Posted on 01/14/2012 2:37:06 PM PST by xzins
How is challenging a doctrine, theology, members, prophets, etc. that damn all other Christians as whores of Babylon, apostates, or sons of perdition classified as "bigotry"?
BillyBoy just wants to protect his own anti-Christian bigotry from the zot that is coming soon.
Wow! All these years being a lifelong practicing Christian and I wasn't aware of my "own anti-Christian bigotry". Thankfully editor-surveyor informed me of this. That must be news to my parish as well, since they appointed me to write the literature of our evagelization material for church visitors unfamilar with Christianity.
I haven't seen any post this amusing since Salvation questioned whether I was an anti-Catholic freeper a few days after I had just posted numerous posts defending the Pope. I suppose the next thing we'll have is some freeper accusing me of being an "anti-Illinois bigot" when I live in this state. Makes as much sense as "Christian freepers hate Christianity" stuff you guys spew.
By any chance have you been hanging out with Perrybots, editor? They've been saying for months that Perry keeps losing voters in droves because of "anti-Christian bigotry" in a country that over 70% Christian. (Perry himself is going around South Carolina right now referring to Santorum as a "Good Catholic" instead of a "Good Christian"... nah, nothing bigoted about that. I'm sure he would have no problem with Santorum addressing a group of Italian-americans in New Jersey and repeatedly referring to Perry as a "Good evangelical protestant" instead of "Good Christian")
Christianity is about love thy neighbor, editor-surveyor, so it seems the only one that doesn't understand the faith is you. You wish to sow discord among people on the basis if they don't share the exact same religious beliefs as you, and question people's faith if they don't support your candidates, that's about as un-Christian as it gets. Again, I suggest you re-read all the stuff in the bible about the Samaritans (who were loathed by the Jews at the time for having a different religious background than them), because Jesus sure as heck didn't preach what you preach.
As I've said before, I'd have no problem voting for Benjamin Netayahu over Nancy Pelosi, if you would refuse to do so simply because of his religion, I feel sorry for you.
I've been here on FR for over a decade so I don't think there's a zot coming on anytime soon. FR is a Conservative forum, not an exclusively Christian one. If you wish to purge the non-Christians that post here, take it up with management.
You can challenge the doctrines all you want and there's nothing "bigoted" about that. I think the Mormon doctrines about golden plates and the angel Moroni and baptizing dead people are cuckoo myself. If you want to question other religions doctrines and state why you don't believe in them and think they are wrong, go right ahead. I said nothing about "challenging doctrines".
What I said was freepers who state that they will "ONLY elect Christians" are nasty bigots. If you wouldn't elect a Jew SIMPLY because their religious beliefs are different than yours, it's bigotry. Not only that, it's unChristian and Jesus (who himself was a Jew) certainly wouldn't agree with it.
What part of "no religious test shall be required for office" don't you understand?
What part of the Constitution don't you understand?
I have a right to decide for myself who I will vote for and on what basis. The Constitution has no say on how or why I vote.
Here’s an election where thankfully SZonian is not a resident. In VA-07, the non-Christian candidate is conservative Republican Eric Cantor, and the Christian candidate is Rick Waugh, a “progressive” Democrat
http://townhall.com/election-2012/election-2010//state/va/candidate/rick-e-waugh/
http://www.votesmart.org/candidate/biography/5121/eric-cantor
I’d have no qualms about voting for Cantor over Waugh. How about you, SZonian?
bttt
Political campaigning is like a job interview. There are candidates who say stuff that their friends like, but the voting public doesn't want to hear. Imagine volunteering a bunch of negative or "insensitive" comments about a potential employer at a job interview.
Even if what you say is partly true, there is such a thing as telling too much.
Smith won Mobile county but only with 54%
http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=1922
Very interesting, the only Southern states that avoided large swings to Hoover were South Carolina, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Louisiana I thought makes sense cause it has a large Catholic population but Smith carried every parish in the State, less in the protestant North but still by a large margins.
All 4 all had democrat percentages hardly changed from 1924 when a conservativeish West Virginian was the rat nominee. Obviously those 4 states had the strongest rat machines.
I always thought it was primarily because Smith was Catholic. You had some Protestant ministers going nuts over it. Perhaps it wasn’t the only thing wrong with Smith though. There was also prohibition, the South was in favor. And his association with Tammany Hall. The article below talks about Senator Heflin’s support of Hoover (and how respected Hoover was) and how many Southerners disliked those with “big city ways”. But it also points to Smith’s religion as a primary factor.
http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/face/Article.jsp?id=h-1517
Nice one!!
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.