When will Christian's stand up for themselves?

1. The Capt. left...

Spike, the same is happening here in the U.S.! Christianity has been hi-jacked by groups who don't even follow the doctrine in words or behavior. It's time for those who truly believe in Spiritual Law to stand up and say, THESE PEOPLE AREN'T SPEAKING FOR CHRISTIANS! THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT CHRISTIANITY IS!

In the U.S. the wild fringe Christians don't believe that you treat others the way you wish to be treated. They don't believe they are their brothers' keeper. They believe God is a racist.

It's a mess that we need to address. So Spike, you're not alone!

2. Tabacco left...

"I’m not what you think I am" - What do you think I think you are besides dead wrong?

"When will Christian's stand up for themselves?" - Christians have been standing up for themselves ever since that senseless slaughter via lions. Jews have also stood up for themselves since Egypt. However both have transgressed from "Victims" to "Oppressors". But let's stick to Christians for now.

Christians threatened and/or executed St. Joan, Galileo, witches, and other alleged enemies of the Church.

Christians supported and/or support Slavery, anti-Semitism, homophobia, Nazism, Apartheid, sun revolves around earth, earth is 6,000 years old (Bishop Usher), earth is flat, God Proscribes against humans gaining wisdom (Adam & Eve in Eden), wars (crusades) and countless other abominations. You must blame Christians for these atrocities and ignorances, but you must NOT blame God. Christians are solely responsible for them.

Christians "cherrypick" homosexuality but ignore the eating of pork, which is also an abomination in the same Bible chapter.

Instead of opposing WAR, GENOCIDE, POLITICAL & ECONOMIC OPPRESSION BY ELITE, you focus on "God" and "Christian" words being permitted in places where they have no business and for purely political, not religious reasons. You offend those who call Him Allah, those Americans who are atheists or agnostiocs, and you offend the Constitution.

Jesus Himself said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's". God does not care if his name is NOT on Caesar's coins!

Christians have been WRONG since the lions. Why should we wish for Christians to lead us. Reverence for God and reverence for the Church are two entirely different matters.

Nobody objects to your right to practice your religion as you see fit. However, Christians do not agree with other Christians. I point out just two evidences of this:

1 - Henry VIII split from Catholic Church to form Episcopal Church so he could divorce AGAIN & remarry

2 - Irish Catholics & Irish Protestants have long history of genocide against each other.

Christian symbolism and Christian reminders belong in Church settings. The rest of us do not wish to be reminded of Christian failings. We too have RIGHTS!

"They think it’s OK to trample on Christianity in a way that they would never do with any other religious group." - Nobody wants to "trample" on any religion. If Christians ceased to demand SPECIAL PRIVILEGES, there would be no problem. The Founding Fathers set up a separation between Church and State, not a Union!

One thing about the Jews - unlike Christians, they do NOT PROSELYTIZE, propagandize and obnoxiously self-promote in public! You could learn common sense, moderation and respect for the rights of others from Jews! I pray you will learn from their model!

Respectfully,

Tabacco (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization)

3. The Capt. left...

Spike, there's no group that's perfect, not even Jews! There's no way you can say how they've handled the situation with the Palestinians over the last 50 years and more, as perfect. So, take what my brother, Tabacco has to say with a grain of salt. He's blaming you for things you haven't said. It's his nature to rant this way, so don't take it to heart. There's a deeper thing going on with him - he's oblivious to this glitch. He provides good information while accusing you of being something your not. He's done the same with me. In my case, I don't care what he thinks! :)

4. BlackPhi left...

Ruth Gledhill of The Times gives the text of one of the banned posters on her blog. It's clear that someone would need to try really, really hard to be offended by this.

It's also reported that Camden Council are having another look at the banned posters, but their spokesperson made a rather peculiar comment in announcing this: "... we are not able to accept posters that promote particular religious beliefs or particular points of view." Yet promoting green issues is something they are clearly in favour of - does that not count as a 'particular point of view'?

I agree with your larger point about 'Christian-bashing' in the UK, particularly in local government. The Christian Institute does seem to be doing a good job highlighting the most blatantly unreasonable examples. It doesn't help though when more extreme groups, such as Christian Voice, shout so much louder and so much more unreasonably in favour of imposing particular interpretations of Christian doctrines on everybody. It also doesn't help when church groupings insist on fighting out their differences on minor doctrinal issues in public and in obviously unChristian ways. Not to mention the painful overspill from the activities of the US religious right

As you say, what is needed is for Christian groups to create a more positive view of what Christianity is about, going out into the community in deed and truth. Except ... actually there are a lot of groups doing just that. It's just that they are not the people you normally hear about. But they are often the people who get hit by local government prejudice creating unnecessary blocks. The Roman Catholic Church has a long history of such engagement in this country, which I guess is why you're aware of them having particular hassle, but there are many other Christian groups suffering similar problems.

