English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

These Fundamentalists have a lot in common, hence the battle for religious supremacy. The rest of us just want a peaceful world where religion has it's place... In your home.

2006-09-21 03:43:35 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Ruth, I am too smart and discerning to believe in an intangible like religion. I leave that sort of thing to sheep.

2006-09-21 04:02:29 · update #1

rosi l, You are damn right. I would very much prefer a world without Religion. Can you imagine, you might even start being decent to fellow humans if you weren't worshipping some damn idol;.

2006-09-21 04:07:29 · update #2

17 answers

Yes. What the Republicans have done using religion asa political tool is unconstitutional and unethical.

2006-09-21 03:45:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 4

Who are "cons"? Are you awake, and paying attention to what's going on? Chavez and his little playmate from Iran are both in this country, slamming our president and our country, have you heard them? I dare say that if you went to either of their countries and spewed the kind of garbage they are your backside would be imprisoned! You are in a free country, able to voice your opinion, in fact, these foreign leaders are also. Instead of the constant whining and bashing, you should be damn grateful that you are here! Actually I think you want a world without religion, and as for peace, it's just human nature. You will never have peace in a world where one nation wants to wipe another off the map. Grow up, stop reciting DNC Talking Points, they are a joke and make you look ridiculous.

Humanist, let's turn the tables just a bit, you might learn tolerance if you believed in something larger than yourself. You're not at all difficult to read, poor thing.

2006-09-21 10:58:13 · answer #2 · answered by rosi l 5 · 2 0

Basing your laws on fundamental religious principles like - don't kill others, don't steal, don't harm others - is hardly the equivalent of forcing women to cover their faces while in public or stoning a girl to death for being raped. There is no moral equivalence.

There is no law in America saying that you have to attend a certain church or any church at all. Religion IS a personal matter in America. The libs are just trying to create fear by making people believe that the conservatives want to force religion on people. That has NEVER happened in America. You have always been free to choose to worship or not worship anyone and anything you choose as long as you do not promote hurting others.

Nice try scaremonger.

2006-09-21 10:45:09 · answer #3 · answered by FozzieBear 7 · 1 1

I sat in a movie theater watching "Schindler's List," asked myself, "Why didn't the Jews fight back?"

Now I know why.

I sat in a movie theater, watching "Pearl Harbor" and asked myself, "Why weren't we prepared?"

Now I know why.

Civilized people cannot fathom, much less predict, the actions of evil people.

On September 11, dozens of capable airplane passengers allowed themselves to be overpowered by a handful of poorly armed terrorists because they did not comprehend the depth of hatred that motivated their captors.

On September 11, thousands of innocent people were murdered because too many Americans naively reject the reality that some nations are dedicated to the dominance of others. Many political pundits, pacifists and media personnel want us to forget the carnage. They say we must focus on the bravery of the rescuers and ignore the cowardice of the killers. They implore us to understand the motivation of the perpetrators. Major television stations have announced they will assist the healing process by not replaying devastating footage of the planes crashing into the Twin Towers.

I will not be manipulated.

I will not pretend to understand.

I will not forget.

I will not forget the liberal media who abused freedom of the press to kick our country when it was vulnerable and hurting.

I will not forget that CBS anchor Dan Rather preceded President Bush's address to the nation with the snide remark, "No matter how you feel about him, he is still our president."

I will not forget that ABC TV anchor Peter Jennings questioned President Bush's motives for not returning immediately to Washington, DC and commented, "We're all pretty skeptical and cynical about Washington."

And I will not forget that ABC's Mark Halperin warned if reporters weren't informed of every little detail of this war, they aren't "likely -- nor should they be expected -- to show deference."

I will not isolate myself from my fellow Americans by pretending an attack on the USS Cole in Yemen was not an attack on the United States of America.

I will not forget the Clinton administration equipped Islamic terrorists and their supporters with the world's most sophisticated telecommunications equipment and encryption technology, thereby compromising America's ability to trace terrorist radio, cell phone, land lines, faxes and modem communications.

I will not be appeased with pointless, quick retaliatory strikes like those perfected by the previous administration.

I will not be comforted by "feel-good, do nothing" regulations like the silly, "Have your bags been under your control?" question at the airport.

I will not be influenced by so called, â€Å“antiwar demonstrators" who exploit the right of __expression to chant anti-American obscenities.

I will not forget the moral victory handed the North Vietnamese by American war protesters who reviled and spat upon the returning soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines.

I will not be softened by the wishful thinking of pacifists who chose reassurance over reality.

I will embrace the wise words of Prime Minister Tony Blair who told the Labor Party conference, "They have no moral inhibition on the slaughter of the innocent. If they could have murdered not 7,000 but 70,000, does anyone doubt they would have done so and rejoiced in it?

There is no compromise possible with such people, no meeting of minds, no point of understanding with such terror. Just a choice: defeat it or be defeated by it. And defeat it we must!"

I will force myself to:

-hear the weeping
-feel the helplessness
-imagine the terror
-sense the panic
-smell the burning flesh
-experience the loss
-remember the hatred.

I sat in a movie theater, watching "Private Ryan" and asked myself, "Where did they find the courage?"

Now I know.

We have no choice. Living without liberty is not living.

2006-09-21 11:19:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Yes they would infact love that ,the go to work and pray on sunday is just what they want . It served america well for years and when blacks got the right to work they then focused on the poor as a whole and not certain races .Before 1970 blacks where paid less then whites in fact all minorities where .
We have growing populations of poor people simply because of racial and today educational differences .

2006-09-21 10:48:20 · answer #5 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 2 1

Most Cons are not Fundamentalists.
In fact many cons are not bush bots!
I know thats a lot for your simple brain to comprehend in one sitting.
I know you guys have to lump people into one category so you can simplify your argument, it just doesnt work that way...much like your line of thinking.

Idyot

2006-09-21 10:49:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

There would be many differences! In an American theocracy, women wouldn't HAVE to wear hijabs. Long skirts, maybe. They would read the Bible, not the Koran!

2006-09-21 10:51:20 · answer #7 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

Yes many do, I couldn't agree with you more, there is little difference between both sets of fundamentalists. "El Diablo" Bush is a cancer on the nation and the planet, the cure begins in November leading up to the election in 2008, although impeachment is a possibility.

http://www.lies.com/wp/images/chickenhawk.jpg

2006-09-21 10:53:19 · answer #8 · answered by Dr.Feelgood 5 · 1 3

Jerry Falwell could be President and Ann Colter could be Vice President.

2006-09-21 10:56:33 · answer #9 · answered by Rja 5 · 0 2

NO (but your question barely invites a civilized response).

And, get honest, if you had religion in your home, don't you think we would be able to tell once in awhile?

2006-09-21 10:48:43 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers