NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.apple.com/trailers/magnolia/jesuscamp/trailer/

wow.


and people ask why I hate religious extremists.

Been showed like, five times. WE KNOW.

I'll just say this...when the one kid said something to the effect of "I got saved when I was 5, because I was just looking for something more out of life", I couldn't help but laugh. I didn't actually watch the whole thing, but that one line in particular struck me. When I was 5 I just wanted more cartoons and cereal, maybe that's just me.

God= infinite cereal and cartoons(?)

God= infinite cereal and cartoons(?)

When I was 5, I definitely would have said yes. BIG YES. :D

Darn, I was hoping for a thread about a guy on a crucifix wearing a Carmen Miranda fruit hat.

I haven't seen it before. That's scary. :eek:

I've heard great things about this...actually, this clip interests me more than any:
http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/jc_video.swf?vidURL=http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/flvs/Tory1.flv

God= infinite cereal and cartoons(?)

now that i'm over 20, if god = more porn, beer & sex, i'm there! :D ;)

now that i'm over 20, if god = more porn, beer & sex, i'm there! :D ;)

Throw in the cereal and cartoons, and I'm there



yep...I'm still a 6 year old at heart.

I've heard great things about this...actually, this clip interests me more than any:
http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/jc_video.swf?vidURL=http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/flvs/Tory1.flv

That little girl takes herself way too seriously.

When I dance, I really have to make sure that that's god. Because people will notice when I'm just dancing for the flesh.

:rolleyes: Bloody hell, she's just a little girl.

It's weird cause I wasn't scared at all. In fact, I think it is awesome that kids are so profoudnly moved by their faith. I was raised that way, and my faith has helped me greatly throughout my adolescence and adulthood. I just can't see why anyone is scared of people who believe there is something bigger than Washington.

That little girl takes herself way too seriously.



:rolleyes: Bloody hell, she's just a little girl.

thats why it interests me so much...there is definatly more to it...I want to see the family, and see how much she understands what she is saying, or if it is parroting.

doesn't help that she looks alot like one of my old campers

It's weird cause I wasn't scared at all. In fact, I think it is awesome that kids are so profoudnly moved by their faith. I was raised that way, and my faith has helped me greatly throughout my adolescence and adulthood. I just can't see why anyone is scared of people who believe there is something bigger than Washington.
believing in a god, fine.

Wanting children to love god so much they are willing to take up arms and kill/die for their chosen diety? Not so fine.

That little girl takes herself way too seriously.
Taking yourself too seriously is what religion is all about.

thats why it interests me so much...there is definatly more to it...I want to see the family, and see how much she understands what she is saying, or if it is parroting.

doesn't help that she looks alot like one of my old campers

Yes, the words she is saying seem far too adult for a child of her age. I also wondered how much of it she really understands.

Taking yourself too seriously is what religion is all about.

To me, there is a seriously disturbing edge to the way she speaks there. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it's unnatural.

To me, there is a seriously disturbing edge to the way she speaks there. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it's unnatural.

Indeed. I see and hear it all the time in my area. It unnerved me when I first came here, but now I am used to it.

Well, this is very different from the bible camp I went to as a kid.

Well, this is very different from the bible camp I went to as a kid.

Hell, I work at a YMCA camp...the most religion I've heard is in their mission statement (To instill Christian values through programs encouaging the character values of Caring, Respect, Honesty, Responsibility, and Fun) and singing God Bless America on the last day (admittedly, that was spontaneous, and not actually camp sanctioned)

Scary. Very scary.

Indoctrinating kids into fundamentalism... that won't end well.

Hell, I work at a YMCA camp...the most religion I've heard is in their mission statement (To instill Christian values through programs encouaging the character values of Caring, Respect, Honesty, Responsibility, and Fun) and singing God Bless America on the last day (admittedly, that was spontaneous, and not actually camp sanctioned)

Originally, bible camp was all crafts and games. We's learn a bible story and then make a craft about it. Later, I was sent to a Christian sleep away camp. Other than having to go to chapel every day and have one "study session," it was not really that diffrent from a normal camp.

Originally, bible camp was all crafts and games. We's learn a bible story and then make a craft about it. Later, I was sent to a Christian sleep away camp. Other than having to go to chapel every day and have one "study session," it was not really that diffrent from a normal camp.
yeah...I have some friends who do more of the "hard core" bible camp...by that, I mean the sleep aways...which do have some religion from what I gather.

YMCA camps...depends which one, but most are pretty tame. They do some religious stuff inherently because they are a Christian organization...but they also accept everyone because...well...that is more Christian than rejecting someone of another religion

this camp....scares me.

Even in that short clip, you can see them teaching to hate...

Two kinds of people, for and against...

If you ain't for them controlling everything about you, you're against them. Worse, these people want war and violence, they want revelations to come true in their lifetime... screw waiting for jesus, they want to go get him!


Scary, very scary,... hope the border is secure.