"Why do Christians find this so hard?" - I tend to the (probably uncharitable) view that it is all about wheat and tares. Tares look like wheat, but without the useful grain; there are individuals and groups that look like Christians, but without the love. Then there seem to be many other groups and individuals who assume this is the way they are meant to behave, so they take these tares as their model.

5. Spike left...

Tabbaco In your comments you actually prove my point of Christians needing to stand up for themselves. You like so many others only concentrate on our past, and the negatives that have happened in the past. You don't look at the good that came from the church. Did you know that Youth Work came out of the church, brownies and guides came out of the church... that just names two things but there are more.

Makes me wonder if you know how to forgive or judge everyone by there past and don't take into account that people change. I have had many wrongs done against me in my past, and it has done a lot of damage and if you knew anything about me you would know how hard it's been for me to try and live with the damage.

Further more, I must apologies as my mouse jumped as I went to approve your new comments, instead I deleted it. It was a mistake and I am sorry. Feel free to post again.

Further more, I am not what you think I am for I am female!

The Cpt. Thank you for your comments. I know they come from someone who has walked part of my journey with me. I appreciate them.

BlackPhil Thank you. I usual you bring up good points and get me to think long and hard about my thoughts. You are right there is some good being done, and it is the more extremes that have the louder voice. Just as a lot of people only see Muslims as the suicide bombers but that is just the extremists. There just needs to be more positivity around all those of faith not just Christians. We live in a Christian country and not meant to talk about Christmas, it's 'Seasons Holiday'.... but that's an annual rant I have.

6. Tabacco left...

Spike:

I do not object to Christians standing up for "themselves". I even object strenuously to the early Roman practices as I object to Hitler's "Final Solution" re Jews and slavery & Apartheid. Re your comment "You like so many others only concentrate on our past, and the negatives that have happened in the past. You don't look at the good that came from the church." How else should we "judge" the Church except by its history, which in this case has been particularly ignoble.

You are free of course to point out the good, however somebody has to do the dirty work and tell the rest of the story lest Readers assume the "Church" itself is without SIN!

Incidentally, in my attempted brevity, I did not mention that your Post is worthwhile, relevant and attracted my attention. I rarely get involved with trivial subjects! Thanks for giving us the opportunity to discuss this subject intelligently.

However, everybody in Christendom misses the point! In AMERICA everybody has rights! Not only Christians, but Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Hare Krishnas, Scientologists, Atheists & Agnostics. If Catholics are permitted to use government buildings for advertising, Episcopalians would have the same rights and would and should squawk. Likewise 7th Day Adventists, Evangelicals, Methodists, Baptists, AMEs, Jehovah's Witnesses and every other group or sect - and that's only the Christians.

I think you would agree that God, Jehovah & Allah would be a bit much to squeeze on coins for example. The question is, "It is obvious that Christians FEEL, but do they THINK?

Christians have made a MESS of their own history and the world's! Even you admit that! How are we to IGNORE THAT HISTORY, give Christians SPECIAL PRIVILEGES denied to other Religions and Non-Believers in the United States of America! Unlike Israel, a Zionist State predicated on Jewish faith, America is a Secular State, not beholding to any religion. If Christians want to advertise, there are ways to do it - just not in public places, public schools and in the faces of non-Christians.

You talk about "Christian RIGHTS" - what about the RIGHTS of NON-CHRISTIANS? Don't they have rights too? Would you like it if the Koran held precedence over the Bible in our Public functions? How about Scientology? Worse yet, how about ATHEISM?

If you cannot or will not see the unfairness of giving one religion or one sect SPECIAL PRIVILEGES over another in the USA, then your viewpoint is un-American. Everyone has Rights here - even small MINORITIES!

Tabacco

7. Spike left...

My views will be un-american because I'm British!

I believe that everyone should be able to talk about their faith openly and honestly. I do not believe that people should be attacked for what they believe. Providing that people will talk about their faith (and here I am not just talking about Christianity, I'm talking about all faiths) and talk about what it means to them, how it's helped them in their lives, how it makes their lives better, then yes everyone should be entitled to that.

I do not agree with actions of the IRA and suicide bombers. Killing or hurting people because they have a different faith is just wrong. Everyone has their own views, everyone lives their lives that best works from them.

In this particular case, that has steamed this wonderful conversation, it was a poster done by a local christian group who was looking at climate change and trying to encourage other christains to take on this issue. I see nothing wrong with that. If muslims wanted to put something similar up I don't see what the issue is.

This idea can lead to some difficulties because cults often emerge from someone's scewerd perception of religion and this can cause a lot of heartache and pain. It's not easy to allow people to have free speech because there are those that would abuse that power.

If we don't allow people to talk about these things then were does it stop. Faith is one things that should be talked about, just as someone's racial history, or what ever. It's a tough one, but in this case it was some christians who were looking at climate change from a christian view point and have been criticised. I think this is wrong. I wonder what would have happened if it was an muslim group or another faith group.

8. Tabacco left...

Spike:

It seems we have only one difference. However, it is the most important aspect: Separation of Church & State!

Thanks for clearing up your "un-American" status (Smile).

So let's forget "American" and talk "common sense"!

Allowing free public access to any religious group, the result ends up becoming Ireland, if not THE CRUSADES! Being a Brit, and not that far from the Emerald Isle, I don't have to inform you! However, even a Brit can see that every initiative has ups and downs, which must be weighed before finalizing a decision. I would hope the Empire has learned a thing or two since George III!

Nobody gets more EMOTIONAL than people over their RELIGION! That's why every government uses hate for their opponent and "God/Jehovah/Allah is on our side" to provoke their soldiers into a genocidal state! War is so much easier if your enemy does not look like you and has a different God! However that never stopped the Spanish, the Germans, the French, the Italians & THE BRITS - all of whom had Christianity on their sides! I'd rather face an Atheist on the battlefield any day than a religious fanatic. You may consider that a plus - I do not!

Common sense tells me the less religions confront each other, the fewer WARS, the less GENOCIDE, the fewer Civil strifes and much less GENOCIDE. I prefer my religion in private - not for show in public to rub others' noses in my power and my relationship with the Almighty.

144,000is not a large number! Christians better realize competition is stiff, and God is not impressed by PUBLIC DISPLAY, but by PRIVATE DOING OF GOOD! God is neither trivial nor persuaded by loud protestations by those who violate His will while singing His praise!

Tabacco

PS I hope my reply to the Capt has merely fallen backward, not off your agenda! I dislike intensely being misquoted!

9. The Capt. left...

In this instance Tabacco, I NEVER quoted you. You're amazing! ;)

10. BlackPhi left...

History: a quick rundown of major 20th-Century conflicts/mass-murders (involving deaths in millions, or 10's of millions):-

• World War 1 - nationalist; no significant religious differences involved.

• Soviet Red Terror, through forced collectivisation, to Stalinist purges - tyranny in an atheist state.

• World War II - ideological (& nationalist); no significant religious differences involved.

• Chinese forced collectivisation & the Great Leap Forward - tyranny in an atheist state.

• Cold War conflicts: Korean & Vietnam - ideological proxy wars.

• Pol Pot's Cambodia - tyranny & genocide in an atheist state.

The worst specifically religious loss of life I can think of was the Partition of India in 1947 - leading to several hundred thousand deaths.

The general drift of modern history is clear: the worst excesses of man's inhumanity to man have nothing to do with religion; the old chestnut putting them together is plain nonsense.

Tabacco, you keep mentioning Ireland as a kind of horrible example of allowing religious freedom. Are you aware that the Republic of Ireland (the vast majority of the 'Emerald Isle') has been a peaceful state since it was founded in 1937? I assume you are actually referring to The Troubles in Northern Ireland, the small part left out when Ireland became independent. Here there is division between 'Nationalists', who want unity with the rest of Ireland, and 'Unionists' who want to remain part of the UK. Nationalists and Unionists are ethnically distinct groupings; and a majority of Nationalists identify themselves as Roman Catholics, whilst a majority of Unionists identify themselves as Protestants. Total deaths over the thirty years or so of The Troubles were 3,524 - substantially lower than the number of people killed on Northern Ireland's roads over the same period. I am aware of no data at all that links The Troubles with allowing religious groups to advertise community meetings in public places.

In most of the UK (Camden excepted) any mainstream community group is generally welcome to advertise meetings which are open to the general public in community facilities, such as public libraries. There is normally no discrimination. Your argument, and that of Camden Council, seems to be that it is okay to discriminate against religious groups (actually, in Camden's case, that seems to be specifically against Christian groups). I disagree. I do not think there should be discrimination between community groups at all - whether on religious grounds or any other. The same rules should apply to all.

11. Tabacco left...

Directed to Spike Only:

This comment does not require publishing, however it is up to you.

I realize you are attempting to protect the Capt by publishing all his comments but not publishing my Reply to him. However, I beseech you to reconsider. I realize this blog is yours, however I have other options.

For Capt's sake, please reconsider.

Incidentally, I always save my Comments on other blogs anticipating situations just like this one! "He who steals my purse, steals trash, but..."

Tabacco

12. Tabacco left...

Spike:

Thank you for the historical clarification! I knew you were aware of the history in "Northern" Ireland. This proves it, and saved me the trouble of doing the research. My statements stand - Catholics vs Protestants!

