Skip to comments.
The Second Coming As Government Entitlement
anti-state.com ^
| September 15, 2001
| sendtoscott
Posted on 09/15/2001 9:52:45 AM PDT by sendtoscott
Here is what Jerry Falwell said on the 700 Club [about the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01]: "I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way - all of them who have tried to secularize America - I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.'" Pat Robertson concurred: "Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted their agenda at the highest levels of our government."
-- Andrew Sullivan, 9/14/01
Actually, the argument can be made (and will be here) that Falwell and Robertson are to blame, due to their overriding support of Israel for their own religious reasons. After all, without the Book of Revelation, would Israel mean more to the United States than, say, Costa Rica? According to Joseph Sobran, the headline of the Washington Times on the morning of the attacks read "Bush 'Tilt' to Israel Provokes Arab World" (this was published before the planes hit). Even the War Party admits our foreign policy was a factor in the attacks. George Will writes:
Americans ... are targets because of their virtues -- principally democracy, and loyalty to those nations that, like Israel, are embattled salients of our virtues in a still-dangerous world.
Regardless of what you think of Israel as a democracy (or what you think of the human rights records of the Muslim countries surrounding them), we do not support Israel because they elect their government. The U.S. supports them because of the millions of evangelical Christians who support Israel for religious reasons. That nation is the focus of their beliefs concerning the end of the world and the second coming of Jesus, and so the U.S. must make sure it survives....
Rest of article
TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 next last
To: Demidog, tex-oma
font fix and ping
To: Ada Coddington , LincolnLover, Arator
ping
To: sendtoscott
The U.S. supports them because of the millions of evangelical Christians who support Israel for religious reasons.If the rest of the article is as misinformed and as ignorant as this statement, why read the rest of it?
4
posted on
09/15/2001 10:00:06 AM PDT
by
sinkspur
To: Brian_Baldwin, Greg Weston, Huck, Cultural Jihad
ping
To: Uriel1975
Someone suggested I ping you.
To: sinkspur
The U.S. supports them because of the millions of evangelical Christians who support Israel for religious reasons.
If the rest of the article is as misinformed and as ignorant as this statement, why read the rest of it?
So if Dubya said during the 2000 campaign that he would pull our support for Israel, nobody on the Christian Right would have screamed bloody murder? And do you claim there would have been no religious motivation for that screaming?
To: sendtoscott
Falwell and Robertson have it all wrong. But then, they need some publicity...they haven't had any huge successes of late. The truth is, God has desires...One: for me to receive lots of checks and money orders to appease things...you know, like Oral Roberts and his $6M fund raiser. Just forward as much money as you have laying around to ME...I'll pass along your thoughts and wants and all will be fine! (Just wanted to get my bid in before these two "holy" idiots do!)
8
posted on
09/15/2001 10:12:07 AM PDT
by
NMFXSTC
To: sendtoscott
"we do not support Israel because they elect their government. The U.S. supports them because of the millions of evangelical Christians who support Israel for religious reasons." Evangelical Christians have had limited success putting rewriting US public policy to reflect their religious values. Yet you claim here they've succeeded. Woudln't that be an anomolous result? Might there be any other explanation for US public policy towards Isreal? Why don't you list the hypotheses you see as the second and third most likely behind this one and we can do a compare and contrast for plausibility?
To: sendtoscott
So if Dubya said during the 2000 campaign that he would pull our support for Israel, nobody on the Christian Right would have screamed bloody murder? And do you claim there would have been no religious motivation for that screaming? The author's premise is wrong.
The US supports Israel because it is the only democracy in the Middle East and has provided a successful counterweight to Arab states.
The Christian Right also recognizes this. Religious considerations are secondary.
10
posted on
09/15/2001 10:18:32 AM PDT
by
sinkspur
To: sendtoscott
Farwel is absolutely correct. I defend his words!!! America is a cross between Babylon AND Sodom!!!!
To: ConsistentLibertarian
Evangelical Christians have had limited success putting rewriting US public policy to reflect their religious values. Yet you claim here they've succeeded. Woudln't that be an anomolous result
People pay closer attention to domestic policy than foreign policy. Pro-abortion activists have more clout than Muslim. Sometimes (foreign and domestically), the Religious Right gets what it wants, sometimes it doesn't. You claim the Religious Right failed at A, so it must have failed at B (despite the fact the B actually happened).
To: sinkspur
The US supports Israel because it is the only democracy in the Middle East and has provided a successful counterweight to Arab states.
Counterweight against them doing what? What would the Arab states have done to anybody other than Israel that Israel has stopped them from doing?
To: sendtoscott
Muslim == Muslims
To: sinkspur
The author's premise is wrong.
Although I'm perfectly willing to post something just FYI (w/o agreeing w/ every word), in this case, I actually am the author.
To: sinkspur
It's not misinformed. It's very informed. There is a lot of truth to the fact that the Christian Right has this illogical obsession with Israel, which is a secular, socialist state.
It's actually quite humorous, but evangelical Christians are typically short on brains and long on convoluted symbolism.
16
posted on
09/15/2001 10:33:21 AM PDT
by
Illbay
To: sendtoscott
"You claim the Religious Right failed at A, so it must have failed at B (despite the fact the B actually happened).". No, that's not the claim. The claim is that an explanation for why the Religious Right succeeds at B is in trouble if it would predict or retrodict success with A when we know A did not actually happen. You want to distinguish cases, saying opposition to the domestic agenda of the Religious Right is feirce, while opposition to their foreign policy agenda is moderate in comparison. Question: Where does the Religious Right invest the bulk of its political capital -- impeachment of a President who has an affair and lies about it, nomination of Pro Life justices, school vouchers, etc, or foreign policy?
To: sendtoscott
What would the Arab states have done to anybody other than Israel that Israel has stopped them from doing? If Israel did not have nuclear weapons, I posit the Arab states would have done lots of bad things.
18
posted on
09/15/2001 10:36:06 AM PDT
by
sinkspur
To: ConsistentLibertarian
The claim is that an explanation for why the Religious Right succeeds at B is in trouble if it would predict or retrodict success with A when we know A did not actually happen. You want to distinguish cases, saying opposition to the domestic agenda of the Religious Right is feirce, while opposition to their foreign policy agenda is moderate in comparison. Question: Where does the Religious Right invest the bulk of its political capital -- impeachment of a President who has an affair and lies about it, nomination of Pro Life justices, school vouchers, etc, or foreign policy?
Clinton was impeached (he wasn't removed). Gore lost. We have had some pro-life nominees, we have a federal ban on money for abortions. Are you saying that the Religious Right has been totally impotent domestically?
Basically, the Christian Right wins some, and loses some. If they ever lose at anything, you claim they must lose at everything. Just about fights harder domestically than over foreign affairs - that's a wash.
To: sendtoscott
Unsubscribe to your anti-state and queer drivel.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson