Christians are the world's gravest danger to peace, not Muslims. Christians can kill the planet.

[Fred Sanders]

Last edited Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:07 PM - Edit history (2)

World military strength by religion

Nuclear weapons

Christian nations: United States, France, Britain, Russia
Muslim nations: Pakistan
Hindu nations: India
Jewish nations: Israel
Yearning for religion nations: China, North Korea (3 bombs)

Military spending, induding nuclear armed

Christian nations: approx. $1 trillion per annum, mainly United States
All other religions combined: approx $200 billion annum, mainly China

http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp?form=form&country1=united-states-of-america&country2=china&Submit=Compare+Countries

..............


?imgmax=800

[n2doc]

1. All worship at the church of the almighty dollar (or Yen, Euro, etc, etc.)

[Fred Sanders]

2. I fear the rule of the Holy High Church of Mass Media, America's true masters, they are untouchable.

Feeding the Fear

http://monarc143.blogspot.ca/2009/09/american-media-feeding-fear.html
...............

Once all the firepower is firmly in Christian true believers hands, let the Holy Wars commence.
Christians know they are on the winning side, just do the math.

[n2doc]

3. The media are just doing what their masters tell them to do

But yes, the propaganda tsunami is scary. Last fall was amazing to watch, and few people picked up on the obvious manipulation going on.

[Fred Sanders]

5. And now the obvious manipulation to fear an entire other religion...Fearbola was just the dress

rehearsal for this fear of The Other. Muslims were always the primary target.

Who will save us from our fears, sayeth The Media..who are the Saviors?

The Holy High Media Council will decide.

Those candidates are also the fear mongers, it is not a coincidence.

[JonLP24]

131. ISIS & Ebola were reported hand-to-hand

This was based on having the misfortune to catch what the MSM was reporting on over the summer.

whatever grabs viewers, increases advertisers dollars but it may be for something more than ratings like when advertisers pull their ads. Naomi Klein said it best "The truth is at once less sinister and more dangerous."

John Oliver had to best rebuttal for "shadow government" conspiracy theories that we already have one and it is called our state legislatures.

[mountain grammy]

101. And it was sooo bloody obvious..corporate media was in it's full glory in 2014!

[Initech]

46. Actually the almighty dollar is the biggest threat known to man.

Those that have it have way too much of it. Those that have way too much of it, are addicted to it. Those that are addicted to it can't get enough of it. And those that can't get enough of it, want all that there is to be had. And those that want all there is to be had, will destroy the planet to get their greedy hands on more of their precious.

[RKP5637]

105. K&R! Well Said!!! n/t

[ND-Dem]

76. aint it the truth. and behind that, the church of power, a satanic church.

[edhopper]

4. Sorry

nice try. We and the others you name are not Christian nations. Our laws are based on the Enlightenment, and not the Bible (no matter what the fundies want to believe.) The best description of those countries would be Secular nations.
Pakistan is not a Muslim nation, it is a predominantly Muslim democracy, though the influence of Islam on it's laws is strong.
Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc.. are Muslim nations with laws based on the Koran.

I also think the gravest danger is Climate Change, so Us, China, India and Europe would be the gravest threat, but it's not about being Christan, or not. It's about being greedy.

[Fred Sanders]

7. Nice tries is what free speech is all about.

[edhopper]

9. True

I just disagree with your premiss.

Also the chance of these "Christian nations" as you call them, using nuclear weapans, is much less than some "Muslim" and other countries.
Iran with one nuke is much scarier than Britain with a hundred.

[Fred Sanders]

13. President Cruz will never happen, of course not. That would be too scary to think about.

There is that whole gerrymandering the Electoral College thing, but Republicans would never just change the fundamental rules of democracy by legislative coup to their favor while the Free Press looked the other way, would they?

[edhopper]

16. And we can speculate about the Taliban

taking over Pakistan and getting the nuke.

But your post is about the World today. So your premiss is still weak. No matter how you try to spin it.

Carry on.

[ND-Dem]

78. premise

[edhopper]

108. both are acceptable,

I believe. My auto-correct obviously agrees.

[Warren Stupidity]

72. Pakistan is officially an Islamic Republic. nt.

[edhopper]

73. Thanks

Sort what I said. Democracy with Islam in the laws. Not ruled by Mullahs like Saudis.
Still negates the OPs points.

[LiberalAndProud]

137. How can it be argued that Pakistan is not a Muslim nation?

http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/amendments/15amendment.html

CONSTITUTION (FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT) BILL, 1998
A Bill further to amend the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:

WHEREAS sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone and the authority which He has delegated to the State of Pakistan through its people for being exercised through their chosen representatives within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust;

AND WHEREAS the Objectives Resolution has been made a substantive part of the Constitution;

AND WHEREAS Islam is the State religion of Pakistan and it is the obligation of the State to enable the Muslims of Pakistan, individually and collectively, to order their lives in accordance with the fundamental principles and basic concepts of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and Sunnah;

AND WHEREAS Islam enjoins the establishment of a social order based on Islamic values, of prescribing what is right and forbidding what is wrong (amr bil ma'roof wa nahi anil munkar);

AND WHEREAS in order to achieve the aforesaid objective and goal, it is expedient further to amend the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan;

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby enacted as follows:-

http://pakistanconstitutionlaw.com/article-227-provisions-relating-to-the-holy-quran-and-sunnah/

Article: 227 Provisions relating to the Holy Quran and Sunnah

227. Provisions relating to the Holy Quran and Sunnah.-(1) All existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah

[Codeine]

6. Earth-shatteringly stupid theory.

I don't live in a Christian nation. England and France are not Christian nations.

[Fred Sanders]

8. CNN, Fox, most of the mass media and all of the Republicans in Congress would disagree.

In fact Congress is now entirely in the control of and almost officially Christian, they say so every day.

Have you seen good Judao-Christian (Catholic sect) CNN lately, now remained "Xenophobia Channel."?
They have the "scary brown Muslim man" stereotype perfected and summarized in a library of gifs they are not shy about putting in a 24 hour mega loop of fear.

And what about good old Cstholic and Baptist Fox News, they have been openly yearning for a religious world war since they first hatched.

Christian Religion is far more dangerous, open your eyes, please.

[Codeine]

10. People can say any stupid thing they want.

There's a group of posters who demonstrate that daily.

But in the end no aspect of my life is subject to biblical law. This theory you're pushing is beyond idiotic.

[melman]

24. CNN is Catholic?

wtf are you talking about?

[Fred Sanders]

26. CNN is a tough nut to prove, but look at the religion of their TV lineup. Did I say something bad?

They are not much different than Fox News, Fox wears it on their sleeve.



Fox News: Not so Fair and Balanced in the Religion Department
January 13, 2013 at 11:20pm
As Fox News is the cable news station of choice for most Evangelical Christians, this information may be of interest to you.

Rupert Murdoch: The 81 year old founder, chairman and CEO of Fox News holding company News Corporation was dubbed a Knight of the Order of Saint Gregory the Great by Pope John Paul II.

Roger Aisles: According to Newsmax, the CEO of Fox News has not officially converted to Catholicism, but he attends mass every Sunday with his Catholic wife.

Bill O’Reilly: The man who is looking out for you is a self-professed Roman Catholic. So is his regular substitute host, Laura Ingraham. So is regular Monica Crowley.

Sean Hannity: The Irish conservative commentator is of course, Roman Catholic.

The Fox Morning Team: Both Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade are Roman Catholics.

Megyn Kelley: Roman Catholic.

The Five: Four out of five ain’t bad. Bob Beckel, Dana Perino, Eric Bolling, and Greg Guttfeld are all Roman Catholic.

Kimberly Guilfoyle: The host of “The Lineup” is a Roman Catholic.

Judge Jeannine Pirro is a Roman Catholic.

Brett Baier: the host of Special Report is a very active Roman Catholic. He attended Catholic Marist High School in Atlanta and attends church at Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Georgetown.

Alysin Camerota: If you wake up early Saturday morning, the co-host of Fox and Friends weekend edition is Roman Catholic.

Juan Williams: According to NNDB (the only website to indicate any religious affiliation for Juan), he is Roman Catholic.

Father Jonathan Morris: The highest profile Fox News Religion Contributor is of course, Roman Catholic. The collar kind of gives it away.

Does this mean that there is a Fox News Catholic conspiracy? No. What it means is that the news channel of choice for most Evangelicals, isn’t. Remember that the next time you tune in.


https://www.facebook.com/notes/wretched/fox-news-not-so-fair-and-balanced-in-the-religion-department/10151400693600056

[brooklynite]

11. UNREC

Beat up the Christians all you want; no excuse for excluding any other religion from blame for the world's problems.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. Yeah, but what can you do about it?

[ileus]

14. Time to ban Christians.

[Fred Sanders]

15. From politics if their policies are ideologically driven, of course.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

38. Really?

[Fred Sanders]

39. A man who was able to seperate spirituality from political ideology and real world policy. None

of his statements are radical religious doctrine, they are all mainstream human rights doctrine. Dinosaurs walked with man, literally, and the Earth not be warming because God will protect us, is extremist doctrine. And it is in the mainstream of American politics and it is poison as all extremist religions injected into the political bloodstream is poisonous

MLK injected morality, not religious dogma, into policy.

His Christianity, like the vast bulk of common folks in all major religions, is not fringe or immoral. The extremists are immoral and I do not need a dictionary to define immoral for me.

Religion does not have a monopoly over what is moral, not as long as it is about power and not morality.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

40. So how you you propose sifting the beliefs of religious people

and then deciding when they can or cannot vote/petition/hold office?

[LanternWaste]

60. You may be the first person on DU to advocate a religious litmus test for office...

You may be the first person on DU to advocate a religious litmus test for office... quite the little authoritarian, eh, Pogo?

[Fred Sanders]

21. Not all, mock their extremist ideas and connect those ideas to their political desires.

[Codeine]

17. And what precisely is a "yearning for religion"

nation?

[hlthe2b]

18. 'Sorry, but religion threads are not allowed in GD. Please do consider reposting in religion.

Thanks for your understanding.

[Fred Sanders]

20. Is the thread unlocked?

Edit: never mind.

..............

Star Member Skinner (60,017 posts)

23. I have instructed the hosts to to unlock those threads.

Open discussion of religion is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025307978

Now I'm locking this thread.
..................

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6093009

[hrmjustin]

19. Wow, just freaking wow!

[cbayer]

22. Complete logic fail. Even most believers don't distort things to this degree to make some

ridiculous point.

Secular nations with majority christian populations do not equal christian nations.

What the hell is "yearning for religion"? China ranked 3rd. S. Korea ranked 9th.

Russia and the UK are christian?

The only conclusion here is that the US spends a shitload of money on the military.

Complete and total fail.

[Fred Sanders]

23. As no one of any consequence or in a position of power is calling for Christian religious beliefs

to be literally translated into official government policy in America I just could be way off on that.

[cbayer]

25. There are lots of people calling for that and we have a constitution that prohibits it.

The US is a secular nation with members who would like it to be a theocracy but will never be able to accomplish that.

Really, I've seen a lot of distortion on this site, but this OP is like a house of mirrors.

Thanks for adding the Richard Pryor quote. It makes your intent crystal clear.

[Fred Sanders]

27. My intent is to mock extremist Christians ideology, it is permitted, within the bounds of not being vulgar.

[cbayer]

28. I think pretty much everyone here is on board with their objection to extremist

Christian ideology. I didn't say it was out of bounds, I'm saying that the way you are doing it is completely illogical and does not stand up to even the mildest scrutiny.

Let's use some of the much vaunted reason, logic and rational thought and not do things like this that just make us look stupid.

[Fred Sanders]

32. I am genuinely worried about creeping Maria law, Sharia law xenophobic fake fears are the cover.

The Republican party has made it clear they embrace religious ideology as the main driver of government policy....it is evil, and not just a passing concern.

[cbayer]

35. I think it's best if I stop kicking this thread.

Many share your concern about the things you list. This OP does absolutely nothing to address that. It just sounds foolish.

[cherokeeprogressive]

36. Consider for a moment who your audience is.

I don't think you'll find anyone who disagrees with you on mocking ANY extremist ideology, Christian or otherwise.

[Fumesucker]

41. Several state constitutions prohibit atheists from holding office

Good thing we have those constitutions so that we know what is right and wrong.

[cbayer]

43. A federal ruling made all of those null and void years ago.

Some are still on the books, but they are totally unenforceable and there is currently an effort to formally remove them.

This still gets trotted out frequently as an attempt to prove something, but it is a dead dog.

That's because we have a constitution that does know what is right and wrong when it comes to this.

[Fumesucker]

64. And yet the number of atheists in office in those states didn't appreciably change after that ruling

I wonder how that could be?

[cbayer]

65. No argument that it remains very difficult for atheists to get elected, but

it's not because of the laws you referred to.

Just wanted to clarify that.

[smirkymonkey]

74. Thank you and f**ing jeez!

[MillennialDem]

104. Russia is very Christian, probably moreso than the US

[cbayer]

107. Actually, no.

Russia - 47% ( although numbers vary widely)

US - 75%

Both are secular countries with a wide variety of other religions.

Anyway, having a majority christian population does not make one a "christian country". It's pretty offensive to even call the US a christian country, imo.

[MillennialDem]

109. Well given the amount of pull the orthodox church has now is what I meant, I didn't mean the

religion of the people necessarily. Now that the american evangelical wing doesn't have a ton of pull still too

Hell though Russia just made it illegal for trans people to drive

[cbayer]

111. I would love to talk to you more, but I don't want to kick this thread.

Hopefully we will meet again.

[dilby]

29. So when are we wiping out all the non believers? n/t

[whatchamacallit]

112. Well, we're thirteen years into our current Crusades n/t

[ChosenUnWisely]

30. We need to look back in history to solve problems....lions* would be my first choice

Last edited Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:50 PM - Edit history (1)

they are endangered and it would be a good way to ensure their survival

*Lions includes all predator felines, including but not limited to tigers, panthers, bobcats, cougars, etc.....

[dawg]

31. "Yearning for religion" nations.

No belief system has a lock on morality. And that includes the atheists.

[cleanhippie]

44. Not believing in a God is a belief system?

[dawg]

48. Believing that the existence of God is an impossibility is ...

in fact ... a belief system.

The fact that you don't recognize it as such only serves to demonstrate how staunchly you cling to your belief system. Only the agnostics are scientific in their reasoning.

[Fred Sanders]

53. I like agnostics, they use reason as their religion.

[smirkymonkey]

75. Oh dear. That's ridiculous.

Questioning whether god exisists is simply an exercise in reason. It is not a belief system.

[Fred Sanders]

81. Questioning whether God exists is an exercise in the freaking obvious. It requires no reasoning.

That is giving "reasoning" a bad name.

[smirkymonkey]

86. Yeah, exactly.

What were you missing?

[Fumesucker]

66. Even Dawkins doesn't say that

What he does say is that God as espoused in the various and sundry scriptures is extremely unlikely, not impossible.

[dawg]

67. Dawkins can be abrasive at times, but he's a more thoughtful and reasonable man ...

than many of the "evangelical" atheists I have encountered online.

[Fumesucker]

68. Dawkins also grew up in a culture rather less marinaded in fundamentalist religion than our own

The experience of atheists varies widely according to where they live, for instance to admit atheism where I live is basically to be shunned. Growing up being told you are going to burn in ultimate agony for all eternity tends to make people either scared or angry. Somehow I doubt Dawkins as a child got nearly the negative exposure to religion that many atheists in the USA get.

If you read the Bible without someone to "explain" it to you it's really easy to come away from that experience with the idea that God is a psychopath at best. A lot of us really don't like the feeling of being at the mercy of a psychopathic deity and deny the possibility that such might exist.

[dawg]

69. The fundies do more to drive people away from religion than Mr. Dawkins ever could.

They are their own worst enemies that way.

To be honest, some of the more outspoken atheists are much the same. There are thoughtful ways to discuss these issues, but that doesn't happen very often. Mockery is a good way to alienate people and drive a wedge between those who would otherwise be natural allies.

[cherokeeprogressive]

33. You... just sit around and think this stuff up.

That's oddly disturbing somehow.

[Fred Sanders]

34. It's a curse.

[cherokeeprogressive]

37. That makes sense. Now I get it.

[Nye Bevan]

42. Hey, when did the US become a "Christian nation"?

Did a constitutional amendment pass that I don't know about?

Because normally the "US is a Christian nation" claim comes from the right and is roundly ridiculed on DU.

[Codeine]

47. To be fair, the OP is routinely and roundly ridiculed on DU as well. nt

[Fred Sanders]

50. In your dreams.

[Bluenorthwest]

54. In this thread.

And deservedly so.

[Fred Sanders]

55. You can start your own OP on how extremist Christian religion has nothing to do with politics in America.

And poses no danger to worry about.

What is a debate without dissent?

[Bluenorthwest]

59. Why would I do that, I don't think that Christian fuckery has nothing to do with US politics

I am a gay person so like, I'm a dyed in the wool expert on the subject. So when I mock this OP I do so from a place of great standing as one of the harshest critics of Christianity on DU. And this OP is stupid and pretty ugly.

[malaise]

45. Imagine no religion

My greatest wish!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

49. "Imagine no religion"

Until a pop singer innocuously changes a lyric line and then all the zealots start screaming for his head as if he had desecrated some holy writ.

[JI7]

80. it was people ranting on the internet, his life was never at risk

[Fred Sanders]

84. Were they Christians or Muslims ranting on the Internet, which never happens by the way?

Makes all the difference to know the religion of the ranters, who is harmless, who is not....who has nuclear weapons, stuff like that.

[Fred Sanders]

83. I do not think Christians are like that. Why are you smearing an entire religion using one, single

example?

There is a well known word for that kind of thinking.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

88. It wasn't Christians losing their minds over the lyric change. DU was quite the display of

spleen venting at the time it happened.

[Fred Sanders]

90. I wasn't Christians? Then it is serious stuff if it was not Christians.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

93. It was tragically comical in its incoherent lack of self awareness.

Although it was an epiphany of sorts for me.

[Fred Sanders]

95. "Incoherent lack of self awareness". Got that right.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

97. To this day I still see no point to the rending of garments that resulted.

[cleanhippie]

85. Except that change was anything but innocuous.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

87. It's a stupid pop song.

[cleanhippie]

89. If you say so.

But that change was anything but innocuous.


To many, it's more than a stupid pop song.

http://metro.co.uk/2015/01/12/watch-what-happened-when-someone-played-john-lennons-imagine-during-the-march-of-unity-5019668/

[Nuclear Unicorn]

92. Which just validates my original post in the sub-thread.

People upset over the sacrilege of, "Imagine no religion" being altered as if it were holy writ becoming a bunch of frothing zealots denouncing the heretic.

No one was harmed, its just a song written by some guy who is no different than those before or after him.

[cleanhippie]

94. Sounds like obtuse tone-deafness and wilfull ignorance to me.

But whatever floats your boat.

You have a nice day.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

96. What harm was inflicted except to over-developed senses of sentiment?

[cleanhippie]

98. Who said anything about harm?

I commented on your take that a religious person changing the words to a song regarding religion was anything but innocuous.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

99. I said the lyric change was innocuous. You repeatedly asserted that is was not innocuous

"innocuous" means "harmless" if it was not harmless, as you assert, it is then harmful.

What harm was caused/could have been caused by the lyric change?

[cleanhippie]

100. Oh dear.

innocuous
[ih-nok-yoo-uh s]

Examples
Word Origin

adjective
1. not harmful or injurious; harmless:
an innocuous home remedy.
2. not likely to irritate or offend; inoffensive; an innocuous remark.
3. not interesting, stimulating, or significant; pallid; insipid:
an innocuous novel.

