Fundamentalists Losing Favor with Public <barf alert>

The Data Lounge ^ | Friday, 6 December 2002 | -- C. Barillas, Editor

[doc30]

Fundamentalists Losing Favor with Public
Friday, 6 December 2002

WASHINGTON -- The American Family Association, a far right lobbying group in Washington, released results from a recent survey that shows mainstream Americans see evangelical Christians as one of the least likeable groups in the country.

Small wonder

Researchers from the Barna survey asked respondents how they felt about evangelicals, born-again Christians, ministers, and other groups of people in society. According to the survey, evangelicals came in tenth out of eleven, narrowly beating out prostitutes.

---

Below lawyers and just above prostitutes.

---

Overview of this issue
>	Far Right - National Strategies
Web Sites
>	Christian Coalition
>	GayVote.com
Other Data Lounge stories
>	Washington DC
Send this article to a friend

Fellow evangelical George Barna, president of the Barna Research Group, said religious conservatives "have a lot of work to do" in combating the general public's negative views.

Speaking to distressed members of the AFA, he said, "We may not be 'evil' people, we may not be 'bad' people -- we may be completely loving and wonderful. But somehow we are being perceived by non-Christians in America as a group of people who are not particularly loving [and] not particularly generous, kind, or understanding."

Particularly galling to the AFA constituency was the country's more open embrace of gay men and lesbians. Gay people, a group conservatives frequently slander and oppose politically, ranked significantly higher in the survey than evangelicals.

"Whether that's because the media portray evangelicals in a negative light or because [religious conservatives have] earned that 'badge of dishonor,' if you will, we've got to figure that out," said Barna, "we have to address that."

Affirming results from other studies, the Barna survey also found the more highly educated non-evangelicals are, the less likely they are to have a positive view of fundamentalist Christians.

-- C. Barillas, Editor

[Aarchaeus]

What is wrong with strong Christian beliefs? This country was founded on such beliefs

They frighten the demon-masters who are running so much of curent American culture and government.

[f.Christian]

or more to the point, stop attacking their right to religious freedom. It seems they are simply trying to stop the pendulum which has been swinging towards the aethist left and maybe move it back a few steps. Our country was after all founded by highly religious and moral men who felt that God was a guiding hand in the creation and development of our country.


300 posted on 12/11/2002 6:44 PM PST by iranger

[Phantom Lord]

I said no such thing and believe no such thing. As I have pointed out several times, it is people who think like him and spout such nonsense that get the press time and are portrayed as the voice of evangelicals. It is the wacko extremists that are portrayed as the leaders of the christian conservatives, when they infact are not. It is because of this portrayl that conservative christians are viewed so negatively.

[Jael]

You judge all people on what one person things?

Besides, the world is never going to like Christians.

[Jael]

The conversation on the thread yesterday,was I here? Maybe it was something else.

But the conversation today was condemning someone, for an opinion. And the guy wasn't even here to defend himself.

As Christians, we had better have our sin meters on. In our life and others. It matters.

[Jael]

I have no issue with, nor deny the validity of God's word. I take issue with those who claim to speak for God and want to impose their beliefs on me, through the power of the states guns, and to use those guns against me if I am not behaving in a way that they personally approve of.

Since true Bible Christianity never converts through force, you are probably very safe.

But God has spoken regarding salvation. It is very clear. There are no free rides. You are either saved by Grace, and trusting in Christ, or when you die you will bust Hell wide open.

[Jael]

the ultra-legalist

I am a Fundamentalist and then some. I know many other Fundies. And quite a few well known leaders who have published books, articles or other position papers.

I have never found one that tried to attache any kind of keeping the law to salvation (Legalist.)

I do find that legalism in other mainline religions that count on man's works to earn some kind of (False salvation).

Every Fundy I have ever known, and I have known many, the small and the great, and I have never heard ONE attach the works of the law or man to salvation.

Ephesians 2:8-9  For by grace are ye saved through faith;
and that not of yourselves:
it is the gift of God:
 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

[Jael]

That was an interesting post. A few points to add if I may. The Evangelical is needed by others far more than he actually knows. He just doesn't realize it, because he has low self esteem regarding his importance. If he could figure that out, he would be a lot more powerful.

He's motivated by fear. He thinks it's better to go with a con-servative than just stay home. He's more afraid of Clinton and company then the real danger, which is a faux- conservative who does just what Clinton did and more.

The difference is that the doer is smiling and the evangelicals are liking it while the knife goes in. The con-servative gets more by the Evangelical than he does anyone else, because they are not very smart.

They have become the Rodney King's of the GOP. They want everyone to just get along. So they will prostitute their voting bloc just to have a taste of the high life, a taste of power.