There are two kinds of people in this world, those who love Jesus and those who don't
This is very devisive rhetoric.

Where should we be putting our focus? I'll tell you where our enemies are putting it. They're putting it on the kids. You go into Palestine and they're kids to camps like we take our kids to bible camps and they're taking hand grenades into their hands.
Notice how she herself draws a parallel between Palestenian terrorists and what she envisions for the Christian Church.

How many want to be those who would give up their lives for Jesus.
It is regrettable that anyone has ever had to make the decision to accept martyrdome for their faith. It is a situation that should be entirely avoided, if possible. Certainly, children should be protected from making this kind of grave decision. It seems that he wants to inspire a generation in which the threat of martydome is seen as a desirable predicimate.

We're being trained to be God's Army.
This wouldn't be so bad, if I didn't have the suspiscion that he means it in a more literal sense.

You are the beginnings of a movement. A race of righteuos judges.
After he said this the children started chanting, "Righteous judges, righteous judges..." These children are being taught that they have the power to pass judgement on their fellow man.

This means war! This means war! Are you a part of it or not?
More devisive rhetoric, this time envoking war.


Conservative Christians have convinced themselves that Christianity isn't succeptible to the same kind violent extremism present among certain Islamic groups. I think what we have in these "Jesus Camps" is the set of ingredients that could ignite a new Christian terrorism.

Conservative Christians have convinced themselves that Christianity isn't succeptible to the same kind violent extremism present among certain Islamic groups. I think what we have in these "Jesus Camps" is the set of ingredients that could ignite a new Christian terrorism.
If they really are willing to seize power violently, they will have to kill me, and I won’t give them the pleasure of fighting back. I suggest others do the same. If there is a God, and if that God is benevolent, I truly doubt he’d let into heaven people who could callously kill their fellow man in cold blood.

If they really are willing to seize power violently, they will have to kill me, and I won’t give them the pleasure of fighting back. I suggest others do the same. If there is a God, and if that God is benevolent, I truly doubt he’d let into heaven people who could callously kill their fellow man in cold blood.

I dont believe in God.

So, if a group of them come for me, to "burn the Heathen" or something, I say, "Take as many of them with you as you can."

I dont care what group it is, what religion or organization.
If you come for me, with the intention of harming, or removing me from my home, for reasons of dissention, IE, "Your not with us, so off you go!", I will do everything I can to resist you.

I will not go quietly.
I will not accept death meekly.
If you want my blood....take it, if you can.

How much different would the Holocaust have been if EVERY single Jew who was abducted fought tooth and nail?

Resistance is never futile.

How much different would the Holocaust have been if EVERY single Jew who was abducted fought tooth and nail?
With regards to this question, it's important to remember not to blame the victims in a situation like the Holocaust. Most of them weren't exactly informed up front about what was going to happen to them.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/magnolia/jesuscamp/trailer/

wow.

and people ask why I hate religious extremists.

Someone should call up Al Qaeda and ask for more planes...

Now really, who will ever stop the religious retards? Does anyone imagine what will happen when they go on as they do? Nationalsocialism, Fascism, Communism are nothing compared to the evilness of "believers".

http://www.apple.com/trailers/magnolia/jesuscamp/trailer/

wow.


and people ask why I hate religious extremists.

And coming soon is the sequel: "Madrassa!" Set in a dirt-floored building in Pakistan, where children are forced to recite Koranic verses ten hours a day, learn nothing of any value to the 21st century, and listen to hate-filled imams tell them that Jews are dogs and apes, that all infidels must die, and that blowing yourself up on a bus is a sure ticket to paradise and 72 virgins (that they wouldn't know what to do with anyway).

Oops, I forgot. It would take balls to actually make that film.

BTW: do you hate all "religious extremists," or just the Christian ones?

believing in a god, fine.

Wanting children to love god so much they are willing to take up arms and kill/die for their chosen diety? Not so fine.

You misunderstand the Christian message. Christians believe they are in the figurative army of God, a spiritual army, not a literal one. No Christian child I know has ever been taught to take up arms for their faith against unbelievers, and I am pretty radical. They also believe that one ought to be willing to die for their faith. Christians do not want to die for their faith, but they will if they have to.

I personally feel that the little snippit I saw was created to shake the tail feathers of those who are not Christian.

i hate people that say stuff like "i am saved" and then they give their reason :bullshit:, i cant stand people like this who think they are above all other people because they beleive in Jesus. maybe they should actually read the Bible and stop trying to be attention whores

You misunderstand the Christian message. Christians believe they are in the figurative army of God, a spiritual army, not a literal one. No Christian child I know has ever been taught to take up arms for their faith against unbelievers, and I am pretty radical.

I think the term you're grasping for is "reactionary".

I dont believe in God.
Neither do I.
So, if a group of them come for me, to "burn the Heathen" or something, I say, "Take as many of them with you as you can."

I dont care what group it is, what religion or organization.
If you come for me, with the intention of harming, or removing me from my home, for reasons of dissention, IE, "Your not with us, so off you go!", I will do everything I can to resist you.

I will not go quietly.
I will not accept death meekly.
If you want my blood....take it, if you can.

How much different would the Holocaust have been if EVERY single Jew who was abducted fought tooth and nail?

Resistance is never futile.
Returning their violence with your own will do nothing but make their acts easier to justify.

You misunderstand the Christian message. Christians believe they are in the figurative army of God, a spiritual army, not a literal one. No Christian child I know has ever been taught to take up arms for their faith against unbelievers, and I am pretty radical. They also believe that one ought to be willing to die for their faith. Christians do not want to die for their faith, but they will if they have to.

I personally feel that the little snippit I saw was created to shake the tail feathers of those who are not Christian.

no, the woman in the movie very clearly stated that she wants children to be as dedicated as the children in the middle east, right after citing the fact that they go to camps to learn how to blow themselves up.

Additionally, the woman in the movie is one of the biggest advocates for it, and has approved all of the trailers. Mind you, she makes no money off of it, and certainly wouldn't endorse something that slanders her.

no, the woman in the movie very clearly stated that she wants children to be as dedicated as the children in the middle east, right after citing the fact that they go to camps to learn how to blow themselves up.

Additionally, the woman in the movie is one of the biggest advocates for it, and has approved all of the trailers. Mind you, she makes no money off of it, and certainly wouldn't endorse something that slanders her.

Apparently, you misunderstand her point. And as much as I want to explain it, I can't. I can just tell you about the history of Christianity and its fundamentalists. The United States was founded with Christian fundamentalism as a significant part. The most fundamentalists among them were the Baptists and the Quakers, who rejected the Puritans because they felt that the Anglican church was so evil it could not be reformed. Among both of these strict fundamentalist sects was a great and overwhelming doctrine of pacifism. The Amish and the Mennonites are the descendants of these with their doctrine of Christian non-resistance.

There is then a striking difference between Muslim fundamentalism and Christian fundamentalism. The worst atrocities committed by Christians were during a time when the Bible was kept from the average Christian. As soon as the Bible was made available by the printing press to everyday Christians, fundamentalism gained ground, and there was a resurgance of Christian pacifism. In the Islamic world, those who are most strictly abiding by their Koran happen to endorse or ignore the actions of terrorists.

Then, it only stands to reason that we, as the Bible states, are not wrestling against flesh and blood, but against spiritual wickedness in high places. By using literal warfare as a backdrop, Christians are able to communicate the message that we must struggle against the forces that seek to undermine the foundation of the West: secularism, humanism, and Islamic fundamentalism. No mainstream Christian fundamentalist advocates some literal armed militia. Jesus himself explained that while we are at war, it is not an earthly war, but a spiritual war.

There is a direct correlation in my mind between the fact that Islamic extremists are arming their five-year-olds and the idea that we ought to empower and educate our Christian kids. Hopefully, in the future, when our Christian kids are taken hostage by Muslims, they won't quickly denounce their faith and pledge to Islam, as some reporters recently have.

Returning their violence with your own will do nothing but make their acts easier to justify.
'cept maybe saving your own life.

Actually, that's not entirely true. Violence maybe will worsen things. But one can fight without being aggressive, and when the aims of your attackers are exclusively to remove everything that they cannot seize, there is no benefit in laying down and accepting it.

wouldnt things be easier if we all praised the one god?

-Snip-
We know the allegory. Noble sentiments, perhaps, but ones easily twisted to political ends. Subservience to God or the forces of that which is fair and noble and unquestioning loyalty to the church and organisation are short hops from each other in the grip of the right orator. Support of one can in subtle ways be made to lead to support of the other. Such is the power of conceptual engineering, both in politics and in preaching. Under the right speaker, the metaphorical could become the literal in an instant.

I would be wary of tying Jesus too tightly to the Church. The man has authority as a teacher above and beyond that which the political Christianity tie to him through "the commission", and he would not necessarily have approved of everything people have done under the banner with his name on it. There has been a worrying tendency in the organisation (particularly following the "WWJD" fad), as in Islam, to claim God's authority for themselves, and it is something that people both following and at a safe distance from the Banner of Christ would do well to watch out for.

'cept maybe saving your own life.

Actually, that's not entirely true. Violence maybe will worsen things. But one can fight without being aggressive, and when the aims of your attackers are exclusively to remove everything that they cannot seize, there is no benefit in laying down and accepting it.

Maybe that’d work out for you. As for me, I’d die not fighting.

Maybe that’d work out for you. As for me, I’d die not fighting.
I'm afraid if you don't fight to protect yourself, someone else will step in for you. You're welcome to accept that if you can and let them take that risk on, but is it worth it?

And coming soon is the sequel: "Madrassa!" Set in a dirt-floored building in Pakistan, where children are forced to recite Koranic verses ten hours a day, learn nothing of any value to the 21st century, and listen to hate-filled imams tell them that Jews are dogs and apes, that all infidels must die, and that blowing yourself up on a bus is a sure ticket to paradise and 72 virgins (that they wouldn't know what to do with anyway).

Oops, I forgot. It would take balls to actually make that film.

BTW: do you hate all "religious extremists," or just the Christian ones?

All.


And to be honest: these people scare me more than the islamic extremists.

these people are turning the next generation of american voters into mindless christbots. "righteous judges"? Judges that will enforce the laws of christianity over my nation?

These people are teaching their children to turn America into a theocracy.

I'm afraid if you don't fight to protect yourself, someone else will step in for you. You're welcome to accept that if you can and let them take that risk on, but is it worth it?
If I don't endorse their actions, then I am not responsible.

All.


And to be honest: these people scare me more than the islamic extremists.

these people are turning the next generation of american voters into mindless christbots. "righteous judges"? Judges that will enforce the laws of christianity over my nation?

These people are teaching their children to turn America into a theocracy.

Don't bother responding to Meir Kahane Junior there. He's of the typical Bushevik mindset that only brown religious people are capable of violence and despotism.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/magnolia/jesuscamp/trailer/

wow.


and people ask why I hate religious extremists.

It's called "indoctrination" and every social movement does it.

I'd have a hard time keeping my food down in the theater seeing this.

I'd have a hard time keeping my food down in the theater seeing this.

But nothing will be done about this growing problem. I mean after all, this country lets cults like Scientology, the Moonies, and the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter Day Saints have a field day as long as nobody in charge is brown and they say "Praise God" instead "Allah Akbar." If it had been about fundie Muslim Camps you can guarandamntee that they would be heavily investigated and shut down.

The country is sadly trapped in a schlocky sequel called "Red Scare 2: The Brown Scare" and the wrist slap that these Jesus Camps will get if any is a symptom of it.

I'm glad the only thing my parents indoctrinated me in was how to think for myself. I can't stand the fact that this kid has alresdy given up on that.

I'm glad the only thing my parents indoctrinated me in was how to think for myself. I can't stand the fact that this kid has alresdy given up on that.

I foresee that they will learn how to do that in their teen years. Hopefully they will abandon this madness by then..

I foresee that they will learn how to do that in their teen years. Hopefully they will abandon this madness by then..

You're far more optimistic than I am. Young is when you want to get them, so that by the time they hit their teens they couldn't even conceive of anything else.

I'm glad the only thing my parents indoctrinated me in was how to think for myself. I can't stand the fact that this kid has alresdy given up on that.

Just because a kid has a profound belief in God means she is not thinking for hereself? Hmmm.... I am much more scared of rabid secularists than these Christian fundamentalists. Remember most of the atrocities committed in the last century were by Atheist regimes (China & Russia, to name two).

Your statement implies that deeply religious people can not be critical thinkers. By making such a statement you are calling many progressive thinkers mindless robots.

Let me pose a question: where you rather run out of gas? The predominately Christian inner city Tuscaloosa or the predominately secular inner city San Francisco? Those people who are "indoctrinated to think for themselves" usually happen to be the most hate filled bigoted self-righteous people I know.

Just because a kid has a profound belief in God means she is not thinking for hereself? Hmmm.... I am much more scared of rabid secularists than these Christian fundamentalists. Remember most of the atrocities committed in the last century were by Atheist regimes (China & Russia, to name two).

the atrocities they committed had nothing to do with their lack of religion

there is no great athiest tome that commands us to kill people. If there were, it would be called a religoin.

when religoius extremists do something in the name of their god, it is entirely evident that religion is the cause of their actions.

nobody ever killed in the name of athiesm.

It's called "indoctrination" and every social movement does it.
Doesn't make indoctriniation of children any less disturbing, shameful, or dangerous. Particularly considering the other social movements in the Middle East this particular camp is resembling.

You're far more optimistic than I am. Young is when you want to get them, so that by the time they hit their teens they couldn't even conceive of anything else.

I am so happy I was "indoctrinated" by Christian fundamentalists in my younger years. My faith in Christ has allowed me to rapidly move up the hierarchy of needs. I am well aware of who I am, and who I need to be. I was able to do this in spite of a very turmulous house, and a verbally abusive father. Whenever I needed someone, He was always there to guide me. By studying His word, and heeding his commandments, I was able to develop a healthy psyche. When I began studying Maslow in college, I realized that my faith had given me an advantage of the secular socialist victim mentality. In Christ, I had learned that I must be accountable for my actions. I could not rely on the shortcomings of my childhood to explain away my less than honorable behavior. Christianity also teaches us not to stop at Maslow's hierarchy, but to step further. Self-actualization is not the final step, but Christians must transcend self to benefit their community around them. Austrian psychiatrist Vincent Frankl spoke of this self-transcendence as he stated that one only becomes human by "forgetting himself and giving himself, overlooking himself and focusing outward."