Tone-deafness or willful ignorance? Or both?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

102. Okay, fine. It still doesn't explain the zealotry erupting over just a song by some guy especially

since the line supposedly wants people to set aside the discord and acrimony that arises from zealotry.


By the way, "innocuous" still means, "harmless" and that is the context I was employing.

[cleanhippie]

106. Zealotry? Thats funny.

I cant comment on something that didn't happen.

zeal·ot·ry
ˈzelətrē/
noun
noun: zealotry

fanatical and uncompromising pursuit of religious, political, or other ideals; fanaticism.

If you really don't understand why people got upset that a religious person changed the words of a song critical of religion to make it not critical of religion, I'd have to say, again, that it sounds like obtuse tone-deafness or willful ignorance to me.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

110. Yeah. That definition pretty much validates my point.

It's just a song written by some guy. It has no more significance than the Hokey Pokey

[cleanhippie]

113. I'm gonna go with willful tone-deafness.

And that definition makes your point only if your point is how easy it is to casually redefine words to suit one's mistaken meaning.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

114. You provided the defintion, I agreed with it.

What harm did Cee Lo Green's rewrite cause that could have justified the vitriol that was unleashed against him?

[cleanhippie]

115. You agreed with an illogical definition you gave it yourself.

Justified? Freedom of Speech works both ways. Greene was harmed no more than anyone objecting to his rewrite.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

116. I never said Green was harmed. I said he was the object of vitriol, which he was.

I have repeatedly asked what harm was caused. All I saw was a bunch of people acting as if some silly song by some guy had been blasphemed.

You say I'm tone-deaf but that doesn't mean anything. Perhaps it would be better if you could actually explain what it is I am supposed to have missed , if you are able.

[cleanhippie]

117. You ask "who was harmed?" then pretend that "justified the vitriol that was unleashed against him"

isn't an accusation of harm against Greene?

Tone-deaf may be too kind a description.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

120. I'm the object of your vitriol. I hardly feel harmed.

So, what is it about that silly song that gets people so worked-up?

[cleanhippie]

122. And now I'm vitriolic?

vit·ri·ol·ic
ˌvitrēˈälik/
adjective
adjective: vitriolic

filled with bitter criticism or malice.

A long look in the mirror is desperately asking for attention.

what is it about that silly song that gets people so worked-up?

I'm willing to bet it's the same thing that's got you so worked-up.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

123. When you call me tone-deaf and then say that is probably too kind then yes,

you have every appearance of bitter criticism.

I'm willing to bet it's the same thing that's got you so worked-up.

I didn't get worked-up. I was set free. I started to realize there was nothing to be found in groups except hypocrisy. So I stopped being a follower. I became my own person. This episode wasn't the sole cause for my "conversion" of sort but it was pretty eye opening.

[cleanhippie]

124. How we got from debating the proper use of "innocuous" to an incoherent tale of your "conversion"

"and not being a follower, but your own person" is most certainly eye-opening.


Fascinating, actually.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

125. You started the debate on the definition. I remain content with my use of the word and

every other definition you have supplied.

What is fascinating is that you have repeatedly ignored every request to explain why so many became so upset over a stupid song written by some guy.

[cleanhippie]

126. Perhaps in your haste to respond you've overlooked all my explanations?

explain why so many became so upset over a stupid song written by some guy.

As I explained earlier, it's for the same reason you became so upset over the treatment of Greene.

What harm did Cee Lo Green's rewrite cause that could have justified the vitriol that was unleashed against him?

You've had the answer all along.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

127. Green's rewrite hardly rises to the level of vitriol directed at Lennon.

Really? That one little line justified everyone losing their collective minds? What a bunch of arrogant thin-skinned crybabies.

[cleanhippie]

129. That must be some view from up there.

That one little line justified everyone losing their collective minds?

To those that "lost their collective minds" it was more than just one little line, and to you their simple objections were 'arrogant vitriol unleashed by crybabies'!


That long look in the mirror really is trying to get your attention yet you continue to ignore it.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

130. "To those that "lost their collective minds" it was more than just one little line"

Then what was it?

Please I'm trying to figure out what all the hoopla was about.

[cleanhippie]

132. I've reached the maximum number of ways I can re-word my point.

If you haven't gotten it by now, you either can't or won't.



Long. Look. In. The. Mirror.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

133. All I have seen is statements telling me people are upset, that the song has deep value to them.

The former is not in dispute with the latter being assumed as the predicate for the former. But looking at the the nature of the re-write offers no justification as to why they're so upset.

"Imagine no religion" to, "Religion if you want"

Scandalous stuff there! I blush simply to type the words.

Is the song so sacred that it cannot be re-worded with a line that allows people to decide for themselves if they want to pursue a religious belief? Or is the idea of tolerance of religious faith anathema to the song's devotees? Has Lennon been canonized in the minds of his followers and they can't countenance the thought of some other guy altering his utterances?