I remember a story in which gunmen asked all "Catholics" or was it all "Protestants" to stand. They then machine-gunned all those standing! There are Christians and there are Christians! Imagine anybody discriminating against Christians in Christian-dominated countries! Sorry, but you missed the POINT! It's Magna Carta, not the Holy Bible!

Regards,

Tabacco

13. Tabacco left...

BlackPhi:

I don't know what history book you read, but take a gander at beginning text of 1st URL I sourced to retort - and it's a religious-based blog:

"The war changed everything in my life and I was one of thousands forced to leave during the ethnic cleansing in my city. But they did not manage to change me. I have NOT learned to hate my neighbors and I never will." Lana Obradovic, a student from Bosnia Herzegovina who lost many relatives in the religious conflict there during the 1990s. "Intolerance breeds injustice. Injustice invariably leads to rebellion and retaliation, and these will lead to escalation on the part of both making reconciliation almost impossible. It would appear that during times of stress, despair and frustration, people become increasingly irrational, and they do things which they never think they are capable of. And so we see hideous brutality perpetrated by the most gentle people."

"Once started religious strife has a tendency to go on and on, to become permanent feuds. Today we see such intractable inter-religious wars in Northern Ireland, between Jews and Muslims and Christians in Palestine, Hindus and Muslims in South Asia and in many other places. Attempts to bring about peace have failed again and again. Always the extremist elements invoking past injustices, imagined or real, will succeed in torpedoing the peace efforts and bringing about another bout of hostility." Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia, addressing the World Evangelical Fellowship on 2001-MAY-4. http://www.religioustolerance.org/curr_war.htm

PS Can I borrow those rose-colored glasses of yours or do you get your historical facts from a bottle? I get my facts from other sources whenever possible and I supply URL, not from a revisionist history failing memory. This is how you make an argument! "My dad can beat your dad" is never-ending, inconclusive and waste of time and effort.

Tabacco

14. Spike left...

tabacco

If you had read an earlier comment of mine you would have seen an apology from me to you as I deleted a comment you made in error because my mouse jumped... the joys of built in laptop mice!

15. The Capt. left...

Tabacco, as you know, I need protection from NO ONE - not even YOU! :) You attempt to go on other people's blogs and become nothing but a suicide bomber. I treat you with respect, but you're always looking for a fight when there is no fight - like you're not totally with us. Your 'elephant in a China store' approach doesn't lead to clarification nor food for further discussion. You're a New Yorker! But you come off sometimes like some long time homeless folks who have some intelligence, but have been out in the elements too long to be coherent! WAKE UP FROM THE NIGHTMARE, CHIEF!

16. Spike left...

I am trying to be fair to everyone by publishing all comments so everyone has a say within the discussion but I feel that things are getting too personal rather than sticking with the discussion at hand.

So I ask everyone, with great respect to you all, that you stick to the subject of the post. I will be editing all comment from here on in and anything that is attacking a person as an individual rather than discussing their post will be deleted.

If need be I will disallow all comments for this post.

I am trying to be fair to everyone but will not tolerate personal attacked on anyone. You have been warned.

17. Spacefrog left...

This is a reply to the original post, not to the ensuing discussion.

I think the council is right to refuse to display these posters. The council shouldn't take a position on religion, either for or against. By displaying the posters in council buildings, the council would be implicitly endorsing these religious events. In this instance it would be no big deal and wouldn't offend many people, but it would put the council in the position of having to decide which religious material was offensive and which wasn't. The only really clear place to draw the line is to say no religious material at all.

I think it's blowing this out of proportion to say that Christians are being 'trampled' here. The council isn't trying to stop these events from happening, or stop the organizers from putting up posters elsewhere. All it's doing is declining to use *its own space* to promote the events.

18. SpaceSquid left...

I would tend to agree with Spacefrog. Creating a clear line in the sand is the only way to prevent the horribly thorny issue of allowing some religious posters and disallowing others. The instant you attempt the latter, you open yourselves up to complaints of bias ("Why did that Jewish poster get through, but not our Muslim one?", "Protestant posters appear more often than Catholic ones!"), which I would suspect aren't worth the hassle. Whatever else wants to say about the positive and negative effects religion has had on the world, it doesn't seem particularly controvertial to suggest there are too many people out there unable to view their faith sufficiently objectively compared to others for them to ever see a pick-and-choose policy as fair, if indeed it were possible to make it fair in the first place.

I agree entirely that it's a shame, though; we need all the help we can get on dealing with the environment. Also, while on that subject, I agree with BlackPhi that the comment regarding "particular points of view" should be elaborated on, though I think by far the most sensible interpretation of the comment is that the council won't promote secular zero-sum games (foreigners out!) any more than they will religious ones (this is the one way to God/escape damnation). Environmental concern is surely qualitatively different.