One important thing about Frankl is that he believed, as I do, that focus on self is ultimate self-defeating and leads to many other psychological phenomena. I find this interesting because I can attribute my own normalcy to the fact that I was taught at a early age to place my faith in something larger, and this allowed me to transcend the problems around me.

I don't know and don't care if I can or can not conceive of anything else; what I do know is that I would hate the kind of person I would have become without Christ. I know what evil exists in my heart. Daily I struggle to suppress my flesh and become productive in His kingdom. Without this struggle, I am not sure that I would be the kind of man I am today: high honors college graduate, faithful husband, homeowner, etc. It is highly probable that I would have ended up a druggie like many of my brothers. I am the only one among five boys that has not spent time in jail, and I very proud of that fact. But I do not think that reality would have been possible without Christ.

the atrocities they committed had nothing to do with their lack of religion

This is ridiculous. The atrocities committed against Christians in China were often directly attributed to anti-religious laws created by the Marxist. China had overtly anti-religious laws until 1976. Today, they do it secretly. So, it has a direct correlation with hostility towards and against religion. I think you need to actually read what these states did, and revise your statement.

You can say these are exceptions, but, of all the governments in the world, these are two very different cultures, only linked by Atheist communism. The US is the only government with Christian fundamentalism as a significant part of its foundation. Which state is more hospitable to people?

-inspirational snip-

It's nice to know that Christ did something good for you. Please realize, though, that there are those of us who manage to keep ourselves out of trouble, avoid drugs, and generally turn out to be nice people without him. Some turn to other religions, others like myself prefer to learn more before making a lifetime commitment like the one those kids are being taught to make before they even reach adolescence. We understand the need for a belief in something greater, but we don't like the idea that such a belief demands the suppression or eradication of other beliefs.

These kids aren't just being taught the Bible or Christianity, they are being taught to fight against any other idea that conflicts with what they've learned. The camp teaches them to seek conflict rather than understanding or tolerance. Such attitudes do not let these children live in peace, nor will they let people that hold views they feel conflict with their religion live in peace. It's not the religion that is at issue here, it's simply the attitude they are being taught that will breed conflict and intolerance.

<snip>
You are a very good illustration of Marx then:

"Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."

Describes you well there.
And of course, everything is possible without any idea of a deity.
Note Einstein's concept of God compared to Pat Robertson's.
Einstein is a lot more mellow, isn't he?
You'll also note that the rashest thing Einstein ever said is "God does not play dice with the universe".
Compare that to Pat Robertson: (looking at Wikiquote, I see that all of his quotes are extreme and it would probably be a good idea to just link you the whole page.)
But I will use one of his quotes as a link:"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson)"

EDIT:
Just in case it isn't sinking in:
The most extreme thing Einstein ever did was insult quantum mechanics.
The most extreme thing Pat Robertson ever did was call feminists (paraphrase) "adulterers, murderers, witches, communists, and lesbians".
Think about this for a second.
After you've finished, do you finally realize why we hate Christian fundementalists?

You can say these are exceptions, but, of all the governments in the world, these are two very different cultures, only linked by Atheist communism. The US is the only government with Christian fundamentalism as a significant part of its foundation. Which state is more hospitable to people?


US was founded on christian fundamentalism? really?

so the part of the bill of rights where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" is a christian fundamentalist philosophy?

If this were a christian nation, I would have expected something more aong the lines of "Thou shall have no other gods before me"

and what about that treaty way back in the beginning of the nation where John Adams says "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"
[seriously: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html article 11, check it out.]


you also say that the atrocities of China and Russia were caused by their athiesm, right?

tell me which of these words "religious opression" fits under better:

Atheism, in its broadest sense, is the absence of belief in the existence of deities. A narrower definition includes only those who believe that deities do not exist, and excludes those who hold no position on the question (see agnostics and other non-theists). In other words, an "atheist" can be defined as either:

Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is a direct opposition to theism. The word has had a range of applications; in secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to belief in any deity, while in theistic ones, it sometimes refers to opposition to an actual god or gods.

you need to learn the difference between "I don't believe there is a God" and "nobody should believe there is a God"

This is ridiculous. The atrocities committed against Christians in China were often directly attributed to anti-religious laws created by the Marxist. China had overtly anti-religious laws until 1976. Today, they do it secretly. So, it has a direct correlation with hostility towards and against religion. I think you need to actually read what these states did, and revise your statement.
From this statement I would take away the impression that Marxism is the culprit of anti-religious atrocities in China, not atheism. Atheism exists are a part of the much larger Marxist ideology, and to place the blame for the violence in China squarely on atheism, you need to find someway to show that Marxism isn't inherently anti-religious on its own.
You can say these are exceptions, but, of all the governments in the world, these are two very different cultures, only linked by Atheist communism. The US is the only government with Christian fundamentalism as a significant part of its foundation.
Fundamentalism isn't part of our foundation. It was specifically written out of our foundations when the Constitution was amended with the Bill of Rights. There certainly are influences of the Christian majority within the United States upon certain laws and regulations, but fundamentalism has never been a strong force in our government.

