BOOK REVIEW: PERSECUTION by David Limbaugh

[matthew94]

I mentioned in the suggestions forum a while back that I was interested in posting some book reviews and possible having a media review forum type deal started. Yesterday I finished a book and figured I'd post my review of it.


PERSECUTION
BY DAVID LIMBAUGH

“This book chronicles discrimination against Christians in American society. While tolerance is touted as the highest virtue in our popular culture, Christians are often subjected to scorn and ridicule and denied their religious freedoms.”

Thus begins the introduction to David Limbaugh’s most recent book, Persecution. I am sure many dismiss this book at once in frustration at the premise that the majority religion in our country could actually be persecuted. Such an instinct is probably natural, but misses part of the reality. The odd truth in this situation is that most persecution of Christians that occurs is by the hands of others who, in a census, would also probably be counted as Christians. Christianity, as is pointed out later in the book, is the only religion that has both genuine and nominal members. In our country, genuine Christians are persecuted by anti-Christians AND nominal Christians. Still don’t buy it? Well that’s what the book is for!

I must admit the first 294 pages of this book can be pretty boring to read. With page after page Limbaugh illustrates how the ‘free exercise clause’ is being trampled by rabid misuse of the ‘establishment clause.’

PART 1: THE WAR IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

He starts with examples of how Christianity is being pushed out of the public schools. By this he is not referring to publicly funded school staff pushing Christianity, but students having to check their Christianity at the door of the schools each morning. Limbaugh gives a thorough history of how education developed in this country and how the current application of the establishment clause is a departure from what was intended. He makes lengthy and informative remarks about important court cases like everson v. Board of Education 1947. Chapters 1 and 2 discuss instances of student led prayer and religious talk being banned, equal access laws being ignored, calendars being stripped of religious wording, and many other examples of Christianity being banned from the public schools.

Chapters 3 and 4 show that not only is the Christian faith being banned from public school, but the secular humanist faith is being paraded in to fill the vacuum under the guise of neutrality. While the supreme court, in fact, does recognize secular humanism as a religion, many are fooled into believing secularism is neutral while it is clearly a ‘religious worldview, the most bigoted faith on earth: its goal is to extirpate every other faith.’ Secular humanism finds its way into the schools through sex education (at the expense of abstinence education), promotion of the gay agenda (at the expense of the traditional family), through the teaching of outlandish psychological theories that undermine Christian principles and moral behavior, and even the celebration of other religions (showing them as moral and Christianity as bigoted).

Chapter 5 gives many examples of this ‘Christianity out, secularism in’ phenomenon going on in our colleges and universities.
PART II: THE WAR IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE

“While few would advocate government endorsement of religion, many apparently believe the public square should be a religion-free zone.” Limbaugh begins his second section with a look at how Christianity is being thrown out of the public square. Once again he touches on equal access laws, freedom of expression principles, discusses 10 commandment display issues, the issue of congressional and military chaplains, and the attack of publicly elected or government appointed officials because of their religious beliefs. Limbaugh then moves to the issues involving Christians and churches under attack in the private sphere through unfair zoning laws, banning religious advertising/evangelism, discrimination in the workplace, the muzzling of Christian pastors, arguments to end government approval of Christian charity work, and other examples.

Just as in part I, part II shows that while Christianity is being thrown out, non-Christian and anti-Christian values are being hurled in hypocritically. The homosexual agenda, hate crime legislation, radical feminism, abortion issues, anti-Christian art and film, and media/Hollywood attacks on Christianity are discussed.

Like I said, by the end of part II, I had heard enough examples and wanted him to go somewhere with all this information. All the illustrations he used were solid evidence for his case, but now it was time to make his points. The book up to this point can be a little boring at times because of the exhaustive means he used to back up his claims. This part consisted of chapters 6-10.

PART III: THE WAR IN PERSPECTIVE

This was by far my favorite part of this book. Limbaugh did a great job researching and bringing his points home. In chapter 11 I had a hard time finding sentences NOT to underline. It is a historical account of our nations Christian roots. After reading this I now feel better equipped to defend our Christian origins and attack revisionist history. Limbaugh gives a history lesson on the separatists and the puritans. He remarks on the earliest state constitutions, the American Revolution, the declaration of independence, many of the founding fathers, the Constitution, and finally the establishment and free-exercise clauses. The reader is left with no doubt that our founders did NOT want a theocracy, but did desire our nation to be a nation of mostly Christians. They believed that Christianity and Christian principles was the best hope our nation had at maintaining freedom. “America’s unique experience in freedom is a direct outgrowth of the Christian religion.”

In chapter 12, entitled ‘America’s Liberty at the Crossroads’ Limbaugh asks two questions to six of the leading Christian thinkers in our nation: Dr. James Dobson, Dr. Michael Novak, Dr. Marvin Olasky, Dr. James Kennedy, Nancy Pearcy, and author/speaker Dr. Ravi Zacharias. Each answers ‘why Christians are being persecuted in our current culture’ and ‘can America’s unique brand of freedom continue to exist if the foundation for it is destroyed.’ The first question was handled especially well by Olasky (giving five reasons for Christian persecution), Kennedy (who talks about relativism, absolute truth, and Darwinism) and Pearcey was especially brilliant in answering (she talked about the modern division of truth into compartments, and how this is so in postmodernism). For the second question, the best answers in my opinion came from Dobson (who discussed how chaos, corruption, and tyranny result when the foundations of freedom are destroyed) and Kennedy (who had a refreshingly optimistic outlook on our culture).

Limbaugh closes with a challenge to American Christians to “engage in the political arena and to seek to influence the course of this country….not to be intimidated from participating in the political process by distorted notions of the proper role of religion…champion unfettered religious freedom, oppose those forces that threaten it, and strengthen their own churches, without which any hope to influence the political system and our culture will be futile.”

I liked Limbaugh’s book ‘Persecution’ a lot and would highly recommend it even to those who will disagree no matter what he says. It’s always best, in debate, to know your opponent accurately. This book is valuable because Limbaugh provides accurate history and insight into American law. If nothing else, skim the first 294 pages and read chapters 11 and 12.

Other Reviews Perhaps Coming Soon:
6 Modern Myths by Philip Sampson
Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis
The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis

[Crinoline]

In a forum that is about 90% left leaning I don't think you'll find many people agreeing with the author of this book here.

[Henry4MVP]

I've read the Screwtape Letters, matty. You should do that one next.

[matthew94]

Yeah, I don't intend to find much support here, but maybe it will stir up some good intellectual discussion.

Henry, that's cool....yeah, I'll try to do that one next, it's, by all accounts, interesting.

[Mehser]

Originally posted by Crinoline
In a forum that is about 90% left leaning I don't think you'll find many people agreeing with the author of this book here.


How do you get 90%?

Think about this incomplete list of regular posters here that do NOT "lean left": Matt, Jro, Stratton, Rock, MPW, 3rdbase, Halbert and me. That would mean that there are at least 77 regular posters here.

[BogusTrumper]

. . . pmoon, gilchrist, CMSU, crinoline, YardRat, hurls, Billsman, royals#####, eyedog

I'm the only LIBERAL here

[Mehser]

Originally posted by BogusTrumper
. . . pmoon, gilchrist, CMSU, crinoline, YardRat, hurls, Billsman, royals#####, eyedog

I'm the only LIBERAL here

I have always beleived in your uniqueness.

[matthew94]

good points mehser....

But even if it's just BT :) If people who disagree with the author are interested perhaps they'd like to one of two things:

1. Share why they disagree with the author
2. Read the book, or even just the review, so they know what the other side of the debate is saying

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by Mehser
How do you get 90%?

Think about this incomplete list of regular posters here that do NOT "lean left": Matt, Jro, Stratton, Rock, MPW, 3rdbase, Halbert and me. That would mean that there are at least 77 regular posters here.


And I thought you were a statistician!

Try 70.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by BogusTrumper
. . . pmoon, gilchrist, CMSU, crinoline, YardRat, hurls, Billsman, royals#####, eyedog

I'm the only LIBERAL here

Throw in one socialist (Reeves), one confused new ager (Hal), one outlaw (me) and my disciple, chimpy.

[shiva2999]

PERSECUTION
BY DAVID LIMBAUGH

Rich middle aged white conservative Republican whines about being a victim.

We feel your pain David.

Liberals turned your dad into a drug addict.

The bastards!

[Mehser]

Originally posted by shiva2999
And I thought you were a statistician!

Try 70.


We are both wrong. 8 names are on the list.

8/X = .1

.1*X = 8

8/.1 = X

80 = X

I originally had seven names and 70 posters. Added Hal at the end. Don't know how I got 77 instead of 80.........

[Mehser]

Originally posted by shiva2999
Throw in one socialist (Reeves), one confused new ager (Hal), one outlaw (me) and my disciple, chimpy.


And a self-proclaimed libertarian (crazy sheep or is it crazy wolf, I forget) in Joe.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by Mehser
We are both wrong. 8 names are on the list.


Indeed. I missed the "me".

That goes to show that neither of us are infallible and consequently are only all the more loveable for our weakness.

[gilchristfan]

A more accurate title could be Persecution Complex. But then, we've had enough victimization around here lately.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by Mehser
And a self-proclaimed libertarian (crazy sheep or is it crazy wolf, I forget) in Joe.

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

-Matthew 7:15

[matthew94]

Originally posted by gilchristfan
A more accurate title could be Persecution Complex. But then, we've had enough victimization around here lately.

Well, Limbaugh by no means is saying Christians are the only people being persecuted in this country. But the over 290 pages of news stories related to unfair treatment of Christians is not something easily dismissed.

The book does not come across as whining at all. It's not really an emotional book at all. Limbaugh is an intellectual. If you've ever seen him interviewed he's actually quite boring. He's not a charismatic guy at all. I got no indication of whining here, just cold reporting of the facts.

He gives factual history and factual evidence and leaves it to the 6 people he interviews in the last chapter to appeal to the Christians' mind, will, and emotions.

Like I said early in the review...the idea of Christians being persecuted is absurd to some b/c the numbers say Christianity is a the majority. And in probably really is. But much of the persecution against Christians is committed by nominal Christians (those who would be counted as Christians on a survey b/c of their family lines).

In public schools, for example, Christians are sometimes picked on or made fun of, by the school bully or whatever. But if some group categorized the religious makeup of the class they'd pretty much all be Christians, even the bully.

The point of the book isn't to cry about persecution, it's a call for Christians to stand up againnst persecution....to get tough....to get serious...for the betterment of our nation.

[BogusTrumper]

You sound like Rush. So stupid this emotional vs intellectual individual crap. Yeah, yeah, yeah, liberals are not to be taken seriously because they make their decisions out of emotion whereas conservatives make theirs out of pure intelligence.

Here's a news tip for you Matt - people can be both. You really think David Limbaugh feels no emotion over the issue whatsoever? I know Rush does. I've heard him.

I'm also really sick of hearing about "real" Christians vs "nominal" Christians. Is that how you squash dissention in your ranks? Just brush the dissenters off as not really being Christian?

#1 - Christians are not being persecuted
#2 - Even if they were, maybe that would better our nation

[Henry4MVP]

Originally posted by shiva2999
"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

-Matthew 7:15

Another Night of the Hunter reference. Nice.

[matthew94]

BT....

I never said liberals make emotional arguments and conservatives make intellectual ones. Come on!

Of course every has both intellect and emotion. Who said they didn't? My point was that this book is not overly emotional. It's mostly just data, information, fact, etc.

You don't think there are both genuine and nominal Christians? That's very odd. Since Christians are saved by genuine repentance and faith in Christ as evidenced by the Holy Spirit it seems common sense to me that some people never genuinely repent. There are many people in churches that put on a show of Christianity, but have never truly asked forgiveness for their sins. Thus, nominal Christians.

And that is also why only Christianity has nominal members. Other religions are based on what we DO. Therefore if someone is doing those things they are a full member of that faith. Christianity, in contrast, is based on what is DONE. It is based on the finished work of Christ on the cross. We are saved by the righteousness of Christ, not our own righteousness (thankfully, since ours would never measure up).

Many people call themselves Christians, but are treating Christianity like any other religion. They are trying to earn salvation through their works. By DOING. But we can only be saved through what Christ has DONE. That is the difference between religion and relationship. That is the difference between other religions and Christianity. That is the difference between nominal Christians and genuine Christians.

[BogusTrumper]

That is the difference between Catholics and Protestants.

Corporal Works of mercy:
To feed the hungry
Give drink to the thirsty
Clothe the naked
Shelter the homeless
Visit the sick
Visit the imprisoned
Bury the dead

Spiritual Works of mercy:
To counsel the doubtful
Instruct the ignorant
Admonish sinners
Shelter the homeless
Comfort the afflicted
Forgive offenses
Bear wrongs patiently
Pray for the living and the dead

[matthew94]

That is the difference b/w some Christians and some catholics. I know Catholics who recognize their works could never save them.

[BogusTrumper]

No, I was just wondering if you place Catholics in the nominal Christian pile because - guess what - we believe in works.

[matthew94]

Oh, no, we believe in works too....

Protestants are saved by a faith THAT works

Works, to me, are an evidence that you truly have faith.

Works are a response to salvation, not a means to earning it.

Do you disagree with that?

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
I never said liberals make emotional arguments and conservatives make intellectual ones. Come on!

Cool. What you were saying just sounded so familiar. Wish you'd give Rush a call and straighten him out.

[matthew94]

BTW BT

I'm not trying to attack you or anything and I know you aren't attacking me either. I'm just trying to figure out specifically where we differ in beliefs and I think we're about there. Thanks for the dialogue

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
Oh, no, we believe in works too....

Protestants are saved by a faith THAT works

Works, to me, are an evidence that you truly have faith.

Works are a response to salvation, not a means to earning it.

Do you disagree with that?


No, we agree there.

I just think you should be careful about assuming that Christians who would disagree with you on politics must be "nominal" Christians.

[matthew94]

Oh no....that's not what I'm saying at all.

The distinction I am making between nominal and genuine Christians is not a political one, it is a relational one.

Repubicans aren't Christians b/c they are republicans
Demoncrats aren't Christians b/c they are democrats
Conservatives aren't Christians b/c they are conservative
Liberals aren't Christians b/c they are liberal

None of that is true

Republicans are Christians if their sin is forgiven through Christ
Democrats are Christians if their sin is forgiven through Christ
Conservatives are Christians if their sin is forgiven through Christ
Liberals are Christians if their sin is forgiven through Christ

Now what percentage of Republicans, Demoncrats, Conservatives, and Liberals have genuinely repented, accepted the work of Christ on their behalf, and are now living in response to that salvation, I have no clue. I am not the judge anyways.

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
Oh no....that's not what I'm saying at all.

But that's what I'm sick of.

[matthew94]

ok....then YOU and I have no problem

Nevertheless, the fact that political affiliation does not have a direct connect to religious faith, does not mean that we should not discuss political stances, theology, the Bible, and religion together. When someone talks about abortion and I discuss Bible passages that should be OK. I'm not equating pro-life with Christianity, I am arguing that as a Christian, I feel I should be pro life. You can argue back. That's what the forums for. When a liberal says Jesus was a liberal, I can argue back that He had many conservative qualities, and they can argue back...that's what the forums for.

Basically, if we are Christians, then Christianity touches all of life. It is all-encompassing. It influences all our views. We can debate HOW it impacts them, but we shouldn't deny that it does so.

[Jro]

Originally posted by shiva2999
Liberals turned your dad into a drug addict.

Rush Limbaugh's dad is a drug addict too?

[jimmifli]

Originally posted by Mehser
How do you get 90%?

Think about this incomplete list of regular posters here that do NOT "lean left": Matt, Jro, Stratton, Rock, MPW, 3rdbase, Halbert and me. That would mean that there are at least 77 regular posters here.


What about me?

[Mehser]

Originally posted by jimmifli
What about me?


I'm protected against missing posters by using the word "incomplete".

Besides, Joe says you are a crazy sheep anyway.

[gilchristfan]

Originally posted by jimmifli
What about me?


You only post now when sheep are mentioned in a thread. if you lived in the midwest, you'd scare me. :)

[Dr. Who]

Originally posted by BogusTrumper


I'm also really sick of hearing about "real" Christians vs "nominal" Christians. Is that how you squash dissention in your ranks? Just brush the dissenters off as not really being Christian?

#1 - Christians are not being persecuted
#2 - Even if they were, maybe that would better our nation

I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant. In one breath, Matt is accused of using name calling to brush off dissent, in the next, it is denied that persecution of Christians occurs, but if it does . . . somewhere there appears to be a contradiction here.

One only has to read Acts and the Pauline epistles to see that the apostles were already having to deal with heresy in the early Church. Catholics, who believe in a teaching magisterium, certainly must recognize dissent that is outside authentic Christian beliefs. Christians as diverse as Augustine, Aquinas and Kierkegaard would have recognized nominal Christians as `tares amongst the wheat.'

Christ is persecuted in every culture at some level. Part of what constitutes the debate in the current `culture wars' is whether or not America is now defining itself in a manner that is intrinsically hostile to orthodox Christian expression. Obviously, initial premises will govern interpretation of facts. There's little common ground between those who suppose an aggressive liberal impulse using the courts and popular culture as the main conduits of anti-Christian propoganda and those who deny such and see secular neutrality as mere fairness.

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by Dr. Who
I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant.

What? Tolerant of myself? I am, pretty much.

Ask Matt what tolerance means. I just plain disagree with him.

[BogusTrumper]

Secular neutrality is what this country was founded on (see #1 in our Bill of Rights).

[shiva2999]

Believers get to go to heaven.

Unbelievers get to go to hell.

Hey, why are people being mean to us?

[gilchristfan]

Originally posted by Dr. Who
I
Christ is persecuted in every culture at some level. Part of what constitutes the debate in the current `culture wars' is whether or not America is now defining itself in a manner that is intrinsically hostile to orthodox Christian expression. Obviously, initial premises will govern interpretation of facts. There's little common ground between those who suppose an aggressive liberal impulse using the courts and popular culture as the main conduits of anti-Christian propoganda and those who deny such and see secular neutrality as mere fairness.

Early christian's were crucified, stoned, beheaded, burned and painted with blood so wild animals could devour them.

Prohibiting Johnny Young Earth from conducting a prayer meeting during science class at a taxpayer supported school doesn't quite rise to that level of persecution. And no, being required to remove the Ten Commandments from a public building doesn't qualify for martyrdom either.

[BogusTrumper]

My thoughts exactly, gil. Been a long time since we've fed any Christians to the lions.

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by Dr. Who
I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant. In one breath, Matt is accused of using name calling to brush off dissent, in the next, it is denied that persecution of Christians occurs, but if it does . . . somewhere there appears to be a contradiction here.

#1 - I'm not accusing Matt of anything. In fact, I had an entirely different BBI member in mind.
#2 - There's no contradiction here. People use that line of thinking all the time.
#3 - It took two breaths.


Originally posted by mattrose992000
ok....then YOU and I have no problem

BTW, Matt, it's soooo irritating that you think you have to tell me that you and I are not having a "fight." That I have a problem with. I hope you were just cluing in everyone else too dense to understand.

[matthew94]

1. Hey BT...no, I wasn't suggesting that you need to be told that we're no longer 'fighting.' I was mostly just using that line to finalize that aspect of the debate. I will look for better closure lines in the future :)

2. In regards to the early church suffering physical torture and extreme persecution, I agree. In comparison, the persecution going on in this country against Christians is not even really worthy, in my opinion and for the most part, of being described with the same word.

However, the fact that it is much different, in its nature, from New Testament persecution does not mean we should just dismiss the subject entirely. Limbaugh's book is not an attempt to equate persecution in this country with persecution in the book of Acts. I don't even think he mentions that kind of persecution. His purpose is to show that the unique brand of freedom known in America is an offshoot of Christian principles, so when the free exercise of Christianity begins to be thwarted in the name of the establishment clause, true American freedom may be at deaths door. If the foundations of freedom are destroyed, freedom itself begins to crumble.

3. In response to your suggestion that another poster ask me my definition of tolerance...I will make this vital point once again. Tolerance does not mean holding another view to be equally as valid as your own. Tolerance implies a disagreement. I tolerate somethinig that is not desirable, otherwise it wouldn't be tolerance. For example, I tolerate a homosexual. This means I don't violate their rights. This means I don't persecute them. This does not mean I consider their lifestyle equally as valid as mine. This does not mean I consider homosexuality equal on moral grounds. I tolerate them.