[cleanhippie]

134. Woosh!

It's difficult to tell if the point flew over your head or if you ducked out of the way.


Either way, I'm exhausted trying to explain it to you.

Have a nice day.


Oh, and GO SEAHAWKS!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

135. Again, where have you explained it? Your comments addressing the song (rather than my vocabulary) --

Except that change was anything but innocuous.

But that change was anything but innocuous.

To many, it's more than a stupid pop song.

Sounds like obtuse tone-deafness and wilfull ignorance to me.

I commented on your take that a religious person changing the words to a song regarding religion was anything but innocuous.

Tone-deafness or willful ignorance? Or both?

Perhaps this is what you are referring to --

If you really don't understand why people got upset that a religious person changed the words of a song critical of religion to make it not critical of religion, I'd have to say, again, that it sounds like obtuse tone-deafness or willful ignorance to me.

However, it is not an explanation, it's a "you have to figure it out for yourself or you're just dumb" dismissal; which is really just a call to faith.

All you're really saying is the anti-religious are so intolerant they cannot emotionally cope with the change in lyric. Yet, supposedly, it is intolerance for other views that makes religion so unpalatable to the anti-religious. I think the word for that is "hypocrisy."

I know, I know, it's not hypocrisy when the right-thinking people do it.

But all of that validates my very original point: The anti-religious are just as tribalist, conceited, hypocritical, uncritical, exclusionary and intolerant as those they profess to disapprove of all wrapped up into one frothing mob.

"Imagine no religion"

Words to live by?

I'll take "turn the other cheek" and wish your Seahawks the best in the upcoming game.

[cleanhippie]

136. Are you still talking to me?

Or do you just like to hear yourself talk?

I've moved on, you should too.

Have a nice day.


And GO SEAHAWKS!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

138. "I've moved on"

Do tell.

[cleanhippie]

139. Still here?

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

140. "Still here?"

Yes.

I'm watching, in rapt fascination, the process you describe as "moving on."

[cleanhippie]

141. Perhaps you should try it instead of watching it.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!!


Put on your jersey, and come on in for the big win! Wilson, Lynch, and the rest are gonna crush 'em today!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

142. "Perhaps you should try it instead of watching it."

You are the one who said you were quitting the conversation. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you, not me.

I'm still willing to discuss the religious faith and intolerance that follows a song that decries religious faith and intolerance and how those who have their faith challenged often have little recourse except to spam tokens of their displeasure.

I'm not beholden to your wishes. You cannot instruct me on what to do and -- as a matter of record -- anarchists aren't really good at this doing-what-they're-told thing.

[cleanhippie]

144. See, you haven't moved on, but I have.

I'm talking about the Seahawks, and you are still trying to talk about the previous subject that I've exhausted myself trying to explain to you. I'm done talking about that. What don't you understand about this? I'm all done. Please, let it go and move on.

If you want to talk about the Seahawks, or NFL football in general, I'm all ears! Otherwise, you've no need to further respond to me about the earlier discussion, because I've moved on. Can you?


Go Seahawks!!

[treestar]

145. Link for people who don't know what this subthread is about:

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/cee-lo-green-outrages-john-lennon-fans-by-changing-lyrics-to-imagine-20120102

[Fred Sanders]

148. Gotta vote with clean hippie on this one. Now to explain how they got from the OP topic to a

flame war about Lennon lyrics?

[EX500rider]

51. "All other religions combined: approx $200 million annum, mainly China"

China alone is close to 200 billion a year.

[Fred Sanders]

52. Thank you, corrected. They aethiests are catching up with their weaponry and spending.

[2naSalit]

56. Hmmm

Posted without comment...

[Fred Sanders]

57. Amen.

At times they were kind, they were polite in their sophistication, smiling but never too loudly acting in a civilized manner an illusion of gentleness always fighting to get their way. while the people see, the people know, the people wait, the people say the closing of your doors will never shut use out, the closing of your doors can only shut you in.

We know the predator, we see them feed on us, we are aware to starve the beast is our destiny. At times they were kind, they were polite, but never honest.

We see your tech no logical society devour you before your very eyes we hear your anguished cries exalting greed through progress while you seek material advances the sound of flowers dying carry messages through the wind trying to tell you about balance and your safety

But your minds are chained to your machines and the strings dangling from your puppeteers hands turning you, twisting you into forms and confusions beyond your control

Your mind for a job your mind for a t.v. your mind for a hair dryer your mind for consumption.

With your atom bombs your material bombs your drug bombs your racial bombs your class bombs your sexist bombs your ageist bombs

Devastating your natural shelters making you homeless on earth chasing you into illusions fooling you, making you pretend you can run away from the ravishing of your spirit

While the sound of flowers dying carry messages through the wind trying to tell you about balance and your safety.

Trying to isolate us in a dimension called loneliness leading us into the trap believe in their power but not in ourselves piling us with guilt always taking the blame greed chasing out the balance trying to isolate us in a dimension called loneliness

economic deities seizing power through illusions created armies are justified class systems are democracy god listens to warmongers prayers tyranny is here, divide and conquer trying to isolate us in a dimension called loneliness

greed a parent insecurity the happiness companion genocide conceived in sophistication tech no logic material civilization a rationalization replacing a way to live trying to isolate us in a dimension called loneliness

..............

To God,

we hope you don’t mind but we would like to talk to you; there are some things we need to straighten out, it’s about these christians they claim to be from your nation but man you should see the things they do all the time blaming it on you: manifest destiny, genocide, maximized profit, sterilization, raping the earth, lying taking more than they need in all the forms of the greed. we ask them why, they say it’s god’s will.

Damn god they make it so hard. Remember jesus? Would you send him back to them, tell them (not) to kill him, rather they should listen stop abusing his name and yours.

We do not mean to be disrespectful but you know how it is, our people have their own ways we never even heard of you until not long ago, your representatives spoke magnificent things of you which we were willing to believe, but from the way they acted we know we and you were being deceived.

We do not mean you and your christian children any bad, but you all came to take all we had we have not seen you but we have heard so much it is time for you to decide what life is worth we already remember but maybe you forgot.

[2naSalit]

61. My favorite part

is when he addresses god... especially this phrase:

Remember jesus? Would you send him back to them, tell them (actually it's "not&quot to kill him, rather they should listen stop abusing his name and yours.

There's a flaw in the text, he asks god to tell them not to kill him but listen to him instead, big difference.

My favorite poem for the conversation and what I refer to when christians try to tell me about their superiority. I've had multiple religions forced upon my psyche... I reject them all.

[Fred Sanders]

62. Correction noted, did seem entirely out of context. Thanks for the poetry.

[2naSalit]

63. Why

soitinly! as Curly would say.

[cpwm17]

58. How about you try this new title: Nations with a Christian majority

are the world's gravest danger to peace, not nations with a Muslim majority. Christian majority nations can kill the planet.

Christian majority nations have more power and they also have a history of committing many great atrocities. Regardless of whether atrocities are committed by Christian or Muslim majority nations, all atrocities are committed due to greed and bigotry, whatever the excuse.

30 Worst Atrocities of the 20th Century: Muslims don't dominate this list, and the worst atrocity this century was the unprovoked Iraq War:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/atrox.htm

Rank Death Toll Event Dates
1 55,000,000 Second World War (Some overlap w/Stalin. Includes Sino-Japanese War and Holocaust. Doesn't incl. post-war German expulsions) 1937/39-1945
2 40,000,000 China: Mao Zedong's regime. (incl. famine) 1949-76
3 20,000,000 USSR: Stalin's regime (incl. WW2-era atrocities) 1924-53
4 15,000,000 First World War (incl. Armenian massacres) 1914-18
5 8,800,000 Russian Civil War 1918-21
6 4,000,000 China: Warlord & Nationalist Era 1917-37
7 3,000,000 Congo Free State (atrocity by Belgium) (1900)-08
8 2,800,000 Korean War 1950-53
8 2,800,000 2nd Indochina War (incl. Laos & Cambodia) 1960-75
10 2,500,000 Chinese Civil War 1945-49
11 2,100,000 German Expulsions after WW2 1945-47
12 1,900,000 Second Sudanese Civil War 1983-(99)
13 1,700,000 Congolese Civil War [n.1] 1998-(99)
14 1,650,000 Cambodia: Khmer Rouge Regime 1975-79
15 1,500,000 Afghanistan: Soviet War 1980-89
16 1,400,000 Ethiopian Civil Wars 1962-92
17 1,250,000 East Pakistan: Massacres 1971
18 1,000,000 Mexican Revolution 1910-20
18 1,000,000 Iran-Iraq War 1980-88
18 1,000,000 Nigeria: Biafran revolt 1967-70
21 917,000 Rwandan Massacres 1994
21 800,000 Mozambique: Civil War 1976-92
23 675,000 French-Algerian War 1954-62
24 600,000 First Indochina War 1945-54
24 600,000 Angolan Civil War 1975-94
26 500,000 Decline of the Amazonian Indians (1900-99)
26 500,000 India-Pakistan Partition 1947
26 500,000 First Sudanese Civil War 1955-72
29 450,000 Indonesia: Massacre of Communists 1965-66
30 365,000 Spanish Civil War 1936-39
? >350,000 Somalia: Chaos 1991-(99)
? >400,000 North Korea: Communist Regime 1948-(99)

[backwoodsbob]

70. When Christians start wiping out entire towns for not bowing to them

let me know

[Fred Sanders]

71. It was not an entire town but it was 77 children. Hans Brevik.

[smirkymonkey]

79. Who was an absolute nut case. His views

on Christianity were as follows:
In 2009, he wrote "Today's Protestant church is a joke. Priests in jeans who march for Palestine and churches that look like minimalist shopping centres. I am a supporter of an indirect collective conversion of the Protestant church back to the Catholic."[189] On his Facebook profile, Breivik described himself as a Christian, though he is critical of the Catholic and Protestant churches, objecting to their "current suicidal path".[citation needed] Before the attacks, he stated an intention to attend Frogner Church in a final "Martyr's mass".[190]