Which state is more hospitable to people?

Define which people you are talking about. We are building a wall across our southern border to keep the people there out, we are waging war in the Middle East to kill people there, and we are holding people in secret facilities around the world to learn about other people they know so we can kill them. America certainly is not hospitable to certain people, and rather suspicious of most other people that aren't American

Perhaps I need to watch the whole movie to get it. So far, I find nothing different in the movie than what I learned growing up. I am still at war with rabid secularism, I do not tolerate the idea of banishing Christianity from the public square. I do believe that we are in an eternal conflict with dark forces. I also concur that some are decent people without direct Christian influence. (My uncle is a retired Mechanical Engineering professor from Stanford University, and an agnostic) I tolerate individuals who have differing viewpoints until they want to force them on me.

Throughout all my Bible teaching as a youth, being part of a S.W.A.T. (Spiritual Warfare Awareness Training) team, and other events that had a direct correlation to the metaphor of war, I never once thought of this struggle as one in which Christians were called to take up arms against anyone else. Instead, I believed that the people who were fighting on the other side were unfortunate victims of the long struggle against God. To bring literal violence against them would mean that we could not recruit them for our side.

Once again, maybe I need to watch the whole movie. Theologically, I struggle with some of the soteriological views the show seems to mirror, but the metaphor of war has been employed by Biblical scholars since Peter and Paul both used it in the first century. To ignore it means to ask Christians to cut a large portion of their Bible out.

Fundamentalism isn't part of our foundation. It was specifically written out of our foundations when the Constitution was amended with the Bill of Rights. There certainly are influences of the Christian majority within the United States upon certain laws and regulations, but fundamentalism has never been a strong force in our government.

You are just plainly ignorant of the foundation of the country. The country began as colonies. Puritanism was the direct foundation of Mass and Connecticut. New Hampshire was founded by fundmentalists who followed the Antinomianism of Anne Hutchinson. Rhode Island was formed by John Clarke and Roger Williams, Baptists who did not like the fact that Mass was not paying the Indians for their land. Pennsylvania was the brain child of John Penn, another Christian fundamentalist. That makes five out of thirteen colonies, a significant portion of our foundation.

The Bill of Rights as approved by the first thirteen colonies limited the federal government from stamping its approval on a state church. "Congress shall make no law . . . " you know what it states. But the balance of powers meant that this freedom, not given to the federal government was retained as the right of each state. Put in historical perspective, states had the right to maintain a state church, and this right by individual states was not challanged until the last century.

Since the US government is an interesting exercise in democracy as a struggle between state and federal government, you can not ignore the obvious fundamentalism that was the foundation of several state governments. It was not written out of the foundations, but passed to the states to regulate as they deemed neccesary.

Perhaps I need to watch the whole movie to get it. So far, I find nothing different in the movie than what I learned growing up. I am still at war with rabid secularism, I do not tolerate the idea of banishing Christianity from the public square. I do believe that we are in an eternal conflict with dark forces. I also concur that some are decent people without direct Christian influence. (My uncle is a retired Mechanical Engineering professor from Stanford University, and an agnostic) I tolerate individuals who have differing viewpoints until they want to force them on me.
.The bold parts would seem to be a contradiction...it is okay for you to force your ideas into the public square, but not for others?

You are just plainly ignorant of the foundation of the country. The country began as colonies. Puritanism was the direct foundation of Mass and Connecticut. New Hampshire was founded by fundmentalists who followed the Antinomianism of Anne Hutchinson. Rhode Island was formed by John Clarke and Roger Williams, Baptists who did not like the fact that Mass was not paying the Indians for their land. Pennsylvania was the brain child of John Penn, another Christian fundamentalist. That makes five out of thirteen colonies, a significant portion of our foundation.That was the founding of the colonies. By the time the nation was founded, Puritanism had evolved into Congregationalism, and lost most of the radical ideals.

The bold parts would seem to be a contradiction...it is okay for you to force your ideas into the public square, but not for others?

I could be very wrong, but I think what he means is that we Christians hear a lot of "do it in your house" and "I hate walking by churches, they offend me" and "quit praying at the restraunt before you eat it disturbs me" and "aren't you supposed to be hiding in a closet somewhere?"

Perhaps I need to watch the whole movie to get it. So far, I find nothing different in the movie than what I learned growing up. I am still at war with rabid secularism, I do not tolerate the idea of banishing Christianity from the public square. I do believe that we are in an eternal conflict with dark forces. I also concur that some are decent people without direct Christian influence. (My uncle is a retired Mechanical Engineering professor from Stanford University, and an agnostic) I tolerate individuals who have differing viewpoints until they want to force them on me.