If I considered it equally valid, that wouldn't be tolerance, it'd be acceptance....and, for me, compromise.

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
1. Hey BT...no, I wasn't suggesting that you need to be told that we're no longer 'fighting.' I was mostly just using that line to finalize that aspect of the debate. I will look for better closure lines in the future :)

Really? I don't need to be told that we're no longer "fighting?" Maybe I need you to tell me when we are "fighting" because I didn't think we were. ;)

Originally posted by mattrose992000
However, the fact that it is much different, in its nature, from New Testament persecution does not mean we should just dismiss the subject entirely. Limbaugh's book is not an attempt to equate persecution in this country with persecution in the book of Acts. I don't even think he mentions that kind of persecution. His purpose is to show that the unique brand of freedom known in America is an offshoot of Christian principles, so when the free exercise of Christianity begins to be thwarted in the name of the establishment clause, true American freedom may be at deaths door. If the foundations of freedom are destroyed, freedom itself begins to crumble.

Well that's strange and unfair but if God wants it that way . . .

[Dr. Who]

Originally posted by gilchristfan
Early christian's were crucified, stoned, beheaded, burned and painted with blood so wild animals could devour them.

Prohibiting Johnny Young Earth from conducting a prayer meeting during science class at a taxpayer supported school doesn't quite rise to that level of persecution. And no, being required to remove the Ten Commandments from a public building doesn't qualify for martyrdom either.

Well, I thought it obvious, but perhaps too implicit in my original comment that Christ is persecuted in every culture at some level that there are manifest differences between being thrown to the lions in the circus maximus and merely being made out to be an ignorant fool like Johnny Young Earth.

It seems quite wrong to me, however, to narrow the definition of persecution to torture and murder. I think one can extend the definition to include systematic contempt and exclusion. Certainly, gays and ethnic groups are very sensitive to language that is derogatory and it is routinely argued that contemptuous language has within it the capacity to incite violence.

Moreover, as I understand David Limbaugh's argument, his point is partly that all sorts of expression that are quasi-religious are allowed into the public forum, but Christianity is singled out as the focus of intolerance.

[Dr. Who]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BogusTrumper
#2 - There's no contradiction here. People use that line of thinking all the time.

The fact that people use a certain line of thinking all the time doesn't mean it isn't contradictory. To spell out more explicitly what at least seemed contradictory to me was your manifest irritation, on the one hand, with the use of the term `nominal Christian,' which you inferred was simply a means of silencing dissent -- and on the other hand, your at least winking concurrence with the possibility that some form of persecution of Christians might be good for the country.

I don't know how serious you were being, but I surmised you meant that silencing certain Christian voices in certain public arenas might be alright -- (I know you wouldn't tolerate lions and tigers and bears, oh my) -- in any event, in essence, a silencing of dissent from the liberal, secular majority that holds forth in the media and academe. That's what I meant by seeming contradiction, what a long explanation this is.

#3 - It took two breaths.

LOL.

[Halbert]

I'm confused.

[gilchristfan]

"systematic contempt and exclusion"

Now that I have a boy in pubkic school, I'm beginning to see what youare talking about. This was a conversation we had the other day:

S(on): Dad, why do we have to pray to Allah in school every morning? I don't even know where Mecca is, and we're not even Muslim.

D(ad): Why? because we Chrsitians are an oppressed minority. Don't worry, your teacher will point the right way to Mecca, its the law, The liberal majority and academia made sure she knows where it is.

S: Did you see that big six pointed star in the front of the school? We wanted to use it as a jungle gym, but they wouldn't let us.

D: The Star of David. Its religious symbol for the Jewish faith. Its not for climbing. By the way, the time will come at school when you will be forced to eat a Passover supper. Again, its the law. A word of warning, the unleavened bread won't taste too good, but eat it anyways.

S: On the playground today, there were a whole bunch of cows there. Why?

D: In the Hindu faith, certain cows are sacred. Don't go near them.

S: But one came charging at me!

D: What did you do?

S: Well I pulled my cross out. (I know you told me to keep it hidden at all times, but this was an emergency), and I shined it at the cow to scare it.

D: Did it work?

S: No, but the principal grabbed me just in time. then he sent me home for 3 days for "displaying a religious symbol".

D: That's OK. Its just another form of the systematic contempt we Christians must endure. But remember what I always say, "Oppression builds character".

S: Is that why you weren't upset when the police took away the Nativity scence from the front lawn?

D: Exactly, by trying to keep us quiet, they are really building us up inside, where it counts.

S: But if I have a 3 day suspension from school, won't I miss the witch who will come and speak to us about incantations?

D: Not on your life. The liberal academia will make sure she comes by the house tonight. Again, its the law.

S: Why are all of these religions against us?

D: Its to be expected when your god is the only true God. They needed to band together to create a liberal majority. I'm sure you've heard Rush speak about the left winged conspracy. this is all a part of it. He has assigned his borther David to spear head the attack on this part.

S: Attack?

D: Sure, that's the best part. We're not going to lie around forever, letting our rights be trampled. Oppression is good for the soul, but not for the body. You see son, we're going to be in the middle of a Holy War soon. As they have been doing for years, all of these religions have secretly combined forces to make sure we're subjected to systematic contempt and exclusion.
But we have some very good people on our side. It will start small, a few articles here and there. A book, radio talk shows. Just to get the word out to "our people". Of course, its all in code, so no one but us can understand it.
For years, our people have been infiltrating the schools, the government, we even have a friend of ours in the White House now. Thanks to him, we now have things like "faith based initiatives", to make sure federal tax dollars get sent to the right places. Financing a Holy war can be complicated at times.

S: When will it happen?

D: Soon. they will all meet us on a battlefield at a place called Armeggedon. We're going to wipe them out there.

S: Well, in the meantime, can't we have any christian symbols?

D: You do, but don't tell them. You know that Christmas tree at the front door of your school? Its really a Christrian symbol, but don't tell them. we have them convinced that Christmas has really become a commerical enterprise, and doesn't have any Christian significance anymore. Its important that you don't talk about this at school, we don't want to tip them off.

S: Is that why we have off for Christmas?

D: Yes, but we have to keep that our little secret.


Not to worry Dr. Who, we'll get 'em yet.

[Henry4MVP]

:rofl: :rofl:

This is really excellent.

Originally posted by gilchristfan
"systematic contempt and exclusion"

Now that I have a boy in pubkic school, I'm beginning to see what youare talking about. This was a conversation we had the other day:

S(on): Dad, why do we have to pray to Allah in school every morning? I don't even know where Mecca is, and we're not even Muslim.

D(ad): Why? because we Chrsitians are an oppressed minority. Don't worry, your teacher will point the right way to Mecca, its the law, The liberal majority and academia made sure she knows where it is.

S: Did you see that big six pointed star in the front of the school? We wanted to use it as a jungle gym, but they wouldn't let us.

D: The Star of David. Its religious symbol for the Jewish faith. Its not for climbing. By the way, the time will come at school when you will be forced to eat a Passover supper. Again, its the law. A word of warning, the unleavened bread won't taste too good, but eat it anyways.

S: On the playground today, there were a whole bunch of cows there. Why?

D: In the Hindu faith, certain cows are sacred. Don't go near them.

S: But one came charging at me!

D: What did you do?

S: Well I pulled my cross out. (I know you told me to keep it hidden at all times, but this was an emergency), and I shined it at the cow to scare it.

D: Did it work?

S: No, but the principal grabbed me just in time. then he sent me home for 3 days for "displaying a religious symbol".

D: That's OK. Its just another form of the systematic contempt we Christians must endure. But remember what I always say, "Oppression builds character".

S: Is that why you weren't upset when the police took away the Nativity scence from the front lawn?

D: Exactly, by trying to keep us quiet, they are really building us up inside, where it counts.

S: But if I have a 3 day suspension from school, won't I miss the witch who will come and speak to us about incantations?

D: Not on your life. The liberal academia will make sure she comes by the house tonight. Again, its the law.

S: Why are all of these religions against us?

D: Its to be expected when your god is the only true God. They needed to band together to create a liberal majority. I'm sure you've heard Rush speak about the left winged conspracy. this is all a part of it. He has assigned his borther David to spear head the attack on this part.

S: Attack?

D: Sure, that's the best part. We're not going to lie around forever, letting our rights be trampled. Oppression is good for the soul, but not for the body. You see son, we're going to be in the middle of a Holy War soon. As they have been doing for years, all of these religions have secretly combined forces to make sure we're subjected to systematic contempt and exclusion.
But we have some very good people on our side. It will start small, a few articles here and there. A book, radio talk shows. Just to get the word out to "our people". Of course, its all in code, so no one but us can understand it.
For years, our people have been infiltrating the schools, the government, we even have a friend of ours in the White House now. Thanks to him, we now have things like "faith based initiatives", to make sure federal tax dollars get sent to the right places. Financing a Holy war can be complicated at times.

S: When will it happen?

D: Soon. they will all meet us on a battlefield at a place called Armeggedon. We're going to wipe them out there.

S: Well, in the meantime, can't we have any christian symbols?

D: You do, but don't tell them. You know that Christmas tree at the front door of your school? Its really a Christrian symbol, but don't tell them. we have them convinced that Christmas has really become a commerical enterprise, and doesn't have any Christian significance anymore. Its important that you don't talk about this at school, we don't want to tip them off.

S: Is that why we have off for Christmas?

D: Yes, but we have to keep that our little secret.


Not to worry Dr. Who, we'll get 'em yet.

[matthew94]

Ok, ok...before we get anyone else pretending or assuming that Limbaugh is hoping for a theocracy, or that he's complaining that creationism isn't taught as scientific fact, or whatever, I'll give some actual examples from the book.

1. The chancellor of the New York City Department of Education prohibited the display of thte Nativity Scene in NYC schools during Christmas, but allowed displays of the Jewish menorah and the Islamic star and crescent.

2. At Pattison Elementary School the singing of Christian oriented Christmas songs was banned, but students were threatened with a grade reduction if they refused to participate in singing songs of other faiths.

3. A teacher at Lynn Lucas Middle School escorted two students to the principals office when they walked into her classroom with Bibles. The girls' mother who had been paged arrived at the principles office just in time to see the teacher say "This is garbage" and throw the Bibles in the trash.

4. Monarch High School disallowed a group of Christian students from meeting on school property while, at the same time, allowing a Gay/Straight alliance club, a multicultural club, a peace jam club, and amnesty international to meet.

