Arkansas Blog

Beautiful!

The Religious Right does not hold the high moral ground on so many issues, but they always act like it. They always behave as if their own words are straight from the mouth of God.

More power to this emerging Religious Left movement. They were there all along. They just got swamped in rhetoric from the Right and didn't speak up until they got mad enough.

And we have always loved the sneers about the middle part of the country being Jesus Land.

The religious left movement started dying when the left mocked William Jennings Bryan (pre-Scopes) for his belief in Jesus as the son of God rather than embracing his message of economic justice.

The religious left movement started dying when the left mocked William Jennings Bryan...

Apparently the religious right movement started dying when a few of them started to realize that being for a low minimum wage is not very Christ-like. As with the turn against Bush, it's likely that many more religious folks will begin to question the words of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc.

Once you begin to tug at a lose thread, the whole thing can unravel. But I prefer a house of cards analogy since it involves things crashing down on Falwell's head.

I think God passed his judgment on Frederick March, er, William Jennings Bryan when He struck him dead at the conclusion of the Monkey Trial.

Backlash -- it's about time!

There's no question that Christianity was hijacked at the turn of the century by the GOP and Fundamentalists for power and financial gain and at the greatest cost -- sacrificing God.

In the past five years, many moderate and liberal Muslims have publicly announced that Osama bin Laden does not speak for them, but unfortunately it's been rare these days to hear moderate and liberal Christians distancing themselves from their intolerant leaders.

Therefore, it's good to finally see more progressive/democrats start challenging the status quo. People are growing weary as I am of the conservative BS thinking that there's no such thing as Christian Democrats

So screw the element of caution of not wanting to offend anyone -- forward march!

When I grew up we were taught to respect our faith and our leaders, and to question them would be to disrespect the church and disrespect God -- well that archaic thinking is caput there's just no God that would hang around many organized churches and church leaders these day's -- at least not one I would submit too.

If you haven't read the THE RANT yesterday from Capitol Hill Blue it's short and to the point must read.

I don't, for a second, believe Bush is a Christian or a religious man. He is an opportunist who uses religion as a political tool as do far too many of the so-called family-value Republicans who infect Congress like a rampaging cancer.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8663.shtml

If "Religious Left" means that love is the foundation for all our decisions, not self righteous judgement, then, I'm inclined to lean left also. Did Jesus ever seem angry with any particular group? Yes! Not the prostitutes, or "sinners". They seemed to be His friends. But the established religious self righteous who looked down their nose at those non-conformists. Those were the ones He rebuked. Yes we have to have standards, but if the driving force is not love, then please don't say your speaking for Jesus.

My problem with the religious right has always been that they use wedge issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, to get voters out to the polls. Now let me ask you, do you think that Jesus would have more of a problem with a same-sex couple that loves each other, or the fact that children go to bed hungry every night, thousands of our fellow Americans don't have adequate health care and our poor are basically ignored in society.

My opinion is that too many "religious" people get caught up in the doctrine, rather than the spirit of Jesus message.

Thank the Force that finally we'll have a religion without a belief in God -- that is what the country has been crying for. More power to the Left!!

Hallelujah opines: 'a religion without a belief in God ... the Left'.

The historic, mainstream church that ordained me many years ago is well-known for leaning to the left, even at the cost of 'losing' some stragglers who cling to their prejudices. Oh yes, we do worship God and do our best to put the teachings of Jesus into practice. For us, that tends to mean things like feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visitng the prisoner, healing the sick, etc--whether people notice what we are doing is less important than doing it.

Go ahead and say we don't know God. We know better.

The Quapaw Quarter UMC ads I've been running on this left-leaning Arkansas Times website have increased visitors to our website by 500%. People are looking for alternatives to the hate-filled fundamentalism that uses scripture as a weapon and Christianity as a means of oppression.

The Quapaw Quarter UMC ads I've been running...

Life-long Methodist here too.
Though it was later criticized by fundamentalists as not emphasizing enough strict Bible, maybe the Methodist upbringing we had in the 50's/60's/early 70's turned out some pretty good people after all!

Religious Left?

ohhhhh wait that is the new term for what used to referred to as atheist in the past. I get you now Max.

Come to think of it "Religious Left" does sound better than doubter.

Come to think of it "Religious Left" does sound better than doubter.

I'd rather be surrounded by a hundred such doubters than by one pious right winger who only pays attention to the most negative, restrictive, hard-line parts of the Bible and ignores the teachings of love, forgiveness and tolerance in the New Testament.

People on both sides tend to dwell on and preach the parts of the Bible they agree with and ignore the parts they aren't comfortable with.

the religious left never went anywhere
they've been doing the good work
they've always been doing, spreading
their version of the 'good news'
and helping the least in our society.
they're just not on cable and don't
fit the narrative of George Bush and
the right wing "people of faith."

article helps show yet again the
Washington Post needs to get
a clue.

I think it's human nature to distain the Kiwanis if you're in the Rotary Club. I think stamp collectors probably think coin collectors are a little dense. This country has taken that to the extreme with Democrats and Republicans. And in the end it serves no one well.

Having worked my way thru religion from birth, it's hard for me to fight off the urge to make fun when I post something regarding religion. But I honestly want to be respectful of all views. No one died and made me boss, I am not Bill Gates, no shining example other than I have survived 50 years, have few enemies, have a nice family and assume there will be a good turnout at my funeral.

I'm sorry religion doesn't groove my hoover any more. I'm sorry naked natives in National Geographic doesn't turn me on any more either. Innocent times are generally happier times. I've found that happiness usually doesn't come thru knowledge. Ma used to sing me to sleep with a little ditty about a happy little moron, doesn't give a damn. It's not the dumb people that start wars, the one exception being George W. Bush.

I'm only dredging thru this little history to help explain to believers why some of us don't believe. In my case it wasn't the work of Satan, it was the realization that I have no capacity for spiritualism, fiction, or faith in the unknown where facts never follow. I never believed in fortune tellers, Martians, or telepathy. Why would I believe in someone no one has heard a peep from in at least 2000 years? I would rather know than feel. Facts turn me on, not fiction. Before my cousin killed himself, he had spent 30 years believing he was a pig. But we buried a man, not a pig. He was wrong.

My point is this. I believe you can be a good person without having the fear of eternal damnation. I believe you can figure out how to treat and respect others without a good Bible beating. I believe you can be a good American without being a member of a religious group or declaring yourself a Christian. I'm thinking other than nuns and priests, probably no other group manages 100% believers in a Supreme Being than our politicians. Trot out the wife, the kids and your pre-packaged belief in God and then announce for public office. Don't forget the flag!

I would have said 10 years ago that it doesn't hurt anything if a politician was a church going Christian. For over 200 years politicians were to be able to be Christians and politicians at the same time with no ugly consequences. But the last 5 years we've seen Christianity used as a divider and a barbed club. And suddenly I'm not so willing to dismiss religious beliefs as being harmless.

I believe that humans develop a need for religion from 2 things that are common in us all. The memory of the safety and comfort most of us got from childhood and our mothers and or fathers. It was great to believe you were loved and watched over at all times. You could jump out of bed each morning knowing that no matter what happened, Mom or Dad would fix it. Nothing was too big that Mom couldn't gobble it up and spit it out.

The second thing is the fear of death that all humans and most animals share instinctively. No one wants to die. Dying is scary and the fear of what comes after is scary and the idea of never being here every again in 15 trillion years is scary. Never seeing your family, never seeing your home, never smelling flowers or a cup of coffee, never hearing music, no puppies, no kisses, no gentle touches....our worst nightmare waiting at the end of our lives. At the end of all our lives, for sure, guaranteed.

So some caveman, laying in his dark cave exercising the few brain cells cavemen had came up with the idea of a vehicle that would carry us beyond death to a new world without mastodons, or big snakes or illness or death. The land of milk and honey, fruit as big as your Neanderthal head. No pain, no hunger, no thirst, no death.

You can bet in no time that brilliant caveman developed a following larger than Benny Hinn could even imagine. And after a big pterodactyl meal and a few virgins, you can bet that first caveman evangelist noticed the power that was suddenly his. With a few words and a little rock pounding whole villages would probably fall in behind him. Doing his bidding at the mere wave of his hairy hand.

And they all lived happily ever after until some other caveman decided he'd get into the game and invent an even more pleasing message and a different method of entering the kingdom of no snakes and big fruit. And then the trouble started. The trouble that troubles us to this day.

I'd like to say hurray for the religious Left, but I can't stomach people or parties that abandon their ideals and start pandering just to get more votes, though he who gets the most votes, wins. I guess I'd rather live forever under the miserable rein of King George Bush than to become him in order to beat him at the polls. Probably a good thing I don't have Howard Dean's job.

I really believe our founding fathers tried to keep a separation of church and state because they foresaw the mess we're in today. I believe we'll remain in this mess until we manage to put religion back into the box and use the Constitution as our one true guide. There is only one Constitution, by one account there are over 4300 brands of religion in the world. If they all decide they have to own a piece of our government, we'll die for sure.

Well said, D.

I'd like to say hurray for the religious Left, but I can't stomach people or parties that abandon their ideals and start pandering... Posted by: Deathbyinches

I really didn't see assertion by the Religious Non-Right as being a political move to win votes, though some of that may come in. I'm just rejoicing that, perhaps, the more tolerant, kind-hearted silent majority may finally feel comfort in saying that king Falwell has no clothes (I know, not a pretty mental picture).

I think a lot of religious moderates have silenced themselves for years now, fearing that they would be seen as less holy if they questioned the dogma being shouted by the Religious Right. I'm optimistic that this resurgence of religious moderates might lead to an easing of a host of things currently wrong with this country.

"do you think that Jesus would have more of a problem with a same-sex couple that loves each other, or the fact that children go to bed hungry every night,"

No I think that he has a problem with both. There are verses in the Bible that cover both subjects. Jesus does represent love and grace. He offers salvation for all and eternal life for all.

But there are also moral issues and standards that are outlined in the Bible. Here's the deal you can't just pick out the parts you like and go with it, it is a whole package. For there to be a standard or a code or a level of morality in your life there must be an unchanging baseline that everything is based on. Otherwise there will be no order in your life. It is debatable that politicians' have abused their faith for votes but it does not change the fact that the hot button issues of abortion and same-sex marriage are wrong according to the Bible. What we as a country have to decide is whether or not we will use unchanging Christian principles to base our laws upon or will we base are morality on what feels good.

My vote will be to base them on what is unchanging.

"There's no question Christianity was hijacked . . ."
BWC

There is a March 2006 book--The Hijacking of Jesus, subtitle, How the Religious Right Distorts Christianity and Promotes Prejudice and Hate--by Dan Wakefield, described on the jacket as a novelist, journalist and screenwriter. I got the book at Cokesbury and have read about fifty pages. It is very readable and tragically accurate.

As to misplaced priorities, in Matthew 23:23, Jesus is quoted as saying: "Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weighier matters of the law, jusice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done without neglecting the others."

(From REL)

...But there are also moral issues and standards that are outlined in the Bible. Here's the deal you can't just pick out the parts you like and go with it, it is a whole package. For there to be a standard or a code or a level of morality in your life there must be an unchanging baseline that everything is based on. Otherwise there will be no order in your life....

Yes, there are moral issues and standards outlined in the Bible. That much is true. But that is not to say that the absence of subscription to the Bible leaves a person with no morals.

I happen to be a Christian (Disciples of Christ, and a recovering Methodist), and I feel I have a pretty reliable moral compass. But I know of plenty of very good folks who do not practice religion of any stripe. They are honest, kind, charitable...if you didn't know any better you might assume they were good Christians.

It's difficult to do this without stereotyping, but the "Religious Right" (think Falwell, Frist, Buchanan, even bush) in my mind bear no resemblance to living Christ-inspired lives. Quite the opposite, really. And all of them do exactly what you say...they pick out the parts that suit their particular political argument. Their point in scourging homosexuals, for example, seems to ignore Christ's overarching lesson that we should love our fellow man DESPITE his sins. We're even supposed to love our enemies, for crying out loud.

Do you hear that, george?

A point that should not be missed is this: although the Bible may be YOUR guide to righteous living, it is not the OFFICIAL guide. Plenty of reasonable people do not take to the Bible. There is no (and should never be) a State religion. The direction for that aspect of life is up to the individual. (See: liberty)

These comments that people are making miss a key problem with the religious right: they don't just want to enforce Old Testament morality, they make up a morality they push on the rest of us.

For example, the Bible (and I focus on the Old Testament here):
--does not forbid lesbian sexuality.
--does not mention abortion, but treats miscarriage due to negligence as a civil offence against the woman's husband.
--views a fetus as of less value than an autonomous person.
--allows a man to marry more than one wife at a time (so marriage is not between "one man and one woman.")
--allows extramarital sex (or second marriage, or concubinage) to resolve infertility problems with one's spouse.
--views a marriage as a civil agreement, or arrangement, between two families, not a religious undertaking.
--does not view marriage asa life-long state, but allows a husband to divorce a wife for ritual uncleanness. Women do not get an equal right to divorce.

While the religous right may claim the moral high ground on many family values issues, many of their claims are not in line with their purported biblical source. There is little morality in making false claims.

It's about time that the Left asserted itself and proclaimed a gospel fit to believe in.

http://www.special-ringtones.net/mp3/ ringtones site free. Best free samsung ringtones, Cingular ringtones and more, Ringtones for free. from website .

http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/ ringtones site free. Free nokia ringtones here, Download ringtones FREE, Best free samsung ringtones. From website .

http://www.la-ringtones.com/mp3/ ringtones site free. Free nokia ringtones here, Download ringtones FREE, Best free samsung ringtones. from website .