Throughout all my Bible teaching as a youth, being part of a S.W.A.T. (Spiritual Warfare Awareness Training) team, and other events that had a direct correlation to the metaphor of war, I never once thought of this struggle as one in which Christians were called to take up arms against anyone else. Instead, I believed that the people who were fighting on the other side were unfortunate victims of the long struggle against God. To bring literal violence against them would mean that we could not recruit them for our side.

Once again, maybe I need to watch the whole movie. Theologically, I struggle with some of the soteriological views the show seems to mirror, but the metaphor of war has been employed by Biblical scholars since Peter and Paul both used it in the first century. To ignore it means to ask Christians to cut a large portion of their Bible out.
You seem to have a good grasp of the metaphorical use of war, but the camp in this movie has taken it out of its metaphorical use. Not to the extreme of armed conflict, but to the realm of ideological conflict in the democratic process. The war these children seem to be learning about is one in which Christian ideals are pitted against other ideals and they are being prepared to wage this ideological war in a political arena.

As children, they write letters and protest, engaging in what are essentially political activities to declare and defend their ideals, rather than witnessing or serving as examples to others. One girl is commited to campaigning against abortion rather than simply making a choice for herself not have one. I'm worried about the translation of the use of political means to the kid's adult years, when they might try to use political power as a means of enforcing their ideals, or try to move into using legal means.

I could be very wrong, but I think what he means is that we Christians hear a lot of "do it in your house" and "I hate walking by churches, they offend me" and "quit praying at the restraunt before you eat it disturbs me" and "aren't you supposed to be hiding in a closet somewhere?"In an ideal world, we wouldn't have to see people running around with filter-masks and "God hates fags" signs OR hear comments like that. :(

In an ideal world, we wouldn't have to see people running around with filter-masks and "God hates fags" signs OR hear comments like that. :(

I don't much care about the comments, I care about the people who are trying to force their idea of "right" on my life.

You are just plainly ignorant of the foundation of the country. The country began as colonies. Puritanism was the direct foundation of Mass and Connecticut. New Hampshire was founded by fundmentalists who followed the Antinomianism of Anne Hutchinson. Rhode Island was formed by John Clarke and Roger Williams, Baptists who did not like the fact that Mass was not paying the Indians for their land. Pennsylvania was the brain child of John Penn, another Christian fundamentalist. That makes five out of thirteen colonies, a significant portion of our foundation.

And yet the founders of those colonies had no hand in writing the Constitution. Their legacies in their particular colonies were not of religion, but of infrastructure and law. Religious beliefs likewise did not get written into the Consitution, yet laws and structure did.

The Bill of Rights as approved by the first thirteen colonies limited the federal government from stamping its approval on a state church. "Congress shall make no law . . . " you know what it states. But the balance of powers meant that this freedom, not given to the federal government was retained as the right of each state. Put in historical perspective, states had the right to maintain a state church, and this right by individual states was not challanged until the last century.

Since the US government is an interesting exercise in democracy as a struggle between state and federal government, you can not ignore the obvious fundamentalism that was the foundation of several state governments. It was not written out of the foundations, but passed to the states to regulate as they deemed neccesary.
I'm certainly not denying the Christian roots of the laws on some states, but the debate beforehand was about the country, not individual states. Our country is not fundamentalist, not by any leap of imagination, even if some of our states have been.

The bold parts would seem to be a contradiction...it is okay for you to force your ideas into the public square, but not for others?

That was the founding of the colonies. By the time the nation was founded, Puritanism had evolved into Congregationalism, and lost most of the radical ideals.

To have a public faith is not to force it on others. But, I have sat in state funded classrooms where the faith of the instructor (usually Atheism) was the only tolerable faith. I can post here statements from state-funded textbooks that plainly are anti-Christian. I can express my faith in the public square without forcing anyone else to concur. What I object to is people that want to completely banish faith, because they assume that faithful people do not think.

Let me state an example, so this can be more easily understood. Evolution is an intergral part of science. The theory of evolution should be taught in school, with all of its hypotheses. Some hypotheses in evolution are debatable, others are very concretely scientific. Any right-thinking individual would have to agree with natural selection and adaptation, both critical parts of evolutionary theory. The origins of life could be explained by either creation and natural evolution. Since neither can be observed, neither is actually scientific.

Why then, in my anthropology book was this article included: "Answers to Creationist Nonsense." This position is an intolerant position that calls faith in God nonsensical. Because I attended a state-sponsored school, the tax dollars of Christians, Jews, and Muslims, many of whom believe in specialized creation, went to fund anti-religious bigotry. This is an example of secularists not simply expressing their opinion, but forcing it. And I oppose vehemently. If these secularists want a secular institution, then they can start one, and fund it like others do- from private donors. If any Christian professor tried to force his ideas of Creationism in a public college, he would and should be fired. But there exists a double standard. Share it, fine, but don't force it.

