Liberal Christians

[Albion]

There are and will always be conservatives out there for you to mingle with.

Yes, society as a whole is more liberal today but it's for better for worse, just like the more conservative society of the past was for better for worse.

It's the social climate we have right now and it's not going to make a difference.

I wouldn't go that far. Yes, cycles come and go, but any of us would have to be very casual about public policy not to realize that we are close to something like what happened in Venezuela. Freedom and Constitutional government are always very fragile and dependent upon the citizenry being watchful.

And it's not comforting to think that there's a light at the end of the tunnel or there'll be a better day somewhere in the future.

 

[korvus]

I'm not going to enjoy it. Just going to try and protect my family and survive the rise of high level crime and corruption.

You really need to put your faith in God. It's okay to worry about things and focus on important responsibilities that need to be kept, but pessimism does not help. I'm going through tough times too but I'm not going to be moved by them.

God Bless You

I wouldn't go that far. Yes, cycles come and go, but any of us would have to be very casual about public policy not to realize that we are close to something like what happened in Venezuela. Freedom and Constitutional government are always very fragile and dependent upon the citizenry being watchful.

And it's not comforting to think that there's a light at the end of the tunnel or there'll be a better day somewhere in the future.

I understand, but I mean in the greater scheme of things, including higher politics. My logic, in plain, is what if there's a cycle of liberalism and conservatism that constantly spins around as the higher ups become bored of conservatism, and then liberalism, and back again.

idk I'm just trying to be optimistic.

 

[Albion]

I understand, but I mean in the greater scheme of things, including higher politics. My logic, in plain, is what if there's a cycle of liberalism and conservatism that constantly spins around as the higher ups become bored of conservatism, and then liberalism, and back again.

idk I'm just trying to be optimistic.

Of course none of us knows what's going to happen, and my thinking was just that we can't count on things working out right. We could be heading into a long and bad period in our nation's history.

 

[Soothfish]

I wouldn't go that far. Yes, cycles come and go, but any of us would have to be very casual about public policy not to realize that we are close to something like what happened in Venezuela. Freedom and Constitutional government are always very fragile and dependent upon the citizenry being watchful.

And it's not comforting to think that there's a light at the end of the tunnel or there'll be a better day somewhere in the future.

You are right. The sad part is, the further a nation falls into totalitarianism, the harder it will be for that country to recover.

The worst cases (i.e North Korea, Cambodia, North Vietnam, Russia, assorted South American and African nations) will never EVER make a full social recovery. Those places will be horribly dysfunctional until the end of this age.

If America turns into that, we will not recover. Europe still hasn't even recovered from the "brain drain" and collective soul damage caused by the two world wars and the holocaust.

We had a free nation for a little while because some self-educated and morally upright British colonists decided to rule themselves. We now have an extremely dim-witted and amoral citizenry electing the worst individuals that they can find (i.e individuals who reflect their own dim minds and amoral values). It's really only a matter of time before full-on oppression and genocide begin in the good ol USA.

 

[Albion]

You are right. The sad part is, the further a nation falls into totalitarianism, the harder it will be for that country to recover.

The worst cases (i.e North Korea, Cambodia, North Vietnam, Russia, assorted South American and African nations) will never EVER make a full social recovery. Those places will be horribly dysfunctional until the end of this age.

If America turns into that, we will not recover. Europe still hasn't even recovered from the "brain drain" and collective soul damage caused by the two world wars and the holocaust.

We had a free nation for a little while because some self-educated and morally upright British colonists decided to rule themselves. We now have an extremely dim-witted and amoral citizenry electing the worst individuals that they can find (i.e individuals who reflect their own dim minds and amoral values). It's really only a matter of time before full-on oppression and genocide begin in the good ol USA.

When a majority of the voters think that the government exists only to give them something that belongs to someone else, we are on the edge.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

I've had my doubts about how different Hugo Chavez and Barack Obama really are. I'm probably not the only one in this subforum who's wondered about that.

 

[korvus]

You are right. The sad part is, the further a nation falls into totalitarianism, the harder it will be for that country to recover.

The worst cases (i.e North Korea, Cambodia, North Vietnam, Russia, assorted South American and African nations) will never EVER make a full social recovery. Those places will be horribly dysfunctional until the end of this age.

If America turns into that, we will not recover. Europe still hasn't even recovered from the "brain drain" and collective soul damage caused by the two world wars and the holocaust.

We had a free nation for a little while because some self-educated and morally upright British colonists decided to rule themselves. We now have an extremely dim-witted and amoral citizenry electing the worst individuals that they can find (i.e individuals who reflect their own dim minds and amoral values). It's really only a matter of time before full-on oppression and genocide begin in the good ol USA.

