, mistreatment of women, etc. Since "peaceful" Mooslims are constantly silent about radical islamic terror, they tacitly approve of it. No other creed has these issues.

What about the Muslims who don't express hateful rhetoric, demand sharia law, or mistreat women and do condemn terrorism? http://www.usnews.com/news/the-repor...dia-ignores-it

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

That's right. Big difference between employers wrongfully treating Mooslims, and citizens like me being alarmed by their hateful rhetoric, demands for sheria law, mistreatment of women, etc. Since "peaceful" Mooslims are constantly silent about radical islamic terror, they tacitly approve of it. No other creed has these issues.

Sometimes when we dislike or fear others it's because we don't know them.

If space aliens were studying us, and all they had to go on was our news outlets they'd concluded the human race is very violent. But because the news doesn't speak of all the non-violent members of the human race they would really know us.

After 9/11 I visited a mosque a couple of times (is that liberal?). I sat at a picnic table with about 20 or so of them. They shared milk and cookies with me. They did not agree with the perpetrators of 9/11. In fact, they didn't think they were real Muslims. Still, they were being persecuted as if they did it. Their mosque was being vandalised, they were being discriminated against in the marketplace, and they couldn't let their children go outside and play. My heart went out to them.

Maybe instead of just going by all the bad news about Muslims, you should make an effort to get to know some Muslims that aren't in the news (the lying media).

Originally Posted by Ohio

If going forward means turning hard left, then I'll pass.

Are your choices only hard left or hard right? The world isn't just black and white. It's filled with all kinds of colors, including gray.

I know it's likely too liberal for you, but I became a Mugwump so that I wouldn't have to hate either one. Or actually, maybe, so that I could hate both equally, when I feel like hating, which is rare.

The human race is worthy of hate. But not all of them. Most, in fact, aren't. Same with Muslims.

But you won't convince Steve Bannon of that. He's not only hard right, but is Alt-right. Is it a conservative thing to hate all but white Christians? I don't think it's a Christian thing (unless it's a Catholic thing during the Crusades).

Here's something that's touching :

Keep the faith: Muslim activists raise $55,000 in just HOURS to rebuild Jewish cemetery where vandals destroyed 154 gravestones
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-cemetery.html

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Sometimes when we dislike or fear others it's because we don't know them.

Or we fear others because of what we do know.

Maybe instead of just going by all the bad news about Muslims, you should make an effort to get to know some Muslims that aren't in the news (the lying media).

Coming from you, I found this interesting.

Reading all your posts, I can't ever remember a time where you portrayed Christians in a good light. We have corresponded for years about your disparaging attitude towards God, towards the Bible, towards Israel, and towards Christians. You never seem to have a good thing to say about any of them, instead you can drag up the most outlandish things, often from millennia ago, to paint them derogatorily. Am I not right?

Yet here you are lecturing me about finding some good mooslims, ready to tell me wonderful stories of their love. You never have a bad thing to say. Why did you not challenge them about their teachings and history, like you do with every other Christian you run in to? Why not incite them on the sunni/shiite conflicts, or anything else close to their heart, like you do with every Christian you know? Why do you treat mooslims so much better than Christians?

Are your choices only hard left or hard right? The world isn't just black and white. It's filled with all kinds of colors, including gray.

Also funny. You have never said anything good about Bush or Trump, yet say nearly nothing about Clintons or Obama. That doesn't sound very colorful to me. Sounds to me pretty monochromatic -- true blue. Or maybe "yellow dog" democrat.

But you won't convince Steve Bannon of that. He's not only hard right, but is Alt-right. Is it a conservative thing to hate all but white Christians?

Little disingenuous for you to criticize Bannon for his views supporting Trump, yet never condemn the Obama girls like Valerie Jarrett, Susan Rice, and Loretta Lynch. They really pushed the limits of Alt-left. Wasn't there a whole lot to hate there? How about the total lack of honesty and transparency?

But wait folks! We ain't allowed to critique their job performance! Heck no! Because they are women. And they are minority women. They get a free pass. How dare us white folks demand accountability from these "public" servants? Don't you know that all of us white folks got "white privilege?" We must forever bear the daily shame of our "white guilt."

News Flash!!

It was not white people who broke all their treaties and killed the yellow man, it was the Democrats.

It was not white people who kept the black man enslaved and oppressed, it was the Democrats, southern AND northern.

[ZNPaaneah]

I think it is fair to this discussion on treatment of muslims to realize that the Koran does not see the distinction between human government and God's government. In the NT Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world" hence Christians can see a distinction without conflict. However, the recent political push to move countries to adopt Sharia law funded by the OPEC countries like Saudi Arabia, a push that has resulted in horrible war atrocities like Sudan and Nigeria should alarm everyone. Under Sharia law non muslims are second class citizens. The only reason a muslim would claim that they are not interested in converting the US to Sharia law is because they aren't even close to 50% of the population. But in countries that are close to 50% it is very clear how they behave towards non Muslims to change the equation. We are not talking about "extremists" we are talking about the major Muslim nations in the UN (OPEC, Indonesia, etc) and about 20 developing nations that recently converted to Sharia law to get financial incentives and give the Muslim nations a much more powerful voice in the UN.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Or we fear others because of what we do know.

Coming from you, I found this interesting.

Reading all your posts, I can't ever remember a time where you portrayed Christians in a good light. We have corresponded for years about your disparaging attitude towards God, towards the Bible, towards Israel, and towards Christians. You never seem to have a good thing to say about any of them, instead you can drag up the most outlandish things, often from millennia ago, to paint them derogatorily. Am I not right?

Yet here you are lecturing me about finding some good mooslims, ready to tell me wonderful stories of their love. You never have a bad thing to say. Why did you not challenge them about their teachings and history, like you do with every other Christian you run in to? Why not incite them on the sunni/shiite conflicts, or anything else close to their heart, like you do with every Christian you know? Why do you treat mooslims so much better than Christians?


Also funny. You have never said anything good about Bush or Trump, yet say nearly nothing about Clintons or Obama. That doesn't sound very colorful to me. Sounds to me pretty monochromatic -- true blue. Or maybe "yellow dog" democrat.


Little disingenuous for you to criticize Bannon for his views supporting Trump, yet never condemn the Obama girls like Valerie Jarrett, Susan Rice, and Loretta Lynch. They really pushed the limits of Alt-left. Wasn't there a whole lot to hate there? How about the total lack of honesty and transparency?

But wait folks! We ain't allowed to critique their job performance! Heck no! Because they are women. And they are minority women. They get a free pass. How dare us white folks demand accountability from these "public" servants? Don't you know that all of us white folks got "white privilege?" We must forever bear the daily shame of our "white guilt."

News Flash!!

It was not white people who broke all their treaties and killed the yellow man, it was the Democrats.

It was not white people who kept the black man enslaved and oppressed, it was the Democrats, southern AND northern.

Goodness bro Ohio, come out for hate why don't you. Seems to me what you are saying is that, I hate Christians, and Jews, and I'm messing up by not hate Muslims, and, by the way, liberals. Hey, I may as well throw the conservatives in there too. Cuz I've got my hands full with just the Christians. Something is wrong with me. I'm not able to hate enough, nor to keep up with all the hate required in the world.

Should we really be hating labels? Should we actually be putting people in categories, and then hating all in that category, without realizing that we might be putting people in the category that don't fit there ; when there are actually good and bad people in each an every category???

I don't get it. Why must we hate? What is it about humans that makes them have to have someone(s) to hate?

[Evangelical]

Most Muslims are non-violent, peace loving people, even the ones that believe in Sharia. Islam is about a personal relationship with God, through Sharia Law. This is similar to a Jew's personal relationship with God through the Torah. In fact the Torah and Sharia Law are very similar to each other.
I can imagine God perhaps preferring a Sharia Law country to a law-less country like America. The Sharia Law country would be more or less similar to ancient Israel.
Contrary to popular opinion, muslims have no interest in converting a country like America to Sharia law, because it is against the Koran to mix church and state. Sharia law obliges muslims to defend other faiths from attack. Fundamentalists, or extremists, on the other hand, want to use Islam to overthrow democracy - there are many muslims who disagree with this, which is why muslim democratic countries still exist.

This parodox between "peace loving" and violence is not only found in Islam, it is also in Christianity. For example, Christianity is a peace loving religion, or so it claims. If that is true, then why do Christians ever go to war given the command to "love thy neighbor"? These sorts of "if Islam is so peaceful why do they....." arguments can also apply to Christianity.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Contrary to popular opinion, muslims have no interest in converting a country like America to Sharia law, because it is against the Koran to mix church and state.

Thank you for teaching us! Can you quote the portion of the Koran that is against mixing church and state? Thanks.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Goodness bro Ohio, come out for hate why don't you. Seems to me what you are saying is that, I hate Christians, and Jews, and I'm messing up by not hate Muslims, and, by the way, liberals. Hey, I may as well throw the conservatives in there too. Cuz I've got my hands full with just the Christians. Something is wrong with me. I'm not able to hate enough, nor to keep up with all the hate required in the world.

Should we really be hating labels? Should we actually be putting people in categories, and then hating all in that category, without realizing that we might be putting people in the category that don't fit there ; when there are actually good and bad people in each an every category???

I don't get it. Why must we hate? What is it about humans that makes them have to have someone(s) to hate?

When did I say to hate anyone? Did you even read what I wrote?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When did I say to hate anyone? Did you even read what I wrote?

I think you critiqued Obama's administration. That usually results in a knee jerk reaction of "hate" and "racist".

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When did I say to hate anyone? Did you even read what I wrote?

No I didn't. It exuded too much hate. Was it lying to me? I hope so. I really hate hate.

But really. Okay I'm hard on Christianity, the Jews and the Bible. But I wouldn't ban any of them. And of course if I got on Islam's case I would likely be as bad, and am, at times with Muslim "friends" on Facebook. I am weak on the point. I've read the Quran, but don't know it like the Bible (it reminds me of the Old Testament). And I realize there are violent Muslims. They're human. But I wouldn't ban them either ; not as a classified group. Most Muslim's aren't violent, thank God, or Allah ... what/whoever.

For a while I was helping a young student here at Murray State University. He was a Muslim from India. He was Sunni. He spewed disdain for Shiite (not Muslim he said) and Hindus. He talked up India like it's the greatest country in the world. But I loved the kid. Even tho he was a Muslim, he was basically a good person, in the struggle of life, like the rest of us.

I asked why we hate. It's obviously a cultural thing. Our culture is good. Their's is not. My tribe good. Yours not. My tribe is real people. Yours is not.

But as Christians we're supposed to be a "new man." I'll leave all the characteristics of the new man to bro ZNP, but I doubt it includes stereotypically hating groups of people ; whether liberals, Muslims, blacks, gays, or otherwise. That to me should be both liberal and conservative values.

Besides, do we really want to advertise to the world that Jesus failed us?