So the Evangelical is needed far more than the real powers let on. If the Evangelical vote bolted, the GOP would have to sit down.

The GOP would never be who or where it was without the silent Moral Majority. They should remember who brought them to the table and stay faithful.

That having been said, the true fundamentalist is probably not as blind about the situation as the evangelical. And they are two different things.

[Constantine XIII]

Here's the hangup: simply believing doesn't get it. The devils in hell believe, and tremble. ;o)

It takes the commitment to the cause of Christ, to give yourself to him entirely and turn away from sin. Only then is the soul cleansed and spritual regeneration take place. It is then that we join the ranks of the saints.

As Christ's followers, we are bound to follow his commandments, the greatest of which are "Love the Lord thy God with all they heart, soul, mind, and strength" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself." If a man believes in and professes Christ, yet goes about causing discord and expressing hatred, not only directly contradicting the word of God but hardening the hearts of those they assail toward Jesus, are they then really what they claim to be? After all, though we are saved by faith, faith without works is dead. And although it is not the place of any man to judge the souls of others, a person in this situation would do well to examine whether or not they really have had the blood applied to thier souls.

Not to be nit-picky, of course, he he.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

But the conversation today was condemning someone, for an opinion. And the guy wasn't even here to defend himself.

Incorrect. The conversation today (yesterday) was about how people view Fundamentalist Christians barely above Prostitutes. The question was why. The answer I was supporting is that there are some whose opinions are so outrageous that it is easy to see why, and we as Fundamentalists have a responsibility to speak out against those sentiments. We are not condemning a person for their opinion, but we should not remain silent to allow our views to be tainted by association with such an opinion.

When a fellow Christian is wrong, we should have no fear to say so. Paul chastized Peter for favoring Jewish followers over Gentile, should Paul have not "condemned" Peter for Peter's opinion?

[Phantom Lord]

I am secure in my salvation and have no fear of what my future holds.

[logos]

Sorry for the delay, and I'm only here today for a short time as well.

I can't help but agree with much that you say. Every human organization, once it reaches "critical mass," as it were, seems to develop its fringe elements. Christianity is certainly no exception to that rule, and in fact, that tends to confirm our contention that humanity is ever corrupt and continuously corrupting; i.e., the original sin doctrine.

However, there is one point that could stand some clarification, in that we agree and disagree at the same time. You closed by saying...

It's pure pragmatic power politics. It's just that simple. That's what matters.

If I were only a politician I would agree wholeheartedly with you on this. Much of life is "pure pragmatic power politics," but for a Christian much of life is so much more than that. In fact, I have often said that it's impossible to be both a good politician and a good Christian at the same time - either political necessity kills one's Christianity, or one's Christianity blunts one's political skills.

On this specific issue I rather think that you and others who take exception to the tactics and comments of FF578 (or whatever his name is - I've never had any dealings with this poster) are overlooking something important to those of us who are serious about our Christianity, to wit: Paul's advice concerning how one corrects a wayward brother. Without going into a whole lot of superfluous detail the first and second remonstrations, at the least, would be made in private, and only publically if nothing else "worked". I won't say whether I've done so in this case; after all, that would remove the privacy element, wouldn't it? :)

Otherwise, you're correct; every organization is responsible for policing itself, much as it's the Senate's job to do something about Lott, and it's our responsibility as FReepers to police Free Republic. Otherwise the fringe elements will drive off everyone else, and what's left won't be worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit.

FWIW, I don't like flame wars. They are responsible, IMO, for reducing some rather important topics to eyesores here on the forum - such things as the Evolution vs. Creation threads, the WOD threads, etc, etc. Those are important topics to discuss, but the majority of FReepers don't even go into such threads any longer because it's known beforehand what is being said and by whom to whom.

I've often said that if a majority of conservatives could vote to change just one rule in the House of Representatives, and that being that no bill could be introduced with more than one topic, nor could any off-topic riders be amended to a bill, that we could take control of this wayward government almost overnight. I think the same is true here at FR; if we could treat each thread on its own merits without introducing existing feuds from other threads, we might actually come to a meeting of the minds every now and then.

Anyway, I appreciate the discussion. Thanks.

[jjm2111]

"...our kids are being taught in school that homosexuality is perfectly fine, infact, THEY might be homosexual...Our little boys are being publically ridiculed for being Boy Scouts--GOOD LITTLE BOYS--and trying to stay "morally pure" by Judeo/Christian standards.

That's terrible. I hope your fighting this tooth and nail in the school. If I were a parent, I wouldn't tolerate the "you might be a homosexua"l type of comment. I also wouldn't want my sons to be ridiculed for being Boy Scouts. I'm an Eagle Scout myself. May I ask who was doing the ridiculing? I don't want you to get me wrong. I'm totally with you on stuff like this.