The manifesto states its author is "100 percent Christian",[4] but he is not "excessively religious"[4] and considers himself a "cultural Christian" and a "modern-day crusader".[3][4] His manifesto states "I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person, as that would be a lie", calls religion a crutch and a source for drawing mental strength, and says "I've always been very pragmatic and influenced by my secular surroundings and environment." Regarding the term cultural Christian, which he says means preserving European culture, he notes, "It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian-atheist (an atheist who wants to preserve at least the basics of the European Christian cultural legacy...)"[3][181] Furthermore, Breivik stated that "myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God."[3][191] Nevertheless, he stated that he planned to pray to God seeking for his help during his attacks.[192]

Breivik condemns Pope Benedict XVI for his dialogue with Islam: "Pope Benedict has abandoned Christianity and all Christian Europeans and is to be considered a cowardly, incompetent, corrupt and illegitimate Pope." It will thus be necessary, writes Breivik, to overthrow the Protestant and Catholic hierarchies, after which a "Great Christian Congress" would set up a new European Church.[193] He has also condemned Christian missionary activity in India as it would lead to the "total destruction of the Hindu faith and culture", and he expresses support for the Hindutva movement against Indian Communist movements.[194]

American Christian press has also highlighted that Breivik appears to have addressed followers of the Neopagan religion of Odinism in his writ. In regards to them, he says, "even Odinists can fight with us or by our side as brothers" in the Knights Templar organisation of which Breivik claims to be a founding member. He later says to reject Odinism, saying that the Thor's Hammer cannot unify the people of Europe, but that the Christian cross will.[195]

Deputy police chief Roger Andresen initially told reporters that information on Breivik's websites was "so to speak

[Fred Sanders]

82. Hans was a Christian as the terrorists of Paris were Muslims. Agreed. I like principals.

1500 page manifesto versus a couple of shouts in the street..who had religion on the brain more?

Is that what the debate is all about, who expressed their genuine feely-feels for their chosen religion more than another before doing insane acts?

The connecting principal that explains it all is in your first sentence - psycopathy.

[Lobo27]

77. So I guess its time to invade Mexico and South America.

Strike down the Christians before they get a chance to get nukes.

[m-lekktor]

91. They hang gays from cranes in Iran.

I can't believe you left out Iran for Muslim. OR Saudi Arabia.

[Exultant Democracy]

118. Due to US intervention. Our coup handed their extremist everything they had

Before Christian intervention Iran was very progressive culturally and led by a progressive democratically elected leader. Iran hasn't faught a war of aggression for something like 300 years and the shitty state of the country now is all due to Christians on the outside that decided to intervene repeatedly to steal their resources.

[Fred Sanders]

121. Obama withdrawing all Christian warriors from Muslim majority lands is not sitting well

with the American Judeo-Christian media-industrial-military complex.

[MillennialDem]

103. Kill the planet is an overstatement, but I agree with the rest of your point. Christians have done

just as bad or worse than Muslims in the last 100 years too.

[Exultant Democracy]

119. Everything shitty in today's Islam is directly attributable to western imperialism.

It is and will remain for a long time the defining horror that set into motion almost every crapsack feature of the modern world.

[smirkymonkey]

147. Oh ffs, you can't be serious.

Islam has it's own issues that have nothing to do with western imperialism. This is the kind of shit that makes me embarrassed to be a liberal sometimes.

[Exultant Democracy]

149. Then you clearly have no knowledge or interest in the actual history of the religion and the region

You probably don't know who the sufis are and you probably also do not understand that the popular form of Islam as it was practiced by the vast majority of the Islamic world resembled a form of vulgarized sufism around a century ago.

You also must not understand the effect that Western Imperialism on the religion in so far as empowering the firebrands. You must not accept some of the basic tents of the social sciences if you do not think that cultural and economic exploitation do not in turn empower the reactionary forces within a society. Based on your profound logic the rise of Hitler in WW2 couldn't have been caused by the harsh terms the allies forced on the Germans. Why, in your understanding of how the world works, did the German people turn toward Hilter?

Do you even know what Western Imperialism means? I would suggest not, since implicit within a reasonable explanation is the fact that the Europeans at one point held coercive force over the rest of the world and used this power to exploit everyone else? Were you not aware of this? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the concept of blow-back, but from your post you are obviously one of those rare gems that thinks pissing into the wind has no foreseeable downside.

I'll say this much anyone who has no clue what a mu'tazilah is or why Ibn Hanbal was suppressed has absolutely no fucking business talking about Islam like they have a the first fucking clue about the religion. The ignorance and arrogance is both astounding and revolting. You are right about one thing, you should be embarrassed to be a liberal, a liberal should do better.

[hughee99]

143. The first time I've seen a DUer argue that

The US is a Christian nation

[treestar]

146. +1

the US is secular and people can practice or not practice any religion they choose.

If the US is a big danger, it's not the Christians. It's the militarists and imperialists.