5. In the textbook 'Across the Centuries' students weren't just required to learn about Islam, they were forced to pretend they were Muslims, praying in the name of Allah. Teachers told students during this course, 'You and your classmates will become Muslims." Clearly if this Christianity had been stuffed down the throats of the students the ACLU would have stepped in, but here only the ACLJ would do so.

6. A public school freshmen health textbook reads, "Testing your ability to function sexually and give pleasure to another person may be less threatening in the early teens with people of your own sex...you may come tot the conclusion that growing up means rejecting thte values of your parents." This is not a neutral position. It is an active rejection of Christian values.

7. A principal in Newton would not abide by parents' directions to remove their children from a condom-distribution program, telling them, 'It's too important."

8. Student Michael Nash won a scholarship based on his academic achievement, but had it taken away when the school found out he planned to major in philosophy/religion. When the ACLJ filed suit, the school changed its position, but similar cases are popping up around the country.

9. Alabama court chief Justice Roy More was forced to remove the ten commandments display, but on the outside wall of the federal courthouse in Montgomery is a much larger (albeit less publicized) statue of Artemis, the Greek goddess of justice. No one asserts that the statue represents an establishment of religion.

10. Patrick Cubbage, a 54 year old vietnam veteran participated in more than 2,000 burial cermonies on government property. Whenever the families wanted him to, he would say a blessing at the graveside such as "God bless you and this family, and God bless the United States of America." He was fired, not at the complaint of any grieving family, but because two fellow guardsmen said it was a violation of the establishment clause.

11. In April 2003 Jack Moody tried to send his military son some Scriptures and some religious comics, but the post office in Lenoir, NC refused, citing a government regulation that anything potentially conttrary to the Islamic faith is prohibited.

12. In San Francisco, under the superior court policy, judges and commissioners are forbidden from being scoutmasters, troop leaders, or members of a governing board that is affiliated with hthe Boy Scouts or any other organization that excludes homosexuals. The policy is so broad that it could arguably preclude judges from being members of a church that preaches against homosexuality.

13. In Brighton Township PA, Beaver Assembly of God church was forbidden to expand b/c it only owned 3.2 acres of land and the city requires churches be on tracts with a minimum of 5 acres. The city placed no such burden on non-religious groups. Under the code, schools are subject to a 2 acre minimum. Strip clubs and porn shops face no minimum at all.

14. In El Cajon, California, Foothills Christian Fellowship was ordered to take down its banner advertising Vacation Bible School since it didn't' have a special permit, but other advertisements without the permit were not required to take their banners down.

15. In Rochester NY, Rolf Szabo was sent an email by his boss telling him and other staff about 'coming out day' at Kodak. The memo included suggestions for helping homosexuals ''come out" at work. Workers were urged to be supportive of the people coming out and acknoweldge their courage. They were to be 'sensitive..aware...and willing to understand' their homosexual co-workers. Upon receiving the email, Szabo forwarded a responsding email requesting that he not be sent this type of information as he found it disgusting and offensive. He was fired for not apologizinig for his comments.

16. A bank in Rochester NY was so intent on not being associated with Christianity that it deleted a 5th graders drawing contest entree b/c it had a cross included.

17. Chevrolet was harshly critisized for sponsoring a Christian music tour featuring Michael W. Smith, Third Day, and pastor Max Lucado because by doing so it was favoring Christianity. Chevrolet spokesman Steve Betz pointed out that research reveals that 26 of the 44 markets in the SE (where the tour was focused) had Bible study and devotional reading as the main leisure activities. Chevrolet was just doing good business.

18. Proposed bill AB 196 mandates fines up to 150,000 against business owners, including non profits such as boy scouts and Bible bookstores, for refusing to hire cross-dressing and transsexual job applicants.

19. In 2001, San Francisco adopted a policy allowing city employees to obtain sex-change operations at taxpayers expense.

20. In 2002, PA governor Mark Schweiker signed a hate crime bill that could be stretched to prohibit the mere expression of opinion disapproving of homosexuality.

21. 2002 Miss America, Erika Harold, made her views supporting abstinence well known, but pageant officials pressured her not to talkk publicly about her views.

22. Corpus Christi, a play portraying Christ as a homosexual who engages in sexual behavior with his disciples was described by time magazine as a "serious, even reverent, retelling of the Christ story in a modern idiom- quite close, in its way, to the original."

23. CNN correspondant Nancy Curnow casually referred to the story of a Muslim murdering Christians as 'religious violence b/w Muslims and Christians.' When a Muslim murdered a Christian medical missionary in Lebanon the NY times headlined the story, 'Killing underscores enmity of evangelists and muslims.'

24. Columbine students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold made a video before massacring their fellow students in which they mockingly said, "What would Jesus do? What would I do? Boosh (pointing a gun at the camera)...Yeah, I love Jesus. I love Jesus. Shut the F--- up...Go Romans. thank God they crucified that a-- hole...Go Romans! Go Romans! Yeah! Whoo!'" Klebold also referred to Christian student Rachel Scott as a 'godly whore' on the video, yet a 20 page cover story report of the tragedy in time magazine mentions absolutely nothing about this video.

25. The murder of Mary Stachowicz by a homosexual coworker received little media attention even though it was incredibly similar to the murder of Matthew Shepherd by three rednecks. Nationally 46 stories picked up the Stachowicz murder while more than 3,000 (including 45 in the NY times alone, were published on the Shepherd story.

Those are just 25 of the many examples in the book. Some of them are direct intolerance of Christianity, some of them are attacks against the Christian worldview and Christian values. Some of the persecutors gave in as soon as their position became known publicly, some of them lost in court. Whatever the case, Limbaugh gives plenty of solid evidence that meaningful Christianity and Christian values are often singled out and attacked in our culture.

[gilchristfan]

Responses are in bold:

Ok, ok...before we get anyone else pretending or assuming that Limbaugh is hoping for a theocracy, or that he's complaining that creationism isn't taught as scientific fact, or whatever, I'll give some actual examples from the book.

1. The chancellor of the New York City Department of Education prohibited the display of thte Nativity Scene in NYC schools during Christmas, but allowed displays of the Jewish menorah and the Islamic star and crescent.

Bad idea, very bad. I'm sure the ACLJ stepped in. You can't give preference of one religion over another.

2. At Pattison Elementary School the singing of Christian oriented Christmas songs was banned, but students were threatened with a grade reduction if they refused to participate in singing songs of other faiths.

See above, that's 2. I'd like to know what the songs of "other faith" were.


3. A teacher at Lynn Lucas Middle School escorted two students to the principals office when they walked into her classroom with Bibles. The girls' mother who had been paged arrived at the principles office just in time to see the teacher say "This is garbage" and throw the Bibles in the trash.

[B]Dumb ass teacher, plain and simple. There are plenty of them. Teachers do stuff like this all the time, and not merely for anti chirstian reasons. Kids get hauled down to the principals's office for drawing swasticas, confederate flags, and passing love notes. Kids are told to remove T-shirts with sexual themes. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they overreact.

Were the kids expelled? Suspended?

4. Monarch High School disallowed a group of Christian students from meeting on school property while, at the same time, allowing a Gay/Straight alliance club, a multicultural club, a peace jam club, and amnesty international to meet.

The other groups don't sound like they have any religiious affiliation. Are they allowing Jewish groups, Muslim groups, Druids, from meeting too?

5. In the textbook 'Across the Centuries' students weren't just required to learn about Islam, they were forced to pretend they were Muslims, praying in the name of Allah. Teachers told students during this course, 'You and your classmates will become Muslims." Clearly if this Christianity had been stuffed down the throats of the students the ACLU would have stepped in, but here only the ACLJ would do so.

Were the kids also being taught about Christianity in a historical context too? If not, probably a bad idea, that's 3, but only assuming teaching of historical Christianity is forbidden. BTW, if taught Christianity, should they be required to teach about the Crusades?, The Inquisition?

6. A public school freshmen health textbook reads, "Testing your ability to function sexually and give pleasure to another person may be less threatening in the early teens with people of your own sex...you may come tot the conclusion that growing up means rejecting thte values of your parents." This is not a neutral position. It is an active rejection of Christian values.

This has nothing to do with persecution of Christians, Is teaching evolution also an "active rejection of Christian values?"

7. A principal in Newton would not abide by parents' directions to remove their children from a condom-distribution program, telling them, 'It's too important."

Once again, this could be a principal overreacting, as I believe parents should be able to pull a child from such a program, but that's me. This is more pro-protection than anti-Christian.

8. Student Michael Nash won a scholarship based on his academic achievement, but had it taken away when the school found out he planned to major in philosophy/religion. When the ACLJ filed suit, the school changed its position, but similar cases are popping up around the country.

I've heard about this case and don't know all the particulars. Fact is, the kid wqon in the courts. I'll give half credit for this. You're up to 3 out of 8

9. Alabama court chief Justice Roy More was forced to remove the ten commandments display, but on the outside wall of the federal courthouse in Montgomery is a much larger (albeit less publicized) statue of Artemis, the Greek goddess of justice. No one asserts that the statue represents an establishment of religion.

you're right, no one DOES assert Artemis is a religious symbol anymore. That's why we refer to the realm of Greek gods as "mythology". Of course, I suppose we could rename all of the constellations after Christian symbols, if that would make people feel less persecuted." BTW, I was wondering when the good judge would be mentioned. Does Limbaugh consider him a martyr? I do have a certain respect for the man myself, I usually do when people stand up for what they believe in. I also KNOW he wasn't persecuted for his faith.

10. Patrick Cubbage, a 54 year old vietnam veteran participated in more than 2,000 burial cermonies on government property. Whenever the families wanted him to, he would say a blessing at the graveside such as "God bless you and this family, and God bless the United States of America." He was fired, not at the complaint of any grieving family, but because two fellow guardsmen said it was a violation of the establishment clause.

Who fired him? Was it a government agency? The national guard? If so, did we appeal? Win his appeal? If he appealed and didn't win, you've got another one.

11. In April 2003 Jack Moody tried to send his military son some Scriptures and some religious comics, but the post office in Lenoir, NC refused, citing a government regulation that anything potentially conttrary to the Islamic faith is prohibited.

Any more on this one? I find it a little hard to believe. Not to say that I can't envision a government workeer doing someithing like this, but did the postmaster actually open the package?

