The Gathering. The $1-Billion-a-Year Right-Wing Conspiracy You Haven’t Heard Of

originally posted by: defcon5
a reply to: flyingfish

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Yeah, keep messing with the harmless Christian interest groups, who do nothing to you personally, so that they become the religious minority in the country. The Muslims are a close second to the Christians; let’s see how all these groups you are so worried about fair with them being the religious majority in the country. I’ll give you a hint; they’ll do more than hurt your feelings by telling you they disagree with your lifestyle choices or (anti)religious beliefs.
Mark my words the day is going to come where these groups are going to be lamenting, saying, “Man… remember when the Christians were around, all we had to worry about back then was that they might make us feel bad.”

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

Hardly.. I see a day when our intelligence emerges beyond religious extremism. There are those of us who value civil liberties and the separation of church and state, the most serious mistake we could make would be to think that 'it can’t happen here.
I'm all for religious freedom, It's religious intolerance, and the money of religious fanatics like The Family Council and others, that are forcing their unfounded views on all Americans causing considerable damage to women and others who want no part of their religious delusions!
It's simple, religion in government is unconstitutional, and should not be permitted.

a reply to: flyingfish
And yet corporations, who do far more damage to everyone, are allowed to lobby the government because the supreme court has agreed that a corporation has the same say as an individual. Well, a religion should have the same rights then. All religions. That includes Christian organizations as much as it should the VERY powerful lobbies of the ADL and AIPAC.

a reply to: flyingfish

It would be much easier if it was simple, but it's not.

It's simple, religion in government is unconstitutional, and should not be permitted.

In this situation, and in all others I can think of, religion in Government is not unconstitutional. Of course, you might be talking about the government passing a law declaring the citizens accept a religion, but we don't have anything approaching that.

No Judaeo-Christian group I know of have forced any unfounded view on any Americans causing considerable damage to women and others.

If you're referring to Hobby Lobby as your example (do you have another?), then you have misunderstood the case and the holding. In the simplest terms I can come up with, the Supreme Court said that the Government could not require people to violate their religion if there were other practical and reasonable methods to get the same job done. The Court found that the Government had admitted that there were other ways to accomplish the same thing without causing any extra cost or harm to women. The Court then said, "Then don't bother us, go do it that other way." (or something similar)

originally posted by: defcon5
a reply to: LDragonFire
Christians did not destroy the Indians, American Settlers did. Many of them were wiped out due to disease, others over greed that had nothing to do with religion, but rather land, gold, resources, etc…
Just because many of the European settlers were Christians, does not make it a religious motive.

Incorrect Sir:
The papal edict “Inter Caetera,” that was read in Latin to native Americans explained that the Spanish had a god given right to settle, exploit and to do whatever they wished, the Natives were told to convert or die, there rights to the land were stripped in the name of God, they were only allowed to occupy the land, and this could be revoked for any reason.

Research "The Doctrine of Discovery" and how it has lead to 500 years of injustice toward Native Americans including being used in the United States to this day.



Here are some links
The Doctrine of Discovery, 1493
Five Hundred Years of Injustice: The Legacy of Fifteenth Century Religious Prejudice

originally posted by: defcon5
a reply to: LDragonFire
Christians did not destroy the Indians, American Settlers did. Many of them were wiped out due to disease, others over greed that had nothing to do with religion, but rather land, gold, resources, etc…
Just because many of the European settlers were Christians, does not make it a religious motive.

BTW this is a fine example of revisionist history supported by these types of groups in the name of God.

a reply to: LDragonFire
The first Europeans where here for gold, period, that’s all the conquistadors were interested in finding and shipping back to Spain. It had nothing to do with religion. Maybe you’ve heard of the Spanish Treasure fleets?

a reply to: defcon5

I provided you the document from the pope from 1493 and two links that tell the history of the document. I can't nor would I attempt to force you to read, but the colonization of the Americas was religiously justified by the Church. Rape murder and genocide was brought onto the land by the Pope and Spain and the Christian's.

Later in North America Christians set up schools to force Native American children to convert and to reject there own culture, this is the history whether you believe or not, and this thread is a continuation of the power wielded by the Church today.

Are you aware that every single treaty signed between the US government and Native Americans was reneged on by the USA? We lied to them, over and over.

The horrors inflicted to Native Americans is well documented, and its roots are directly from the Church.

a reply to: LDragonFire

Excuse me, but have we gone off topic? 1493, nearly 300 years before we had a Constitution, doesn't really seem to apply here.

a reply to: charles1952

Religious groups have a long history of using there power and influence mostly to control populations and to further there own agenda of power and wealth. Just because the modern groups are not looping off the savages heads doesn't mean they are not a danger to people's freedom and liberty.

Most of the colonists that first came to America did it for religious freedom, they didn't want the state to dictate how they were to worship. This groups wishes to conform the state into doing it's bidding and is a clear threat to anyone that doesn't follow there teaching or ideology. Everything is connected and if you don't know history you are doomed to repeat it.

I'm not against Christians at all, but I'm Leary of powerful religious groups attempting to wield power and influence over people who may not follow there dogma. What would a American Theocracy look like? Would they destroy monuments in the states that are deemed not Christian? Would they force there beliefs on the masses? Doesn't power corrupt absolutely even withing religious organizations? Would they rewrite our history books like so many already are? Would freedom have a place in this world they wish to manifest? Would we enter a dark age? Would education and science be banned like in so many religious dominated cultures?

Lots to discuss...

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Religious groups have a long history of using there power and influence mostly to control populations and to further there own agenda of power and wealth. Just because the modern groups are not looping off the savages heads doesn't mean they are not a danger to people's freedom and liberty.

So what freedoms are they trying to deny?

originally posted by: LDragonFire
The horrors inflicted to Native Americans is well documented, and its roots are directly from the Church.

So how do you categorize the 150 million killed in Russia and China during their very non-religious periods?

a reply to: LDragonFire

Dear LDragonFire,

I'm a little uncomfortable with the argument "Well, they did it once, they're probably going to do it again." Especially when we're talking about religions in the United States.

I can't think of anything that Christians or Jews have done in the US that are a danger to peoples' freedom and liberty.

As you say, quite correctly:

Just because the modern groups are not looping off the savages heads doesn't mean they are not a danger to people's freedom and liberty.

But what does mean they're a danger to freedom and liberty? They haven't been in the past 200+ years, why be afraid of them now? Have they done anything that violates the Constitution? Or tried to overthrow the government?

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: LDragonFire
So the pope wrote a document that excused what the Spanish were going to do in South America anyway, as long as he got his cut. That still does not change the fact that the majority of the South American Indians died from disease, not being converted to Christianity. Why did the Spaniards allow Columbus to come to the new land to begin with? Was it to covert the East Indians? No it was to open new, and they hoped faster, trade routes.

You also assume that the majority of North American Settlers were Catholic, which is not true, they were Protestants. Many of them were going to America to escape the Catholic Church to being with. All the North American Indians were decimated by expansionism, not religion. The United States government was not putting them on reservations due to their religion, but rather because settlers wanted their land, especially for cattle ranching. The trail of tears was instituted by the US Army, not the Catholic Church.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: LDragonFire
The horrors inflicted to Native Americans is well documented, and its roots are directly from the Church.

So how do you categorize the 150 million killed in Russia and China during their very non-religious periods?

I haven't endorsed communism or atheism nor would I ever and this is totally off topic..

a reply to: charles1952

Using the constitution and the bible slavery was legal in the US for 200 years. Women didn't have the right to vote, based on biblical law. Prohibition was a evangelical movement. We have dry counties and blue laws. The current effort by republicans to limit or ban abortions is religiously motivated. Christians are still attempting to limit the rights of minorities to marry. And they insist that there right to discriminate against those that do not share there beliefs is somehow attacking there freedoms.

Islamic fundamentalist say convert or die.

Phil Robertson says convert or die.

originally posted by: defcon5
a reply to: LDragonFire
So the pope wrote a document that excused what the Spanish were going to do in South America anyway, as long as he got his cut. That still does not change the fact that the majority of the South American Indians died from disease, not being converted to Christianity. Why did the Spaniards allow Columbus to come to the new land to begin with? Was it to covert the East Indians? No it was to open new, and they hoped faster, trade routes.

