"Their understandable longing for security --" leads some fundamentalists to believe that the "rightness" of their cause justifies violations of the constitution. -- Increasingly, many self-described 'conservatives' here at FR are exhibiting such behavior.
Perhaps, -- some may see themselves herein.
1 posted on
08/08/2002 1:04:36 PM PDT by
tpaine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
To: tpaine
Fundamentalists try to satisfy their "lust for certitude" by oversimplifying things
Much like this article.
To: tpaine
Tolerance of other religious heritages, and respect for every person's freedom and obligation before God to follow his or her own conscience, do not tend to be strengths of fundamentalist groups. They can be quite narrow-minded and judgmental. We as Catholics...do not presume to judge anyone's heart, but leave that to God alone.
Am I missing something here???
You judge me to be "judgemental" while telling me how you don't judge people?? What kind of idiot wrote this???
To: tpaine
Whoa! The Roman Catholic Church against the Fundamentalists at Rutgers, eh? This may sound callous, but there's a bit of humor to be found here.
To: tpaine
Campus Christian church wars. Should be interesting.
To: tpaine
A fundamentalist's unyielding adherence to rigid doctrinal and ideological positions may find expression in his or her social and political, as well as religious, attitudes. Violent fundamentalists are those who believe that the "rightness" of their cause justifies even the most heinous of crimes. They are right, and others have no rights. Whether "religious" and secular, down through the ages violent fundamentalists have been responsible for terrible atrocities--crusaders slaughtering Muslims, inquisitors torturing heretics, Nazis gassing Jews, communists annihilating counterrevolutionaries, capitalists tyrannizing the poor.
Or This:
A leftist's unyielding adherence to rigid doctrinal and ideological positions may find expression in his or her social and political, as well as religious, attitudes. Violent leftists are those who believe that the "rightness" of their cause justifies even the most heinous of crimes. They are right, and others have no rights. Whether "leftist" and secular, down through the ages violent leftists have been responsible for terrible atrocities--palestinians slaughtering Israelis, communists annihilating counterrevolutionaries, statists tyrannizing the poor.
Seems a better fit to me.
14 posted on
08/08/2002 1:32:59 PM PDT by
tcostell
To: tpaine
Rather than trying to understand the historical situation in which the books of the Bible were written and the literary styles they employ, fundamentalists believe that their English translations of the Bible must be understood literally, that is, the surface meaning must be accepted as true, word for word. What kind of MORON thinks that English translations of the Bible must be understood literally?? I am exceedingly fundamentalist, and I have NEVER, EVER heard anyone claim this.
Do Catholics have so little ability to refute actual Fundamentalist, Bible-believing views that they must make up phony beliefs to argue against??
To: tpaine
I tend to side a little with the Catholic interpretion of things, but the article makes it sound as if the Church is afraid of losing some of its flock to the Campus Crusade for Christ! Maybe each should be given a rugby team.
To: tpaine
It's right in the name.
Da Mental (cases, defectives etc)
19 posted on
08/08/2002 1:35:29 PM PDT by
Dinsdale
To: tpaine
Fundamentalists try to satisfy their "lust for certitude" by oversimplifying things, by making a passionate commitment to a part, and sometimes to a distortion, of the truth.You mean, like when liberals argue for higher taxes, price controls on health care and other commodities, and laws that "get tough on business" while allowing the government to continue to snow us with phony budgets and balance sheets?? You mean like when the UN-lovers tell us that America's rightful concern with its own interests is "isolationist"? You mean like the liberals who spew out predictable epithets like "homophobic" and "racist" rather than actually talk about ideas?
Violent fundamentalists are those who believe that the "rightness" of their cause justifies even the most heinous of crimes. They are right, and others have no rights.
You mean, like environmentalist whackos?
Whether "religious" and secular, down through the ages violent fundamentalists have been responsible for terrible atrocities--crusaders slaughtering Muslims, inquisitors torturing heretics, Nazis gassing Jews, communists annihilating counterrevolutionaries, capitalists tyrannizing the poor.
Capitalists tyrannizing the poor. Capitalists paying low wages are like Hitler gassing the Jews? Ya gotta love it. Take all of the hardship imposed on the poor by capitalism (child labor, whatever), and it pales to insignificance besides the damage done by fundamentalist liberal social engineers.