12. In San Francisco, under the superior court policy, judges and commissioners are forbidden from being scoutmasters, troop leaders, or members of a governing board that is affiliated with hthe Boy Scouts or any other organization that excludes homosexuals. The policy is so broad that it could arguably preclude judges from being members of a church that preaches against homosexuality.

Judges are often restricted on which groups they may belong, and whom they may accept political contributions from, it depends on the jurisdiction. On the other hand, it has little, if anything to do with christianity, and more to do with homosexuality. Its a dumb policy, but not really antichristian.

13. In Brighton Township PA, Beaver Assembly of God church was forbidden to expand b/c it only owned 3.2 acres of land and the city requires churches be on tracts with a minimum of 5 acres. The city placed no such burden on non-religious groups. Under the code, schools are subject to a 2 acre minimum. Strip clubs and porn shops face no minimum at all.

I'd like to know the rationale on this zoning reg., but taking it at face value, its discriminatory. I'll give you that.

14. In El Cajon, California, Foothills Christian Fellowship was ordered to take down its banner advertising Vacation Bible School since it didn't' have a special permit, but other advertisements without the permit were not required to take their banners down.

Obtaining a permit is a relatively minesterial task. Were they prevented from getting one, or did they just fail to do so? If the latter, there's no persecution.

15. In Rochester NY, Rolf Szabo was sent an email by his boss telling him and other staff about 'coming out day' at Kodak. The memo included suggestions for helping homosexuals ''come out" at work. Workers were urged to be supportive of the people coming out and acknoweldge their courage. They were to be 'sensitive..aware...and willing to understand' their homosexual co-workers. Upon receiving the email, Szabo forwarded a responsding email requesting that he not be sent this type of information as he found it disgusting and offensive. He was fired for not apologizinig for his comments.

Once again, it has nothing to do with religious affiliation, only on the guy's views of homosexuality. Kodak found him intolerant with co-workers. What's the point?

16. A bank in Rochester NY was so intent on not being associated with Christianity that it deleted a 5th graders drawing contest entree b/c it had a cross included.

Bogus was behind this, I'm sure. And if a kid in a contest sponsored by your church did an entry with a Buddhist theme, you would do what with it?

17. Chevrolet was harshly critisized for sponsoring a Christian music tour featuring Michael W. Smith, Third Day, and pastor Max Lucado because by doing so it was favoring Christianity. Chevrolet spokesman Steve Betz pointed out that research reveals that 26 of the 44 markets in the SE (where the tour was focused) had Bible study and devotional reading as the main leisure activities. Chevrolet was just doing good business.

Did Chevy atually refuse to sponsor this group? Did they continue. The moral majority and the Christian Coalition or any other group of that nature NEVER comes out against sponsors of events it finds objectionable? So when a religious group comes out against sponsors of a gay rally, they can be properly classified as actively persecuting homosexuals, correct?
At least in Chevy's case, they were acting under the motive of not favoring one religion over another.

18. Proposed bill AB 196 mandates fines up to 150,000 against business owners, including non profits such as boy scouts and Bible bookstores, for refusing to hire cross-dressing and transsexual job applicants.

There are plenty of cross dressers in religious groups. they are called nuns.

19. In 2001, San Francisco adopted a policy allowing city employees to obtain sex-change operations at taxpayers expense.

Yet another. has nothing to do with persecuting Christians,though I know I wouldn't want my taxes going to to pay for a sex change. I don't feel persecuted though.

20. In 2002, PA governor Mark Schweiker signed a hate crime bill that could be stretched to prohibit the mere expression of opinion disapproving of homosexuality.

I detest "hate crime" legislation myself. Without reading the wording of the bill, it might have a tough time passing constitutional muster. Its pro gay, not anti Christian though.

21. 2002 Miss America, Erika Harold, made her views supporting abstinence well known, but pageant officials pressured her not to talkk publicly about her views.

Vanessa Williams was removed as Miss American due to publication of nude lesbian photos in Penthouse. Officials of Miss American don' talk about sex.

22. Corpus Christi, a play portraying Christ as a homosexual who engages in sexual behavior with his disciples was described by time magazine as a "serious, even reverent, retelling of the Christ story in a modern idiom- quite close, in its way, to the original."

Time gives an opinon about a play and its now christian persecution?

23. CNN correspondant Nancy Curnow casually referred to the story of a Muslim murdering Christians as 'religious violence b/w Muslims and Christians.' When a Muslim murdered a Christian medical missionary in Lebanon the NY times headlined the story, 'Killing underscores enmity of evangelists and muslims.'


You will have to explain this one to me.

24. Columbine students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold made a video before massacring their fellow students in which they mockingly said, "What would Jesus do? What would I do? Boosh (pointing a gun at the camera)...Yeah, I love Jesus. I love Jesus. Shut the F--- up...Go Romans. thank God they crucified that a-- hole...Go Romans! Go Romans! Yeah! Whoo!'" Klebold also referred to Christian student Rachel Scott as a 'godly whore' on the video, yet a 20 page cover story report of the tragedy in time magazine mentions absolutely nothing about this video.

Reach of reaches. Now the Columbine shootings, by two obviously demented students, is now part of Christian persecution, coupled with a liveral media cover up?

25. The murder of Mary Stachowicz by a homosexual coworker received little media attention even though it was incredibly similar to the murder of Matthew Shepherd by three rednecks. Nationally 46 stories picked up the Stachowicz murder while more than 3,000 (including 45 in the NY times alone, were published on the Shepherd story.

see 6, 7 12, 15, 18, 20 and 21 above

Those are just 25 of the many examples in the book. Some of them are direct intolerance of Christianity, some of them are attacks against the Christian worldview and Christian values. Some of the persecutors gave in as soon as their position became known publicly, some of them lost in court. Whatever the case, Limbaugh gives plenty of solid evidence that meaningful Christianity and Christian values are often singled out and attacked in our culture.

OK, so out of the 25 examples you gave, 1,2, 8, 10, 11, and 13, are probably legit. 3, 4 and 5 are maybes. The remainder have nothing to do with persecution of Christians. Out of more than 100 million christians in the US, this is the best he could come up with? Not a single lynching that could be considered an antichristian killing? No church burnings? Any churches that have been shut down? Christians being forced to sit at the back of the bus or drink from a different water fountain, merely because they are Christian?

When someone does something that protects homosexuals, it is persecution of Christians????? When someone comes out with something different from your own idealogy they are antiChristian or worse, persecutors? You know better than that.

[Halbert]

I find a lot of them hard to believe, but even if they are true they are isolated incidents of over-zealous individuals who exhibit poor judgment, not a systemic attack against Christianity. If you want to see a legitimate systemic attack against a particular religion in the US search for examples of Islamic or Jewish persecution.

[matthew94]

I saw David Limbaugh and Jay Sekulow (ACLJ) on a debate a few weeks back and they seemed to agree they wouldn't want the Judge More case as a lawrer. There are many more clear cut cases to chose from of that sort.

As for your comments on the examples I listed, I appreciate the time you put into it. Here are a few comments in reply.

First of all, I'm aware, and Limbaugh mentions that, in many of these cases, the attacked Christian wins in the courts. We all agree that that is a good thing. The problem isn't that free exercise is winning in courts, it's that free exercise is being challanged more and more each year in our nation.

Secondly, Limbaugh's book goes back and forth from discussing 'Christianity out' to discussing 'secularism in.' He is showing that while Christian values are being banned from schools, they are not being replaced by neutrality, they are being replaced by the opposite values. While abstinence education is at best ignored and at worst mocked in many schools, fornication and homosexual experimentation are sometimes applauded. This is not directly anti-Christian, but there is no doubt that the idea in this nation that homosexuality is morally wrong has mostly Christian roots. Therefore Christian values concerning sex are being thrown out with the opposing values being filtered in to replace them. The government, in publicly funded ways, is endorsing homosexuality, but saying rejecting homosexuality is a violation of the establishment clause. Do you see the contradiction?

Thirdly, I wasn't saying that all those examples were ILLEGAL. Nor was Limbaugh. Persecution doesn't have to be illegal. Legal persecution is still persecution. When Christian kids in school are made fun of because they are Christian it isn't really illegal, but it's still not a good thing.

Fourthly, our nation would never tolerate church burnings and direct attack of the church. We are a nation of mostly Christians! That is why the persecuters in this country attempt legal means to persecution. They try to get away with persecution and don't retreat until someone notices. That is what frustrates me. They know what they are doing is illegal, but they just see how far they can push the issue.

I don't think persecution of Christians in the New Testament started with murder. At first they tried to force them to stop practicing their faith through legal means. They tried to shut them up. When they wouldn't do so, persecution grew to be more violent and deadly.

What we are seeing today is the initial stages of Christian persecution. It starts with legal mocking, moves on to a few court cases that are easily dismissed, then a few extreme judges rule in favor of the persecution, after a while Christians are free to exercise their religion, and eventually they live in fear or their lives are put in danger.

Limbaugh's book was a warning to all of us. Segments of our nation are on a course leading to Christian persecution. The end of that road wouldn't be good for Christians and it wouldn't be good for this country. So I am thankful for the word of warning he provided.

[gilchristfan]

Any idea of what he's really doing Matt? Its a tried and true method to gain political power.

1) Profess yourself to be a victim, or your collective group to be persecuted. Come up with a few legitimate items that could possibly construed as persecution, and then a whole bunch more that sound like they could be persecution, at least at first glance. After enough garbage is continually thrown around, the canvas will be painted, regardless of the colors used.

2) Convince yourself that your cause is just, and its not hard to do when the subject is religion, as the cause can will be rooted through divine inspiration. It worked well for both sides in the Civil War, for cults, and works very well for Muslim extremists.

3) For those in your group that are lukewarm, they can be energized through continuous reminders that they are not real members of the group unless they wholeheartedly take up the cause. Its a combination of patriotism and peer pressure.

4) Find a group to target as the cause of your perceived victimization. Right now, its the liberals, but that concept may be a little too broad. A better defined group may be needed. The Supreme Court? the federal courts? minority religions? There will have to be a specific enemy in the attack. It worked tremendously for Hitler 70 years ago, but he used a definable group to point to.

Of course, it gets worse from there (rights of the targeted group are suspended on a "temporary basis", just long enough to restore order, a giving in to the demands of the "victimized" group out of guilt, etc), but you get the general idea.

