It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Training evangelical pastors to be politicians

page: 8
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beezzer


So you offer one guys opinion.


Should we run to the hills now or wait a week?

Why do you have to be a smartass??

That "one guy" is the one DOING this - rallying and pushing for the Dominionists to gain control of the government!

Is that how you'd refer to what Hitler had to say? It was all just "one guy's" opinion.


So he's Hitler now?

AAAIIIGGHHHHH *cough* DOOOOM!

And the progressives are in control and we are just doing splendid!


This is fear mongering from the extreme leftists who are afraid of losing power.




posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

You have no intention of reading EITHER of the two posts that opened this thread, do you?

Several sources are linked in the first post, from various sites; you can read all about the Dominionists in the second post.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

No it isn't. You're being deliberately obtuse. Bernie Sanders is a progressive, through and through.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

I quoted the article.

The article quoted the people involved.

Are you claiming that it is not the stated goal of the group in the OP, which is part of a larger effort known as Dominionism, to get elected to public office with the sole purpose of instituting Christian religious beliefs (and only Christian religious beliefs) as the basis of government in this country?

Make a clear statement about what YOU believe rather than rattling on about what you think I'm saying.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Annee


I know that the 2nd amendment probably does not mean what the Extreme Right wants it to mean.



What does it mean to the progressives?


Just know I began my political interest as a Christian Republican. Actually a Flag Waving "Hawk" Goldwater Republican.

Progressive to me means "move forward and adapt to changes that are best for society".


edit on 11-7-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beezzer


The progressives ARE in, and they are destroying the country!

They are?!!

Inequality is destroying the country. Tell me again how equality (including income equality) destroys countries???

Or, at least tell me how it's not money that runs our government now. Corporate monsters BUY our politicians.

Beez, you know better than that.





Always blame the money and not the weasels writing laws.

HEY!

I have an idea!

Why not just make more laws??



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Annee


I know that the 2nd amendment probably does not mean what the Extreme Right wants it to mean.



What does it mean to the progressives?


Just know I began my political interest as a Christian Republican. Actually a "Hawk" Goldwater Republican.

Progressive to me means "move forward and adapt to changes that are best for society".[/quote

Yeah, and the Freedom Act gives us freedoms.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Annee


I know that the 2nd amendment probably does not mean what the Extreme Right wants it to mean.



What does it mean to the progressives?


Just know I began my political interest as a Christian Republican. Actually a "Hawk" Goldwater Republican.

Progressive to me means "move forward and adapt to changes that are best for society".


Yeah, and the Freedom Act gives us freedoms.



Is this a discussion of the Freedom Act?



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

What "freedoms" have you, personally, suffered the loss of, beezzer?



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

The extreme leftists who are afraid of losing power ...

You mean the Republicans in charge of Congress?

I don't usually think of them as leftists, but if you say so.

Say, just as an odd figure ... how much do you pay for these smoke-screen machines?

You come in, make vague general comments that you can't back up, make a few silly quips, and then start talking about the other posters rather than facts.

Prime Beezzer.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   
I think I understand the fears and concerns now.

(You'll have to forgive me, I'm slow)

Politicians get elected by a majority of the vote. Meaning that, if the majority of people agree with the politician, they vote for that person and that person gets elected.

You all are afraid that more people would support a religious individual over a progressive individual.

We all see how politicians lie to get votes and we all see the disgust from people who have been fooled by the lies politicians tell.

Progressives tend to lie the most because they are all about government control and limiting freedoms.

The majority of Americans don't buy into the progressive ideals. The majority of Americans are probably simple folks like myself.

Hmmf.

I get it now.

You all are afraid that if the truth came out, progressives would lose.

Of course, all this is just a simple persons humble opinion.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

What truth needs to come out?

That the Dominionists' stated goal is to fundamentally change the government of the United States of America?

That the vague insult "progressives" is used by you and others to gesture toward anyone who disagrees with your own ideology?

That you will do anything besides having an actual discussion about the facts?

Keep sticking your head down that rabbit-hole Beez.

You're not fooling anyone.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I refuse to allow you or anyone else control either the narrative or my ideas on any given topic.

If people don't want these folks in, then they won't vote for them.

Problem solved, right?



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beezzer

Guess that depends on how they view the Supreme Court, or who they decide to appoint to it.




"They", Buzzy? You mean the small group with the basic and simple task of
obfuscating the Constitution itself into oblivion?

A rather glaring example of going off the res with the intent of the SCOTUS
is concerning that legislation from the bench about a recently argued law
over socialized health care. "It's a tax if WE SAY it is."

Rather than insinuate drift, I consider the SCOTUS more than qualified by
precedent already to take away all our protections without firing a shot.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

Progressives tend to lie the most because they are all about government control and limiting freedoms.



Paranoid?

Progressive: prior to "cyber" there was no need for Cyber Security. Logically, Need meets Need.

Theocracy: The Christian Right has done more damage to their cause then any outsider. Losers tend to get desperate.

Do I fear an intense organized effort of Christian Political Dominance? NO. However, complacency leaves doors wide open.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Right.

No one's trying to control you. I know that's one of your issues and the way you respond to differing opinions.

At least you're not on about your other hypocritical patter about how you believe everyone has a right to speak.

The Congress is 92% Christian. The President is Christian. Seven out of nine on the SCOTUS are Christians.

How many more Christians do we need in government?

What's different about these people that you are supporting here?

Oh yeah ...



"Somebody's values are going to reign supreme" in the United States, Lane told National Public Radio. "We want people with our values to represent our values and interests in the public square, be elected to office, and represent our issues."


It's not enough for them to share their values with others, or even use them in government: they must REIGN SUPREME.

By supporting these people, you discredit every single thing you've ever said about being "against tyranny."



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: derfreebie


Rather than insinuate drift, I consider the SCOTUS more than qualified by
precedent already to take away all our protections without firing a shot.

I'm not understanding what you're trying to point out.

What have you lost?



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: beezzer

The extreme leftists who are afraid of losing power ...

You mean the Republicans in charge of Congress?

I don't usually think of them as leftists, but if you say so.



Actually many Federal level Republicans are Progressives.

Just not as extreme and outward as Democrat Progressives.

All Authoritarians are Progressive at various levels.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm only one voter. It's not like I live in Chicago and can vote several times.

Your beef is with the voters that would elect these people.

If the majority votes them in, then that would indicate that the majority agreed with what the politician is selling.

You do still want free elections, don't you?



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: derfreebie

Not to butt in ...

The provision of mandatory enrollment (a right-wing idea) in the ACA was established under the Congress' ability to Tax.

The SCOTUS had to point that fact out.

Are you saying that Congress is "legislating from the bench" cause if so, they ain't doin' a very good job of it.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join