I could be very wrong, but I think what he means is that we Christians hear a lot of "do it in your house" and "I hate walking by churches, they offend me" and "quit praying at the restraunt before you eat it disturbs me" and "aren't you supposed to be hiding in a closet somewhere?"
OHHH...if that is the case, then, of course, I retract my comment.

To some extent, I agree with the "do it in your house", as in, don't expect the town to put up a christmas tree for you or to have prayers before graduation...you can do that in your house.

Growing up in New England, I love churches. They are so much a part of the standard town up here. I actually just got back from apple picking, and the view of a bunch of white steeples above the fall leaves is beautiful.

And pray wherever you want. No one can really stop you *shrug*

OHHH...if that is the case, then, of course, I retract my comment.

To some extent, I agree with the "do it in your house", as in, don't expect the town to put up a christmas tree for you or to have prayers before graduation...you can do that in your house.

Growing up in New England, I love churches. They are so much a part of the standard town up here. I actually just got back from apple picking, and the view of a bunch of white steeples above the fall leaves is beautiful.

And pray wherever you want. No one can really stop you *shrug*

yeah, I don't think that the town should put up a Christmas tree either.... but that's not what most people mean, they mean that I shouldn't read my Bible on the bus.... you know because it might scare the children. ;)

To have a public faith is not to force it on others. But, I have sat in state funded classrooms where the faith of the instructor (usually Atheism) was the only tolerable faith. I can post here statements from state-funded textbooks that plainly are anti-Christian. I can express my faith in the public square without forcing anyone else to concur. What I object to is people that want to completely banish faith, because they assume that faithful people do not think.Sorry about that...I think I misunderstood you, but Smunkee set me straight:)

Let me state an example, so this can be more easily understood. Evolution is an intergral part of science. The theory of evolution should be taught in school, with all of its hypotheses. Some hypotheses in evolution are debatable, others are very concretely scientific. Any right-thinking individual would have to agree with natural selection and adaptation, both critical parts of evolutionary theory. The origins of life could be explained by either creation and natural evolution. Since neither can be observed, neither is actually scientific.The only issue I see here is that something like the big bang is scientific because of the way it is designed...it is a falsifiable theory, even if we don't have the technology or methods to disprove it right now. Creationism/ID/etc can't be proven wrong, and therefore can't be scientific. Creationism says "god created the universe. He told us he did, and so it must be right". That can never be tested, and so isn't science.

Why then, in my anthropology book was this article included: "Answers to Creationist Nonsense." This position is an intolerant position that calls faith in God nonsensical. Because I attended a state-sponsored school, the tax dollars of Christians, Jews, and Muslims, many of whom believe in specialized creation, went to fund anti-religious bigotry. This is an example of secularists not simply expressing their opinion, but forcing it. And I oppose vehemently. If these secularists want a secular institution, then they can start one, and fund it like others do- from private donors. If any Christian professor tried to force his ideas of Creationism in a public college, he would and should be fired. But there exists a double standard. Share it, fine, but don't force it.
wow...that is pretty bad. But that isn't secularism. That is atheism being pushed as religion, which is equally bad as christianity or islam or what have you being pushed as religion.

True secularism says "everyone can believe what they want"

Our country is not fundamentalist, not by any leap of imagination, even if some of our states have been.

I think I was very clear that the country had a significant portion of it foundation rooted in fundamentalism. I did not say the country was ever fundamentalist. You misrepresent what I said.

Since the country is a conglomeration of states, the foundation of the states plays a significant portion in the history. Several states, including Mass., maintained a state church many years after the ratifying of the Constitution. You can not separate the state government from the federal government when you do a detailed study of national history.

While the founders clearly separated their faith from the federal government, it was not because they wanted a secular state, rather it was a compromise between several deeply religious state governments, and some not so religious, that did not want their freedom of religion trampled on.

yeah, I don't think that the town should put up a Christmas tree either.... but that's not what most people mean, they mean that I shouldn't read my Bible on the bus.... you know because it might scare the children. ;)

well, it IS a pretty scary book. It taught me that if I piss off God, a whale will eat me;)

personally, I find the hobo masturbating in the back of the bus to be much more frightening than the Bible.

But yeah, I understand ya. And I think those people are idiots. Then again, most people are.

well, it IS a pretty scary book. It taught me that if I piss off God, a whale will eat me;)

personally, I find the hobo masturbating in the back of the bus to be much more frightening than the Bible.

But yeah, I understand ya. And I think those people are idiots. Then again, most people are.

not to throw the thread into a hijack about Jonah, but I never saw the fish as a punishment.

I'm holding out for the exposè on Band Camp...

not to throw the thread into a hijack about Jonah, but I never saw the fish as a punishment.

not going to lie, I didn't either. But I do love the sermon about it in Moby Dick