Using a persecution complex strategically can be a very effective political weapon, and I have little doubt that this is what he is hoping to accomplish.

[Dr. Who]

That's an incredibly cynical interpretation of David Limbaugh's motivations, Gilchristfan. You preemptively assume, because you do not find the argument compelling yourself, that Limbaugh must have a different motive than his stated one. While this kind of `hermeneutic of suspicion' is sometimes correct -- and we all tend to have more mixed and complex motives than we are aware of -- it is not patently obvious that every person who argues to defend a group from perceived persecution, religous, ethnic, what have you, is necessarily engaged in demagoguery, certainly not to be linked in the same breath with Hitler without significant evidence.

That being said, playing the victim card has been a politically effective tool in contemporary America. I am suspicious of it as well, though, again, that does not mean it is always illegitimate. My own experience in academe is extensive and though I suspect you will dismiss me as inherently biased, my experience confirms much of what Limbaugh writes about. Exclusion and defamation of Christians is tolerated just because it is assumed we are a Christian nation. Under the rubric of white, male, patriarchy traditional European as well as early American traditions are fair game -- so much so that it is now routine, for example, to call Columbus not a hero, but a genocidal tyrant. Unquestioned glorification is not simply complicated, but the pendulum swings 180 degrees.

I continue to assert that Christian voices are either excluded or marginalized. Here is part of my gripe: when Johnny and Sally go to school, they are given a history and an ethics that either ignores the importance of Christianity entirely or are given a skewed vision that makes Christiainity out to be a worldview entirely incompatible with everything that is substantively taught in the school. (Students are given a split vision of reality. On the one hand, they may choose to believe all they learn at home and Sunday school, but if they want to be rational, scientific, and accepted by intelligent, educated people, well then . . .)

Some might argue that it is not the schools' place to inculcate any substantive worldview, but in fact, it is an Enlightenment myth that one can simply promote a neutral, rational worldview and allow `value judgments' and the like to be privately determined. The truth is, as Matt claims, that there is always a presupposition of some value system. Hence, I believe a truly democratic education should allow for debate and the presentation of a plurality of views, whereas what we actually have is the surreptitious presentation of a secular, positivist faith with an emotivist ethic pretending to be purely neutral.

Just as an addendum, the Crusades and the Inquistion are always trotted out as favorite whipping boys. Like everything else, the historical reality is much more complicated than the ideological crudity that is happily made use of by those who tend to see religion as a baneful influence, of which, of course, one is forced to concede there are pleniful examples, though Christianity has within its own resources an explanation for such -- its called sin and religion is nothing but realist when it asserts that mankind suffers from deep flaws, moral and intellectual, that effect even his best aspirations and most noble creations.

[gilchristfan]

When David Limbaugh comes up with some real evidence of actual Christian persecution, maybe I'll change my opinion. But when the vast majority of his examples relate to the homosexuality issue (a deeply divided issue among Christians BTW, at least in the manner that homosexuals should be treated), and then somehow called this persecution of Christianity, his position becomes little more than propoganda.

[matthew94]

First of all, I agree with Dr. Who that it's quite a jump to compare Limbaugh to Hitler in motivation

Maybe that comparison should be example 26 :)

Also, it's important to notice that the debate within the church between homosexuality is almost a direct correlation b/w the debate on whether or not God's Word is truly God's Word. For the most part, denominations that have continued to trust the Bible as God's Word also continue to count homosexuality as sin. Those who have departed from the doctrine of biblical infallibility are much more likely to accept it as simply an alternative lifestyle. Clearly, then, acceptance of homosexuality is not a biblical (and therefore not a Christian) idea, but a human idea allowed only when the Word of God has been dismissed or moved behind human reason and emotion in trustworthiness.

But again, Christianity has practical fruit. One huge branch of consequences is a distinct and specific brand of morality based on absolute truth. So for Limbaugh to describe moral practices in the book makes sense. Going against Christian morality, and in some cases persecuting those who put them into practice or attempting to make them practice the opposite, is indeed a form of persecution.

[BogusTrumper]

But not a stretch to compare Limbaugh to Limbaugh. It's demagoguery pure and simple.

[gilchristfan]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
First of all, I agree with Dr. Who that it's quite a jump to compare Limbaugh to Hitler in motivation

Maybe that comparison should be example 26 :)

Maybe I should have used Charles Manson as an example, he used the same technique :) But then again, he used sex and drugs as lures also. Jim Jones perhaps? The KKK was founded on the same preceptions that Limbaugh now claims exist. Except they added the angry white man shut out by society angle.

Nevertheless, its the technique used that I was illustrating. I remind you, it was you claiming that the perceived persecuted cited by Limbaugh could plant the seeds of a new Roman Empire and actual persecution taking place.

Originally posted by mattrose992000


Also, it's important to notice that the debate within the church between homosexuality is almost a direct correlation b/w the debate on whether or not God's Word is truly God's Word. For the most part, denominations that have continued to trust the Bible as God's Word also continue to count homosexuality as sin. Those who have departed from the doctrine of biblical infallibility are much more likely to accept it as simply an alternative lifestyle. Clearly, then, acceptance of homosexuality is not a biblical (and therefore not a Christian) idea, but a human idea allowed only when the Word of God has been dismissed or moved behind human reason and emotion in trustworthiness.

OK, thanks for admitting there is a division in Christianity on the homosexuality issue, or at least, as I stated previously, the manner in which homosexuals are treated. How does this division equate with persecution?

Originally posted by mattrose992000


Going against Christian morality, and in some cases persecuting those who put them into practice or attempting to make them practice the opposite, is indeed a form of persecution.

1) Slavery was considered a form of Christian morality, especially in the South. Ending slavery was really persecution of Chrsitians?

2) Up until 6 months ago, in many states it was illegal to engage in the act of homosexuality within the confines of one's own home. One could be arrested, tried and jailed for doing so.
Now, because this type of state action is no longer permissible, Christianity is being persecuted? Who is really being persecuted, and who are the persecutors?

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by Dr. Who
Some might argue that it is not the schools' place to inculcate any substantive worldview, but in fact, it is an Enlightenment myth that one can simply promote a neutral, rational worldview and allow `value judgments' and the like to be privately determined. The truth is, as Matt claims, that there is always a presupposition of some value system. Hence, I believe a truly democratic education should allow for debate and the presentation of a plurality of views, whereas what we actually have is the surreptitious presentation of a secular, positivist faith with an emotivist ethic pretending to be purely neutral.

It's not the schools' place. I don't want anyone teaching my kids Christian values except for the Christians I want teaching my kids Christian values. Guess what? The people I want teaching my kids are found at my church. No offense, but I don't want Matt, or anyone with his views, teaching my kids.

Secondly, I don't believe schools present a "secular, positivist faith with an emotivist ethic." The one value I see them teaching is the golden rule - which should satisfy people of all faiths.

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by Dr. Who
The fact that people use a certain line of thinking all the time doesn't mean it isn't contradictory. To spell out more explicitly what at least seemed contradictory to me was your manifest irritation, on the one hand, with the use of the term `nominal Christian,' which you inferred was simply a means of silencing dissent -- and on the other hand, your at least winking concurrence with the possibility that some form of persecution of Christians might be good for the country.

I don't know how serious you were being, but I surmised you meant that silencing certain Christian voices in certain public arenas might be alright -- (I know you wouldn't tolerate lions and tigers and bears, oh my) -- in any event, in essence, a silencing of dissent from the liberal, secular majority that holds forth in the media and academe. That's what I meant by seeming contradiction, what a long explanation this is.



I was not winking. And I didn't mean to give the impression that I thought that persecuting Christians was good in any way. I was merely challenging another one of his points - that more Christianity mixed in with our culture would somehow straighten this country out - considering the kind of Christianity I've seen people practice. So let me say it again:

#1 - Christians are not being persecuted
#2 - More Christianity would not necessarily straighten this country out.

[shiva2999]

Considering matt has noted for us that a professed atheist could never be elected President, specifically because they are atheists...

Does that not sound like persecution?

When was the last time a non Christian was elected president?

Are there any non Christian senators? Supreme court justices? Governors? Police chiefs?

[BogusTrumper]

Additionally, but this is beside the point, if I did mean what you took me to mean, wouldn't that be less contradictory - aside from the fact that I would be advocating the persecution of me?

#1 - Christians are not being persecuted
#2 - But they should be

And, yes, I can say all that in one breath whereas your explanation of what you think I said may take a few more.

Is there a prize for succintness?

[gilchristfan]

Originally posted by shiva2999
Considering matt has noted for us that a professed atheist could never be elected President, specifically because they are atheists...

Does that not sound like persecution?

When was the last time a non Christian was elected president?

Are there any non Christian senators? Supreme court justices? Governors? Police chiefs?


There were a number of Jewish SC justices, beginning with Louis Brandeis and Benjamin Cardozo. After retiring, that seat went to Felix Frankfurter, and later Arthur Goldberg. It became known as the Jewish seat.

But with that aside, your point is well taken, and I can't believe they cannot see the obvious. I can't think of a religious group with more political power in the country than Christianity. None come close. But yet, it is somehow a persecuted minority subjected to systematic contempt and exclusion? Some will never be happy until the theocracy is created.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by gilchristfan
There were a number of Jewish SC justices, beginning with Louis Brandeis and Benjamin Cardozo. After retiring, that seat went to Felix Frankfurter, and later Arthur Goldberg. It became known as the Jewish seat.

But with that aside, your point is well taken, and I can't believe they cannot see the obvious. I can't think of a religious group with more political power in the country than Christianity. None come close. But yet, it is somehow a persecuted minority subjected to systematic contempt and exclusion? Some will never be happy until the theocracy is created.


Ahem...

I was considering mentioning Jews as the obvious exception, but you know what that leads to charges of.

[matthew94]

The fact that you haven't to say you're Christian to be elected in most cases is not persecution. It's a fruit of the fact that most people in this country classify themselves as Christians. It's democracy.

Obviously, and we can all agree to this, there are people in this nation (just like there are people on this message board) who are very anti-Christian.

Now they want power as well. And they are sometimes smart. They have figured out that they can squeeze themselves into positions of power through the courts and through education. They know that if they can attack the most fundamental parts of Christianity, they can ruin the whole.

So they found a way to teach young people their values and ban Christian values from the schools. They found a way to make unconstitutional laws without much publicity. They found a way cast orthodox and practicing Christians in the same light as Islamic terrorists.