How is oppression and genocide going to readily be approved in a society that is right now at the moment democratic and largely liberal?

I know it's very important to be ready for the worst, but as long as we're a democracy, we should have nothing to complain as we make up out country and if we have any issues we protest/vote for it.

We should accept realities of course, but we should also mind that we are ultimately in charge of what our country does through the people we choose and the situations we protest for/against.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to see the similarities between left-liberalism, Chicago style, and Hugo Chavez' brand of "democratic" (also Chicago-style) socialism.

 

[A New Dawn]

How is oppression and genocide going to readily be approved in a society that is right now at the moment democratic and largely liberal?

I know it's very important to be ready for the worst, but as long as we're a democracy, we should have nothing to complain as we make up out country and if we have any issues we protest/vote for it.

We should accept realities of course, but we should also mind that we are ultimately in charge of what our country does through the people we choose and the situations we protest for/against.

I'm sorry, I must be misreading your first sentence. How will oppression be readily approved in a society that is democratic and liberal? Really? The liberals are the ones who are most oppressive. They have no tolerance for people who disagree with them, and come down hard on them. Have you not been reading the news or seeing the comments that come from the liberal politicians and the liberal press (most of the press is liberal, BTW)?

IMO, most people who are liberals are really not liberal, they are just conservatives who focus their conservativism in a different direction. No matter how accepting they claim to be, they are not. I have met few true liberals who are truly accepting. The rest pervert the label and give the true liberals a bad name.

 

[korvus]

I'm sorry, I must be misreading your first sentence. How will oppression be readily approved in a society that is democratic and liberal? Really? The liberals are the ones who are most oppressive. They have no tolerance for people who disagree with them, and come down hard on them. Have you not been reading the news or seeing the comments that come from the liberal politicians and the liberal press (most of the press is liberal, BTW)?

IMO, most people who are liberals are really not liberal, they are just conservatives who focus their conservativism in a different direction. No matter how accepting they claim to be, they are not. I have met few true liberals who are truly accepting. The rest pervert the label and give the true liberals a bad name.

I was meaning actual liberals, the accepting type.

You're right that most 'liberals' are indeed hypocrites, but I wouldn't see any call for gun control or restriction on vending machines. I guess I was meaning society being liberal as in equal treatment among gender, race, and (mostly) beliefs.

 

[McMatt]

Right here. You found one.

I am as perplexed and dumbfounded as the next man as to how someone can be a Liberal (as we understand Liberalism today) AND a Christian.

The actions of jesus were very liberal. The conservative bit comes from the greedy church

 

[Albion]

The actions of jesus were very liberal. The conservative bit comes from the greedy church

Illustrating once again how poorly people understand the meaning of the terms "liberal" and "conservative."

 

[Soothfish]

The actions of jesus were very liberal. The conservative bit comes from the greedy church

Jesus had no interest in elevating the power of Caesar...which is exactly what post-modern 'liberalism' is all about.

GREEDY is also one of the very first words to come to mind when I look at Hollywood 'liberals'.

Meanwhile, we have constitution-supporting innovators (i.e engineers, scientists, doctors, non-profit CEOs, etc) whose names will never be well-known on this Earth. They will never be "rich" by any means and their personal sacrifices will put a strain on their marriages and other personal relationships because of it.

 

[korvus]

Jesus had no interest in elevating the power of Caesar...which is exactly what post-modern 'liberalism' is all about.

GREEDY is also one of the very first words to come to mind when I look at Hollywood 'liberals'.

Meanwhile, we have constitution-supporting innovators (i.e engineers, scientists, doctors, non-profit CEOs, etc) whose names will never be well-known on this Earth. They will never be "rich" by any means and their personal sacrifices will put a strain on their marriages and other personal relationships because of it.

I think McMatt should've been more descriptive, but you know what he meant by 'liberal' and 'greedy'.

He was (shoot me McMatt if I'm wrong) meaning liberal as in being accepting and loving of everyone as well as believing in people power, of course not the 'liberalism' in today's politics.

 

[Albion]

He was (shoot me McMatt if I'm wrong) meaning liberal as in being accepting and loving of everyone, of course not the 'liberalism' in today's politics.

That's true. He MAY have meant it that way. However, that is not what "liberal" means, no matter which definition we have in mind.

 

[McMatt]

Greedy is one of the words I use to describe the church because the church is immoral. The pastor always rubs shoulders with the guy wearing the thousand dollar suits and the guy wearing the sixty dollar suits never gets "in" with anyone. On top of that the church spits on pretty much anything made by a person that is not within the church, only to promote their own knock offs to make a good buck (ie. music).

