Do you consider any disagreement with your POV in its every subtlety and nuance, to be an “attack”? Your question has been answered (by spirited irish, post #31, this thread, directed to Zionist Conspirator, but clearly known to you as evidenced by your response, post #32, wherein you sought not to illustrate why spiriteds response was inadequate, but where you seemed only to be looking for a fight.
In my experience, into the ‘50s, ‘60s, and at least half of the ‘70s, Christians tended to generally keep their own council when it came to politics, exercising their franchise perhaps to a greater degree than most others, but largely confining themselves to that activity, to Armistice Day (now Veterans’ Day), and to the occasional commemoration installing a statue or other public monument, having a certain local or national patriotic significance. All of that changed in the ‘70s (see the Moral Majority) when it became obvious to many Christians that Liberals meant to use the Regime’s power to entirely destroy the Judeo-Christian Tradition, or to at least ban it from Western Civilization, and to deny the Protestant underpinnings of our Constitution and form of government.
Now unable to defeat your protagonists in open debate, in typical liberal fashion, you seek disqualification as your means of relief.
In the meantime you flee in terror from the issues I have (repeatedly) raised:
• Are Kevmo and spirited Congress?
• Do you think that Kevmo and spirited should have something greater than their opinion behind the ideas they express?
• Or, contrarily, do you believe Kevmo’s and spirited’s ideas so repugnant that you believe the Regime’s power should be used (presumably at your direction) to suppress them?
• Is it your opinion that some opinions are simply intolerable, and that your vote should be the deciding opinion decreeing which are?
• Are Kevmo’s and spirited’s opinions more outside the boundary of Society than Phil Robertson’s? NAMBLA? The GLBT?
• Does not Joe’s observation more closely approximate a description of Liberals, Planned Parenthood, or either of the Regime’s two political parties than anything else?
post #32, ... where you seemed only to be looking for a fight.
***He was trolling at the very beginning of this thread. Had this article been posted in the Religion Forum, his posts would have been removed. But, then we wouldn’t have been able to see the unveiling of a full-fledged Heretic.
I considered the immediate quibbling over what I meant by "heresy" an attack. The comment was made in reference to the article. The context and meaning of the term was already established by the article. It was a manufactured diversion.
They are not. But I think we should consider what it says about us if we assume to engage in political activism to influence what Congress does but won't even adopt ourselves the ethics, practices and conventions we're going to demand from them if we want an "original intent" application of the Constitution.
• Do you think that Kevmo and spirited should have something greater than their opinion behind the ideas they express?
I think they should have some sense of the context in which the ideas are expressed and the potential unintended consequences. Is this what we want people to understand political conservativism to be about?
• Or, contrarily, do you believe Kevmo’s and spirited’s ideas so repugnant that you believe the Regime’s power should be used (presumably at your direction) to suppress them?
I think the site made changes to prevent pissing matches over religious differences, and did it for very good reasons. They did that entirely on their own without any direction or even advice from me.
• Is it your opinion that some opinions are simply intolerable, and that your vote should be the deciding opinion decreeing which are?
In my house, yes. This is not my house, nor does it belong to you, kevmo, or spiritedirish.
• Are Kevmo’s and spirited’s opinions more outside the boundary of Society than Phil Robertson’s? NAMBLA? The GLBT?
In what context? Their religious beliefs are closer to Phil Robertson's. Their ideas on what to do about people that don't have the same beliefs they do seems more in line with the militant liberals.
• Does not Joe’s observation more closely approximate a description of Liberals, Planned Parenthood, or either of the Regime’s two political parties than anything else?
I don't know which "observation" you are referring to.