Re: OT: Did we just win?


Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
On 8 Nov 2006 21:44:08 -0800, dagmargoodboat@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

[big snip]

Okay, I understand from the snip that you had reservations going back
to Iran-Contra, from long before, both for the President and his
current helpers. Thanks for that most thoughtful reply.

I know a little about the conflict in Central America second-hand.
My dad was there, saw it, felt it, and, as a doctor, did what he could:
http://mysite.verizon.net/resri52l/dad/

War is certainly a very nasty business, not to be taken up lightly.
Civilians will be killed, either because there's no way to avoid it, or
intentionally, to actively discourage an opposing state, e.g., the fire
bombing of Tokyo, and intense bombings of Germany in WWII. Those were
good people too our fathers killed. But it had to be done. War is not
a toy.

But doesn't every other religious person think the same, that they're
here for a reason, whatever that reason might be?

No.

Oh, I think you either misunderstand what I mean, or you're mistaken.
Especially among born-agains, but also among other christians and even
muslims, it's a common theme: a humble belief that God has placed them
here on this Earth for some purpose, and they're here to serve him and
his will.

That's what the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormon missionaries who knock
on my door saturday mornings think, anyhow.

The President is religious. And he's open about it. And, unlike his
opponents and predecessors, he really means it. I don't think that
makes him bad, or overly scary. We have separation of church and
state, and plenty of checks and balances.

I don't care if he means it or not. I look at results, not words;
actions, not beliefs.

Well then what results? What bad practical consequences have there
been?

"Faith-based initiatives" (if I have that right) seems a) a clear
sponsorship of religion by the State, and b) AIUI, the money
exclusively goes to Christian causes and none to other religions.

Apart from that, I don't see any practical consequences to the
American people of the President's beliefs. He's made his pitch, to
little avail. Abortion rights are unimpaired. Stem cell research, gay
marriage...I'd submit that these are more active and vibrant than ever.

There have been NO checks and balances in operation of late.

Of course there have been. Remember the President's Social Security
proposal, the one that was shouted down by scare-mongers? Gone. And
the President's Gay Marriage amendment?

I admit to being young at heart, and loathe to assume malice until
proven. It does take an effort some times, but it's usually worth it.

Thanks for your frank and revealing insights--I understand your views
better.

Best,
James Arthur

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Science versus religion fnord
    ... i just told you i dont use faith. ... evidence free and not susceptible to evidence. ... When ever you use the phrase "religion does X", ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Science versus religion fnord
    ... That's another article of your faith. ... evidence free and not susceptible to evidence. ... When ever you use the phrase "religion does X", ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Bible printing press confiscated in Cuba
    ... > Religion is very politicized in the US (snip) ... freedom of religion means freedom, ... The press agency did not report the reason for the eviction. ... Every time you post that lie about me I post the truth about you. ...
    (soc.culture.cuba)
  • Re: Anyone using Vista?
    ... CNET reports a market share of about 9.6%. ... months of being 'in control' has Democrats behaving like some folks ... Religion and rational thought are not contradictory; ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Religious scientists
    ... that I believe evidence trumps old documents, so whatever science can ... My own taste in religion being addressable by the scientific method ... "Christian" so Christian School, Christian business, and Christian ...
    (talk.origins)