How many times have you been in church and the sermon was shorter than the speech about offering?

Now in terms of what I said about jesus being liberal. I meant that not necessarily politically, because why would jesus care? I mean jesus was for the people, not the tax collectors. He spent his time with mostly blue collar type guys, and on top of that he didn't discriminate against anyone. If you were to really sit and think about what the christ-like action to take in any sort of situation is, you would more than likely come to the conclusion that the christ-like action is the more socialist or humanitarian act.

The church excludes gays, hates anything not made by a christian, excludes it's poor, goes to the sinners for the sole purpose of "saving" them and they clearly have no intention remain in conversation with that person the second that person says "I'm sorry, but I do not want to accept christ", the church even hates other groups within the same faith. If you want to be anything christ-like then don't be like your church.

The church is also widely recognized as a conservative organization, so the answer seems pretty clear to me about whether christianity needs a more liberal reform

Now for a more politically liberal aspect - God gave man free will to do as they please (even if they want to do that with another man). Are we in a place to stop things like gay marriage in that case? From what it sounds like to me, we are taking more executive authority on the matter than god did in the first place. Why not let them do their thing and be judged for it accordingly when theyre dead? Why spend so much time making an enemy of someone and depriving them of their happiness when you could see that person as a friend? And I do support gay marriage to the extent that when one of the partners dies the other one gets to take over pensions and is legally recognized as a spouse. The same goes for many other issues - why make an enemy when you can enjoy their friendship

 

[Albion]

Greedy is one of the words I use to describe the church because the church is immoral. The pastor always rubs shoulders with the guy wearing the thousand dollar suits and the guy wearing the sixty dollar suits never gets "in" with anyone. On top of that the church spits on pretty much anything made by a person that is not within the church, only to promote their own knock offs to make a good buck (ie. music).

Obviously you have some personal grievance against some pastor or congregation somewhere. Generalizing like you're doing, however, doesn't leave us with any basis for a discussion.

How many times have you been in church and the sermon was shorter than the speech about offering?

I can't remember any.

Now in terms of what I said about jesus being liberal. I meant that not necessarily politically, because why would jesus care? I mean jesus was for the people, not the tax collectors. He spent his time with mostly blue collar type guys, and on top of that he didn't discriminate against anyone. If you were to really sit and think about what the christ-like action to take in any sort of situation is, you would more than likely come to the conclusion that the christ-like action is the more socialist or humanitarian act.

'
Goodness, no! None of that is typical of Socialism, nor is Socialism in the least bit humanitarian.

The church excludes gays, hates anything not made by a christian, excludes it's poor

As I said, this kind of talk is so far from the facts that it can't be taken seriously. We could discuss the institutional church's shortcomings, but the notion that it hates the poor and music not made by Christian artists....is that it. Did you fail to be hired to perform somewhere?

 

[McMatt]

Actually when I was a teenager I was into a lot of comic books. I also played guitar in my youth group's worship band. One day I was told I couldn't perform that night for the sole reason being I wore a punisher shirt (because the punisher's logo is a skull). I'm not saying that all churches are into picketing like westboro, I myself have found a couple of really good churches, but with the amount of legalism and fear a lot of churches carry (you cant deny that fear and legalism are not a problem in the church body as a whole), all it takes is to turn those thoughts into actions and you would have one big funeral picketing westboro-esque church

 

[Albion]

Actually when I was a teenager I was into a lot of comic books. I also played guitar in my youth group's worship band. One day I was told I couldn't perform that night for the sole reason being I wore a punisher shirt (because the punisher's logo is a skull). I'm not saying that all churches are into picketing like westboro, I myself have found a couple of really good churches, but with the amount of legalism and fear a lot of churches carry (you cant deny that fear and legalism are not a problem in the church body as a whole), all it takes is to turn those thoughts into actions and you would have one big funeral picketing westboro-esque church

I imagine how you felt, but I tend to see it as more a matter of church leaders being what my father's generation might call "stick in the mud" types. Just aggravatingly averse to anything that's "not the way it's always been." That wouldn't really be either liberal or conservative, but just inflexible.

 

[A New Dawn]

The actions of jesus were very liberal. The conservative bit comes from the greedy church

Jesus followed the law to the T. He was the most conservative Jew there has ever been. Reason? He had to follow the law perfectly in order to fulfill it. Perhaps you are thinking that he didn't follow the things that were added to the law that the pharisees were trying to enforce. You would be correct in that, but He most certainly did keep the law completely.