I just get tired of the people who are so far out there on sexual morality. One individual who shall go unnamed told me that even a husband sucking his wife's toes is perverted and evil. That kind of extremism combined with the constant harping grates on me.

[logos]

PL referred to FF578 in the context of this thread and pinged him at the same time. I think that's fair.

I don't. See #312.

[general_re]

If I were only a politician I would agree wholeheartedly with you on this. Much of life is "pure pragmatic power politics," but for a Christian much of life is so much more than that. In fact, I have often said that it's impossible to be both a good politician and a good Christian at the same time - either political necessity kills one's Christianity, or one's Christianity blunts one's political skills.

I think I've accidentally overstated my case. You are, of course, completely correct - power isn't all that matters in life, but it is the most important thing in politics.

It's a fine line that we all have to walk. On the one hand, none of us is ever going to get every single thing we want in terms of politics and society, not as long as we have neighbors, so some compromise is inevitable. On the other hand, there's Matthew 16:26. It's a tough gig ;)

Without going into a whole lot of superfluous detail the first and second remonstrations, at the least, would be made in private, and only publically if nothing else "worked". I won't say whether I've done so in this case; after all, that would remove the privacy element, wouldn't it? :)

And I certainly cannot fault you for this. That is, besides being the Christian thing to do, eminently reasonable - airing the family's dirty laundy is never the preferred solution, but it is the solution of last resort.

FWIW, I don't like flame wars. They are responsible, IMO, for reducing some rather important topics to eyesores here on the forum - such things as the Evolution vs. Creation threads, the WOD threads, etc, etc. Those are important topics to discuss, but the majority of FReepers don't even go into such threads any longer because it's known beforehand what is being said and by whom to whom.

I thought the crevo threads were nasty. Then I spent some time lurking on the Civil War threads ;)

Unfortunately, we are all human. I am certainly guilty of posting intemperately at times, and I know I'm not alone. Frustrations sometimes come to the fore, and tempers flare, particularly when arguing with the same people day in and day out. Whatever our faults may be around here, lack of passion is certainly not one of them.

But because of that, what would be a minor difference to an outsider gets magnified into a major difference for those involved. My dream is the Rodney King dream, that we'll all get along, by going to bed at night and realizing that we here have far more common interests than differences. By way of a concrete example, on the crevo threads where I will sometimes be found, the disagreements tend to border on schismatic. But regardless of the various perceptions of the problem, I'd bet good money that if I took a poll of the regular players, there would be near-unanimous agreement that the best solution is to end the state monopoly on education.

And while a good flame war is sometimes cathartic, we shouldn't let the signal-to-noise ratio get out of hand. To me, a lot of the argumentation that happens here smacks of counting one's chickens before they've hatched - there's no point in arguing how the spoils should be divided before you've actually got the prize in hand. If anything, it's counterproductive when an inability to agree on such things causes one or more of the players to quit, thereby insuring that everyone gets nothing.

I think the same is true here at FR; if we could treat each thread on its own merits without introducing existing feuds from other threads, we might actually come to a meeting of the minds every now and then.

True. But for some people, learning when not to speak is the hardest lesson of all. Like me ;)

[logos]

It's a fine line that we all have to walk. On the one hand, none of us is ever going to get every single thing we want in terms of politics and society, not as long as we have neighbors, so some compromise is inevitable. On the other hand, there's Matthew 16:26. It's a tough gig ;)

For me, this all ties in with your comment about learning when not to speak. I find it easiest to button my lip when I remind myself of what I will be taking with me after my last breath. Only my soul, and while it will be far from spotless, there are some smudges which are easier to bypass than erase. ;^)

In case we don't meet up betwixt now and then, Merry Christmas, and my God's blessings fall upon you and yours.

[Marysecretary]

Nope. More love and less judgement from Christians would fare us well. I don't mean the touchy-feely Kumbaya kind of love either. Love sometimes is tough-love. Truth is fine as long as it's spoken with love. God is a just God and He's capable of taking care of the problem. I don't have to love sin (homosexuality for instance) but I am commanded to love the sinner. Fundamentalism, unfortunately, is very judgemental. It's always looking OUT to see the sin in others and rarely looks INSIDE at your own sin. Oh, well, maybe one day we'll get it right! M

[general_re]

In case we don't meet up betwixt now and then, Merry Christmas, and my God's blessings fall upon you and yours.

Thank you, and allow me to wish the same for you and yours.

best,

[general_re]

Oh, well, maybe one day we'll get it right!

Sometimes the attempt is the important thing, not whether you actually succeed. ;)

[general_re]

Sometimes the attempt is the important thing, not whether you actually succeed.

Right? ;)