You wouldn't have asked if you would have read the links I provided: First paragraph:

When Christopher Columbus first set foot on the white sands of Guanahani island, he performed a ceremony to "take possession" of the land for the king and queen of Spain, acting under the international laws of Western Christendom. Although the story of Columbus' "discovery" has taken on mythological proportions in most of the Western world, few people are aware that his act of "possession" was based on a religious doctrine now known in history as the Doctrine of Discovery. Even fewer people realize that today - five centuries later - the United States government still uses this archaic Judeo-Christian doctrine to deny the rights of Native American Indians.

Five Hundred Years of Injustice: The Legacy of Fifteenth Century Religious Prejudice

You also assume that the majority of North American Settlers were Catholic, which is not true, they were Protestants. Many of them were going to America to escape the Catholic Church to being with. All the North American Indians were decimated by expansionism, not religion. The United States government was not putting them on reservations due to their religion, but rather because settlers wanted their land, especially for cattle ranching. The trail of tears was instituted by the US Army, not the Catholic Church.

I never assumed anything of the sort, I have studied American History, and America was a melting pot of different cultures and religions with Christianity the majority and I do include Catholics as Christians.

Was it Christian of the US government to make treaties with Native Americans then break every treaty ever signed?

Was it Christian of the US to allow slavery? The US used the bible to justify slavery, do you wish to dispute this?

Christians have a history, Christian groups have a dark legacy for atrocities against those that don't convert to there ideology, or do you wish to debate this?

Everyone has reasons to question fundamentalist groups attempting to dictate social change.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Using the constitution and the bible slavery was legal in the US for 200 years.

Holy crap, you say I have revisionist history…
First off slavery is neither condemned nor condoned in the Bible, it was simply a cultural matter through much of history. But according to you, the bible allows slavery, yet then why were slaves not prevalent in Europe where the parent churches (both protestant and catholic) existed? I believe at the time it was outlawed all through Europe. It went on in America not because of the Bible, but because the Southern land owners, who were far enough away from the scrutiny of European opinion and religious ethics, could get away with it. They needed the manpower to work their fields, which is why it was never as big an issue in the industrialized north.

But, hey, why not blame religion for everything while you’re at it?

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Women didn't have the right to vote

Nothing to do with religion.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Prohibition was a evangelical movement.

And it was also supported by woman’s groups.
Alcohol is not condemned in the bible, only excessive drinking. As a matter of fact Christ and the apostles drank. I seem to recall something about water into wine, and the last supper…

originally posted by: LDragonFire
The current effort by republicans to limit or ban abortions is religiously motivated.

Just as many non-religious feel that abortion is murder. It’s a moral issue, not a religious one.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Christians are still attempting to limit the rights of minorities to marry.

Really, what minorities?

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Islamic fundamentalist say convert or die.

Phil Robertson says convert or die.

Phil Robertson is an idiot and what the bible refers to as a Pharisee.
Christians don’t call for anyone to die, it strictly says to “love they neighbor” and your enemies.

a reply to: LDragonFire
I don’t need to read “native web” I have personally spent time with the American Indians and am well aware of their misplaced hatred and prejudice against Christianity. They are not an accurate source of historical material.

Oh boy that sure is dangerous. Promoting God and family. We can't allow this to go unpunished!

My goodness look at this subversive doctrine from their own website!

Fathers of Hope was produced to promote fathering skills and Dads and Moms That Make a Difference seminars started. A short-term social outreach, called 50 Good Men, was begun to encourage men to give back to their community.

We just can't have fathering skills being promoted, nor dare we give back to our communities. Instead let's maintain the progressive agenda of moral degeneracy, hatred of the nuclear family and the destruction of western democracy.

a reply to: LDragonFire

The papal edict “Inter Caetera,” that was read in Latin to native Americans explained that the Spanish had a god given right to settle, exploit and to do whatever they wished, the Natives were told to convert or die, there rights to the land were stripped in the name of God, they were only allowed to occupy the land, and this could be revoked for any reason.

You're conveniently forgetting the 1537 Sublimus Dei Papal Bull, which forbade the mistreatment of the natives of the Americas.

You're also conveniently forgetting that the English settlers who decimated what would become the United States and Canada were Protestants who couldn't care less what the Pope had to say.