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.
originally posted by: Bilk22
I don't think you get it. When you use words such as "right wing conspiracy" you come of as a liberal hack. What do you think is happening on the other side? They're just as slimy and use all the same tactics. They have world domination desires too - just from a different vantage point. They're certainly not a live and let live mentality. They want to control you as you claim this group does. So open you eyes before you try to open everyone else's eyes.
originally posted by: flyingfish
originally posted by: Bilk22
a reply to: flyingfish
Sound like dinners Obama speaks at and the plates cost more LOL They're all trying to destroy our way of life. Doesn't matter what side of the aisle they stand. You just don't get it so you're shilling for the other side unknowingly. Or maybe not
The only good this group serves is as a counterbalance to the other side. As long as they keep tugging, we'll be ok. Once on side gets full control (what Obama has bee trying to accomplish) we're all screwed.
You don't get it, this is not about two wrongs make a right fallacy, this thread is about the gathering and it's American bastardization of xtianity.
If I'm a "shill" then it's for this guy..
"Our prime purpose in this life is to help others. And if you can't help them, at least don't hurt them."
Dalai Lama
Description of Two Wrongs Make a Right
Two Wrongs Make a Right is a fallacy in which a person "justifies" an action against a person by asserting that the person would do the same thing to him/her, when the action is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A. This fallacy has the following pattern of "reasoning":
1.It is claimed that person B would do X to person A.
2.It is acceptable for person A to do X to person B (when A's doing X to B is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A).
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because an action that is wrong is wrong even if another person would also do it. It should be noted that it can be the case that it is not wrong for A to do X to B if X is done to prevent B from doing X to A or if X is done in justified retribution.
For example, if Sally is running in the park and Biff tries to attack her, Sally would eb jsutified in attacking Biff to defend herself. As another example, if country A is planning to invade country B in order to enslave the people, then country B would be justified in launching a pre-emptive strike to prevent the invasion.
originally posted by: LDragonFire
I haven't endorsed communism or atheism nor would I ever and this is totally off topic..
originally posted by: UnifiedSerenity
I don't like hateful words coming out of anyone's mouth. This so called "Christian Bigotry" is no different to me than the plethora of overt publicly sanctioned anti-Christian Bigotry / bashing that is allowed and approved of throughout our society. Millions more are hurt by the disgusting antics of comics and hate speech directed against Christians than are hurt by the minority of ugly things said by some Christians.
There has been an all out assault on Christian beliefs for decades and we have complained about it, but nothing has changed, and you want to get up in arms about some Christians meeting together to try to push back a little bit against the billions lobbed against them by their enemies who have the ears of people in government and liberal controlled institutions?
This is all going to come down to a race / religion war eventually. The majority of converts to Islam in America are black people. This new religious twist adds into the old white vs black twist nicely. The recent beheading of a woman by a black convert is going to stoke the flames as we hear about Muslims cheering (supposedly, as I think this is contrived in many ways to push this religion war) in OK about this beheading that apparently started because of an argument over the stoning of women!
No, I think I will put up with a few Christians paying 1750.00 a plate for a meeting when as many have pointed out the other sides 5k, 10k, 30k dinners. Give me a friggin break!
originally posted by: flyingfish
it's the intend to impose their morality at the expense of others who do not subscribe to their religious indoctrination. It's what actually happens when people impose their beliefs on others, they do damage by considering them to be "less" on the simple basis of their religion, gender, race or sexual orientation. You damage their self-esteem. You treat them like an enemy. You tell them that they should feel ashamed of who they are. Other people need to be respected regardless.
Did it ever occur to you that nonsensical apologetics based upon the compiled ancient texts of societies that existed thousands of years ago may not be the best source for a system of morality?
Who said "a culture divided against itself is weak" is it not true? Do you demand that the government should legislate for One True Religion, do you? Or for One True Music or One True Literature? or One True Form Of Marriage?... you might be a bigot.
originally posted by: LDragonFire
More human deaths have occurred at the hands of the state and religion
For the record I don't trust big money in politics from any side. Religious political activist have stated they wish for a more Christian orientated theocracy. This will destroy freedom and liberty, or what we have left, the state has done a fine job of eliminating most of our constitutional protections as it is.
originally posted by: sheepslayer247
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71
The thread is about a "Right wing conspiracy", is it not? My comment actually said that both sides do this sort of thing, but then focused on the topic at hand.
Then you said this:
$1750 is kinda cheap, Obama had a fundraiser at $5000 a plate. abcnews.go.com... gle.com%2F So what the big conspiracy here? It sounds like comic con for churches.
So is it a big deal or not? If you agree the left shouldn't do it, then neither should the right.....correct?
Why did you have to counter the OP with facts about Obama's fundraising and not denounce the tactics of the right if it is so wrong? It's not the topic is it?
Does that sound bi partisan to you?
originally posted by: UnifiedSerenity
I don't like hateful words coming out of anyone's mouth. This so called "Christian Bigotry" is no different to me than the plethora of overt publicly sanctioned anti-Christian Bigotry / bashing that is allowed and approved of throughout our society. Millions more are hurt by the disgusting antics of comics and hate speech directed against Christians than are hurt by the minority of ugly things said by some Christians.
!
originally posted by: flyingfish
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.
originally posted by: SevenThunders
originally posted by: flyingfish
it's the intend to impose their morality at the expense of others who do not subscribe to their religious indoctrination. It's what actually happens when people impose their beliefs on others, they do damage by considering them to be "less" on the simple basis of their religion, gender, race or sexual orientation. You damage their self-esteem. You treat them like an enemy. You tell them that they should feel ashamed of who they are. Other people need to be respected regardless.
Did it ever occur to you that nonsensical apologetics based upon the compiled ancient texts of societies that existed thousands of years ago may not be the best source for a system of morality?
Who said "a culture divided against itself is weak" is it not true? Do you demand that the government should legislate for One True Religion, do you? Or for One True Music or One True Literature? or One True Form Of Marriage?... you might be a bigot.
That's interesting. So promoting any particular worldview that you happen to believe in is wrong? I suppose the one exception is if you have a Marxist or libertine worldview aligned with the global progressive agenda. Promoting that is OK right?
I know this will be hard to accept, but promoting your beliefs is well established in the US constitution. It's called the first amendment. Are you one of those leftists who believe that concept is outdated? We need an "enlightened" government to determine which beliefs are acceptable? Those beliefs which don't damage your self esteem? Is that the criterion?
Last I checked freedom to practice your religion or to peaceably assemble means that a US citizen has the right to promulgate any sincerely held belief. That's called freedom of speech. I know this idea is rather quaint and old fashioned among today's enlightened. Also it is sooo old fashioned to have a religion that actually tries to spread it's beliefs among others by the simple presentation of the truth. Perhaps you prefer the soviet method or the Islam technique; conversion by force?