And many people are buying into their lies. That's why you have persecution of Christians by other people who, on a national census, would also be considered a Christian.

[matthew94]

And BTW...I absolutely DO NOT want a theocracy

I don't know how many times I have to say it

I simply observe the establishment clause trampling over the free exercise clause when in reality they are BOTH supposed to be for the benefit of freedom of religion in this nation.

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
Now they want power as well. And they are sometimes smart. They have figured out that they can squeeze themselves into positions of power through the courts and through education.

I hate it when they do that.

What percentage of educators do you imagine squeezed themselves through school in order to get certified and then put in long, hard hours in order to inflitrate our schools so that they can spread their lies? They should really quit their jobs now that they've succeeded. Man, way to stay with the plan.

And Christians persecuting Christians? I hate that too.

[BogusTrumper]

What is the most fundamental part of Christianity?

[Mehser]

Originally posted by mattrose992000


Obviously, and we can all agree to this, there are people in this nation (just like there are people on this message board) who are very anti-Christian.


Are there people on this board that are anti-Christian? I suppose, but it definitely depends upon one's definition of anti-Christian.

I think that there are a number of people who are not ant-Christian, despite being non-Christian themselves. And that is an important distinction.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
The fact that you haven't to say you're Christian to be elected in most cases is not persecution. It's a fruit of the fact that most people in this country classify themselves as Christians. It's democracy.


Ah, the appeal to the majority again.

Doesn't the refusal to vote for a candidate specifically because of their religious/non-religious beliefs make one a bigot matt?

[Mehser]

Originally posted by shiva2999
Ah, the appeal to the majority again.

Doesn't the refusal to vote for a candidate specifically because of their religious/non-religious beliefs make one a bigot matt?


I would say it very well could.

But would you vote for a fundamental christian any faster than Matt would vote for an athiest?

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by Mehser
I would say it very well could.

But would you vote for a fundamental christian any faster than Matt would vote for an athiest?

If I liked other things they said more than the things the other candidates said, yes, of course.

[BogusTrumper]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
That's why you have persecution of Christians by other people who, on a national census, would also be considered a Christian.

In other words, the "nominal" Christians.

[EricStratton]

Originally posted by shiva2999
If I liked other things they said more than the things the other candidates said, yes, of course.


So it there a possibility a person can be defined by more than one thing?

[BogusTrumper]

I just can't get over how sneaky those "anti-Christians" are. And brilliant. Just brilliant. Or are they just stealing that strategy from Ralph Reed?

[gilchristfan]

Originally posted by EricStratton
So it there a possibility a person can be defined by more than one thing?

No of course not. Penile size is all that really matters.

[gilchristfan]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
The fact that you haven't to say you're Christian to be elected in most cases is not persecution. It's a fruit of the fact that most people in this country classify themselves as Christians. It's democracy.

Obviously, and we can all agree to this, there are people in this nation (just like there are people on this message board) who are very anti-Christian.

Now they want power as well. And they are sometimes smart. They have figured out that they can squeeze themselves into positions of power through the courts and through education. They know that if they can attack the most fundamental parts of Christianity, they can ruin the whole.

So they found a way to teach young people their values and ban Christian values from the schools. They found a way to make unconstitutional laws without much publicity. They found a way cast orthodox and practicing Christians in the same light as Islamic terrorists.

And many people are buying into their lies. That's why you have persecution of Christians by other people who, on a national census, would also be considered a Christian.


Very good. Mr. Limbaugh has another convert. Let the Holy War begin!! Lets begin with the US goverment. There are currenly 10,000 anti-christians that have infiltrated the United States government.

1) we need a blacklist. 2) we need heaings 3) we need more anti-christian prohibition laws. 4) we need a Christian loyalty oath. 5) we need a Christian police force. 6) we need to close stores on Sundays to honor the Sabbath. Any one out on the streets on Sundays?, well, we'll know what side they are on.
7) We need a new preamble to the Constitution, reminding everyone that this is a Christian nation, run by Christians, for christians. 8) Inquisition, we definitely need a new inquisition.

Ok, I'm boiling over with ideas, when's the first meeting.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by EricStratton
So it there a possibility a person can be defined by more than one thing?

Let me also point out that atheists have been voting for Christians for over 200 years.

But Christians won't vote for atheists.

So tell me how it's all the same thing again Eric.

[EricStratton]

Originally posted by shiva2999
Let me also point out that atheists have been voting for Christians for over 200 years.

But Christians won't vote for atheists.

So tell me how it's all the same thing again Eric.


Did I say it was?

[matthew94]

I'm not saying there is a vast conspiracy or anything BT. I'm just stating the FACT that the views of those teaching our students in higher education is in stark contrast to the views of the American people. There are stats to back that up. How does such a situation come about? By accident? I don't think so. Educational organizations led by secular humanists plan it that way. And they have, to a large extent, succeeded.

What is the most fundamental part of Christianity? The Gospel. Who you say Christ is is the most important part. Christ is fully God, fully man, our only Savior, and will return with judgement.

Mehser. There are definitiely many on this board who are non-Christians but certainly not anti-Christian. By no means did I intend to convey that alll non-Christians are anti-Christian. There are only a few that could probably be classified as anti-Christian (probably those saying that Christianity is a mental disorder or that we'd be better off if Christians were kicked out of the country).

Shiva...No, not voting for someone simply because they are an atheist is not bigotry at all. First of all, people cannot be compartmentalized. No one is JUST an atheist or JUST a Christian. So, in a sense, no I wouldn't vote for someone JUST b/c they're an atheist. That would be impossible. But why on earth would I vote for someone who has a completely different worldview than me? Why would I vote for someone who doesn't believe the foundational things about life that I believe? It wouldn't make sense for someone to do that.

Gilchrist...you are not attacking my position or Limbaugh's. I agree with his book, but that doesn't make me agree with any of your 8 mocking ideas. That's a theocracy. I DO NOT WANT THAT. Limbaugh isn't calling for that either. AT ALL. He is pointing out some places in the system where free exercise is being trampled by a misunderstanding of the establishment clause. His book is a defensive warning, not an offensive plan to take over the country.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
Shiva...No, not voting for someone simply because they are an atheist is not bigotry at all. First of all, people cannot be compartmentalized. No one is JUST an atheist or JUST a Christian. So, in a sense, no I wouldn't vote for someone JUST b/c they're an atheist. That would be impossible. But why on earth would I vote for someone who has a completely different worldview than me? Why would I vote for someone who doesn't believe the foundational things about life that I believe? It wouldn't make sense for someone to do that.


So you'd vote for an incompetant Christian but not a competant atheist?



Webster's 1913 Dictionary

Definition: \Big"ot*ed\, a.
Obstinately and blindly attached to some creed, opinion
practice, or ritual; unreasonably devoted to a system or
party, and illiberal toward the opinions of others. ``Bigoted
to strife.'' --Byron.

Syn: Prejudiced; intolerant; narrow-minded.

[matthew94]

haha, come on Shiva :)

No, I wouldnt' vote for an incompetant Christian over a competant atheist

But I'd be pretty mad if those were the only 2 candidates :)

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
haha, come on Shiva :)

No, I wouldnt' vote for an incompetant Christian over a competant atheist

But I'd be pretty mad if those were the only 2 candidates :)



Do you think it's possible that a candidate could lie to you about their religious beliefs to get your vote?

[matthew94]

Yes, that is possible

It almost seems like your inferring something :)

[shiva2999]

You infer. I imply.

[matthew94]

True :) my mistake

Do you think George W. Bush is a fake Christian?

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
True :) my mistake

Do you think George W. Bush is a fake Christian?


He could very easily have convinced himself that he is one.

I have to tell you though, I'm doubly skeptical of people who claim to be born again.

And then when they use that fact to sell themselves politically, well...

[matthew94]

See...I look at it differently

You say he claims to be born again and USES that fact to get elected

I say he probably is born again and the voters like that

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
See...I look at it differently

You say he claims to be born again and USES that fact to get elected

I say he probably is born again and the voters like that


Probably?

So you think there's a possibility he could be lying?

[Halbert]

WOW

I believe you that Bush claims he's born again, I just never heard it myself.

That makes me respect him even less, but not for the reason you might think.

I've know a lot of cool born-agains. If he really is (or thinks he is) then he ABSOLUTELY should have handled it differently. There's no good born agains that I know that would have rushed to war the way he did.

Wow.

How about a sh** sandwich for President?

[Halbert]

Wait a minute, I thought matt said Bush claimed to be born again.

No offense, but if it was shiva that initially said that, well, I'll have to check it out.

If he did claim to be born again then my previous comment stands.

[shiva2999]

Originally posted by Halbert
No offense, but if it was shiva that initially said that, well, I'll have to check it out.


Geez, you're getting a little snippy lately.

Have I insulted you somehow?


http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/georgewbush.htm


Email Says Presidential Candidate George W. Bush is a Born-Again Christian-Truth!


Summary of Rumor:
This email says Bush was asked in an interview about his faith and described that Billy Graham contributed to his decision to "commit my heart to Jesus Christ."


The Truth:
Some versions of this eRumor say it is from an interview. Others say that the presidential candidates were asked by a journalist to give a statement on their faith, but that George Bush was the only one to reply. We've not found that to be the case, but the statement is a true quote from George W. Bush's book, "A CHARGE TO KEEP" (Morrow). It is in chapter 10 titled "The Big 4-0", beginning on page 136.


A real example of the story as it has been circulated:

Subject: George Bush's Statement of Faith
If any of you are interested in what George Bush believes spiritually, here it is. It's from an interview when he was asked about his faith. "Actually, the seeds of my decision had been planted the year before, by the Reverend Billy Graham. He visited my family for a summer weekend in Maine. I saw him preach at the small summer church, St. Ann's by the Sea. We all had lunch on the patio overlooking the ocean. One evening my dad asked Billy to answer questions from a big group of family gathered for the weekend. He sat by the fire and talked. And what he said sparked a change in my heart. I don't remember the exact words. It was more the power of his example. The Lord was so clearly reflected in his gentle and loving demeanor.

The next day we walked and talked at Walker's Point, and I knew I was in the presence of a great man. He was like a magnet; I felt drawn to seek something different. He didn't lecture admonish; he shared warmth and concern. Billy Graham didn't make you feel guilty; he made you feel loved.

Over the course of that weekend, Reverend Graham planted a mustard seed in my soul, a seed that grew over the next year. He led me to the path, and I began walking. It was the beginning of a change in my life.I had always been a "religious" person, had regularly attended church, even taught Sunday School and served as an altar boy. But that weekend my faith took on a new meaning. It was the beginning of a new walk where I would commit my heart to Jesus Christ.

I was humbled to learn that God sent His Son to die for a sinner like me. I was comforted to know that through the Son, I could find God's amazing grace, a grace that crosses every border, every barrier and is open to everyone. Through the love of Christ's life, I could understand the life changing powers of faith.

When I returned to Midland, I began reading the Bible regularly. Don Evans talked me into joining him and another friend, Don Jones, at a men's community Bible study. The group had first assembled the year before, in Spring of 1984, at the beginning of the downturn in the energy industry.

Midland was hurting. A lot of people were looking for comfort and strength and direction. A couple of men started the Bible study as a support group, and it grew. By the time I began attending, in the fall of 1985, almost 120 men would gather. We met in small discussion groups of ten or twelve, then joined the larger group for full meetings. Don Jones picked me up every week for the meetings. I remember looking forward to them. My interest in reading the Bible grew stronger and stronger, and the words became clearer and more meaningful. We studied Acts, the story of the Apostles building the Christian Church, and next year, the Gospel of Luke. The preparation for each meeting took several hours, reading the Scripture passages and thinking

Through responses to discussion questions. I took it seriously, with my usual touch of humor....

Laura and I were active members of the First Methodist Church of Midland, and we participated in many family programs, including James Dobson's Focus on the Family series on raising children. As I studied and learned, Scripture took on greater meaning, and gained confidence and understanding in my faith. I read the Bible regularly. Don Evans gave me the "one-year" Bible, a Bible divided into 365 daily readings, each one including a section from the New Testament, the Old Testament, Psalms, and Proverbs. I read through that Bible every other year. During the years in between, I pick different chapters to study at different times.

I have also learned the power of prayer. I pray for guidance. I do not pray for earthly things, but for heavenly things, for wisdom and patience and understanding. My faith gives me focus and perspective. It teaches humility. But I also recognize that faith can be misinterpreted in the political process. Faith is an important part of my life. I believe it is important to live my faith, not flaunt it.

America is a great country because of our religious freedoms. It is important for any leader to respect the faith of others. That point was driven home when Laura and I visited Israel in 1998. We had traveled to Rome to spend Thanksgiving with our daughter, who was attending a school program there, and spent three days in Israel on the way home. It was an incredible experience. I remember waking up at the Jerusalem Hilton and opening the curtains and seeing the Old City before us, the Jerusalem stone glowing gold. We visited the Western Wall and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. And we went to the Sea of Galilee and stood atop the hill where Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount. It was an overwhelming feeling to stand in the spot where the most famous speech in the history of the world was delivered, the spot where Jesus outlined the character and conduct of a believer and gave his disciples and the world the beatitudes, the golden rule, and the Lord's Prayer.

Our delegation included four gentile governors-one Methodist, two Catholics, and a Mormon, and several Jewish-American friends. Someone suggested we read Scripture. I chose to read "Amazing Grace," my favorite hymn. Later that night we all gathered at a restaurant in Tel Aviv for dinner before we boarded our middle-of-night flight back to America. We talked about the wonderful experiences and thanked the guides and government officials who had introduced us to their country. And toward the end of the meal, one of our friends rose to share a story, to tell us how he, a gentile, and his friend, a Jew, had (unbeknownst to the rest of us) walked down to the Sea of Galilee, joined hands underwater, and prayed together, on bended knee. Then out of his mouth came a hymn he had known as a child, a hymn he hadn't thought about in years. He got every word right: Now is the time approaching, by prophets long foretold, when all shall dwell together, One Shepherd and one fold. Now Jew and gentile, meeting, from many a distant shore, around an altar kneeling, one common Lord adore. Faith changes lives. I know, because faith has changed mine."

"I could not be governor if I did not believe in a divine plan that supersedes all human plans. Politics is a fickle business. Polls change. Today's friend is tomorrow's adversary. People lavish praise and attention. Many times it is genuine; sometimes it is not. Yet I build my life on a foundation that will not shift. My faith frees me. Frees me to put the problem of the moment in proper perspective. Frees me to make decisions that others might not like. Frees me to try to do the right thing, even though it may not poll well... The death penalty is a difficult issue for supporters as well as its opponents. I have a reverence for life; my faith teaches that life is a gift from our Creator. In a perfect world, life is given by God and only taken by God. I hope someday our society will respect life, the full spectrum of life, from the unborn to the elderly. I hope someday unborn children will be protected by law and welcomed in life. I support the death penalty because I believe, if administered swiftly and justly, capital punishment is a deterrent against future violence and will save other innocent lives. Some advocates of life will challenge why I oppose abortion yet support the death penalty. To me, it's the difference between innocence and guilt. Today, two weeks after Jeb's inauguration, in my church in downtown

Austin, Pastor Mark Craig, was telling me that my re-election was the first Governor to win back-to-back, four-year terms in the history of the State of Texas. It was a beginning, not an end.... People are starved for faithfulness. He talked of the need for honesty in government. He warned that leaders who cheat on their wives will cheat their country, will cheat their colleagues, will cheat themselves. Pastor Craig said that America is starved for honest leaders. He told the story of Moses, asked by God to lead his people to a land of milk and honey. Moses had a lot of reasons to shirk the task. As the Pastor told it, Moses' basic reaction was, "Sorry, God, I'm busy. I've got a family. I've got sheep to tend. I've got a life. "Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh, and bring the sons of Israel out of Egypt? The people won't believe me, he protested. I'm not a very good speaker. Oh, my Lord, send, I pray, some other person," Moses pleaded. But God did not, and Moses ultimately did His bidding, leading his people through forty years of wilderness and wandering, relying on God for strength and direction and inspiration. "People are starved for

leadership," Pastor Craig said, "starved for leaders who have ethical and moral courage." "It is not enough to have an ethical compass to know right from wrong," he argued. "America needs leaders who have the moral courage to do what is right for the right reason. It's not always easy or convenient for leaders to step forward," he acknowledged. "Remember, even Moses had doubts."

"He was talking to you," my mother later said. The pastor was, of course, talking to all of us, challenging each one of us to make the most of our lives, to assume the mantle of leadership and responsibility wherever we find it. He was calling on us to use whatever power we have, in business, in politics, in our communities, and in our families, to do good for the right reason. And his sermon spoke directly to my heart and my life.... There was no magic moment of decision. After talking with my family during the Christmas holidays, then hearing this rousing sermon, to make most of every moment, during my inaugural church service, I gradually felt more comfortable with the prospect of a presidential campaign. My family would love me, my faith would sustain me, no matter what.

"During the more than half century of my life, we have seen an unprecedented decay in our American culture, a decay that has eroded the foundations of our collective values and moral standards of conduct. Our sense of personal responsibility has declined dramatically, just as the role and responsibility of the federal government have increased. The changing culture blurred the sharp contrast between right and wrong and created a new standard of conduct: 'If it feels good, do it.' And 'If you've got a problem, blame somebody else'." "Individuals are not responsible for their actions," the new culture has said. "We are all victims of forces beyond our control." We have gone from a culture of sacrifice and saving to a culture obsessed with grabbing all the gusto. We went from accepting responsibility to assigning blame. As government did more and more, individuals were required to do less and less. The new culture said: if people were poor, the government should feed them. If someone had no house, the government should provide one. If criminals are not responsible for their acts, then the answers are not prisons, but social programs.... "For our culture to change, it must change one heart, one soul, and one conscience at a time. Government can spend money, but it cannot put hope in our hearts or a sense of purpose in our lives."... "But government should welcome the active involvement of people who are following a religious imperative to love their neighbors through after school programs, child care, drug treatment, maternity group homes, and a range of other services. Supporting these men and women - the soldiers in the armies of compassion - is the next bold step of welfare reform, because I know that changing hearts will change our entire society."

"During the opening months of my presidential campaign, I have traveled our country and my heart has been warmed. My experiences have reinvigorated my faith in the greatness of Americans. They have reminded me that societies are renewed from the bottom up, not the top down. Everywhere I go, I see people of love and faith, taking time to help a neighbor in need... These people and thousands like them are the heart and soul and greatness of America. And I want to do my part. I am running for President because I believe America must seize this moment, America must lead. We must give our prosperity a greater purpose, a purpose of peace and freedom and hope. We are a great nation of good and loving people. And together, we have a charge to keep."

[matthew94]

Halbert....I do not understand your shock at the term born again. Maybe you are thinking it is something different that I am thinking it is :)

In my understanding all true Christians are born again b/c

1. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God
2. The wages of sin is death
3. The free gift of God is eternal life

So we are as good as dead until we accept Jesus' offer of life. Anyone who has done this is 'born again' so that they are spiritually alive in Christ and have heaven to look forward to.

[Halbert]

Originally posted by mattrose992000
Halbert....I do not understand your shock at the term born again. Maybe you are thinking it is something different that I am thinking it is :)
Yeah, my mistake. I’m sorry I should have known better. I was talking about the specific type of individual and groups that introduce themselves as Born Again Christians, not the principle you’re talking about. I sort of jumped in the middle of the thread there and lost context.

The reason I was so shocked is that I’ve been to a couple of their congregations and in my experience those individuals usually have a strong association with peace and non-violence. They would most likely see war as a last resort. It would be conspicuously hypocritical for them to choose war instead of exhausting the other options, which is why I should have recognized I was seeing the reference wrong.

BTW - it wasn't my flavor of spirituality but they were extremely nice and warm and fun people. Sometimes a little too exhuberant but good people.

Originally posted by shiva2999
Geez, you're getting a little snippy lately.
I have been a little impatient lately so forgive me. I’m processing some challenging things that haven’t quite settled yet.

But this was also related to my inopportune block headedness described above. Based on the definition I was thinking of at the time, Matt has a built in advantage to be accurate about that, don’t you agree? He is naturally a lot closer to that issue than you because it’s his job (and more importantly, his calling). You could throw that information out there a lot easier than Matt could because if you’re wrong it’s only a minor embarrassment, but if Matt does it then it’s a major matzo ball that just sits out there. lol. So I saw it as virtually impossible he