Capitalism at least brings prosperity over time to most people, even if it takes generations. The same cannot ever be said of left-wing social engineering.
I note also that the Muslims are here presented only as victims of the Crusades. I guess Muslim fundamentalism is not that widespread.
But I do agree that fundamentalist liberals here and abroad are the biggest long-term problem that the US currently faces. We'll eventually stop the Muslim fundamentalists, but I doubt we'll ever stop the fundamentalist totalitarian leftists in our government and institutions.
23 posted on
08/08/2002 1:42:42 PM PDT by
Maceman
To: tpaine
"Fundamentalism" is actually believing and trying to live by the principles your religion espouses. Clearly a bad thing.
Much better the mealy-mouthed, watered-down, terminally compromised "let's all be nice" socially acceptable version of religion that God's avowed enemies want you to practice in its stead.
To: tpaine
Modern day fundamentalism is an extreme reaction to the complexity and immorality of today's world...Their understandable longing for security leads some to look for a way to cut through the complexities of modern life and reestablish fundamental truths. Fundamentalists try to satisfy their "lust for certitude" by oversimplifying things, by making a passionate commitment to a part, and sometimes to a distortion, of the truth. Fundamentalism may oppose the immorality of today's world, and may appear to oppose its complexity, but how does the author expect to establish his claim that fundamentalism is an extreme reaction etc.? I skimmed the article from the link you provided, but found no support for these claims. Perhaps you would be so kind...?
The world, including fundamentalism, is indeed complex. Perhaps the author is himself reacting to the complexity by trying to see things in simple terms: fundamentalism is a reaction.
And having produced this "theory of fundmentalism" without the benefit of any evidence, he now forces all of his observations to fit into this framework.
Of course, that is how the social "sciences" seem to operate these days.
31 posted on
08/08/2002 3:47:29 PM PDT by
Kyrie
To: tpaine
From the same author....
God will not damn anyone to hell. If people do go to hell it is only because they have knowingly and willingly chosen to separate themselves from God's love. Hell is like a room with the lock on the inside.
Ahhhhh, like a lock on the inside.
Maybe a lock on the inside with the key forever lost and a flame thrower pointed at your butt on full blast while worms eat your flesh.
39 posted on
08/08/2002 4:48:10 PM PDT by
LowOiL
To: tpaine
What irks me are the people who rigidly adhere to the idea that government is not to become involved in certain areas of our life, and are insistent upon a hundred limitations and leave no room for social progress put forward by liberal-minded individuals. They refuse to accept the need for social change, and even if they do, they demand that the government stay out of the proccess. They are obsessed with vague ideas on freedom and liberty, even at the expense of other viewpoints and the greater good of the social order- they refuse to protect people from certain substances in the name of vague "liberty". They seem particularly adherent to an outdated document and the related ideas connected to that document, apparently believing centuries old political beliefs laid down by rich white males can be used to solve the complex social and political problems of our day. < sarcasm >
46 posted on
08/08/2002 5:10:14 PM PDT by
Cleburne
To: All
50 posted on
08/08/2002 6:08:08 PM PDT by
Bob J
To: tpaine
This depends upon what your view of Fundamentalism is...
To: tpaine
the author (along with most people) does not even know what the term "fundamentalist" means. It correct meaning is a conservative protestant who holds to the basic principles of his faith.
Liberals use the word fundamentalist to mean fanatic. Since most fundamentalists are also conservative. So they can attack conservatives and exempt themselves from the same standards of behavior at the same time.
A better writer would have not used the term fundamentalist, but used fanatic instead.
To: tpaine
bump for later
62 posted on
08/08/2002 7:04:38 PM PDT by
Fzob
To: tpaine
Modern day fundamentalism is an extreme reaction to the complexity and immorality of today's world. The knowledge and technology explosion has left many people confused and afraid. Their understandable longing for security leads some to look for a way to cut through the complexities of modern life and reestablish fundamental truths . . .*Yawn*
To: tpaine
When you fund a mentalist, you are giving your hard earned money to a mystic charlatan either directly or through one of those weird government grants that use your tax money.
74 posted on
08/09/2002 9:10:04 AM PDT by
Consort
To: tpaine
They are right, and others have no rights. I do not know if this defines fundamentalists but it sure as hell defines the trouble makers of the world.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson