Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick
devnull at spamcop.net
Fri Sep 30 09:55:57 EDT 2005
| To argue the way you are doing against them in particular ways that
| Christians interpret them only underscores a division that is not
| there for most Christians (and believers in the 10 commandments).
| IMHO, it is divisive and intolerant and only makes it more
| difficult for moderates to oppose /real/ threats to religious
| liberty - which as FP points out is not a myth.
What many/most don't seem to comprehend is that the push to the mandatory
inclusion of Christian perspective/doctrine is a very dangerous activity.
While I'm in agreement with Christian beliefs and should have no problem
with the inclusion of Christian doctrine as a matter of faith I'm very
concerned that the process will be further hijacked by a) politicians (ample
evidence of that) b) other Christians c) other faiths.
A Theocracy in any government scares the sh|t out of me. We've all seen the
reports of Religious Police in Islamic cultures and many assume it can't
Recall the recent visit to my home about the clothing my 5 and 11 y.o. grand
daughters were wearing? Want to tell me it can't happen in this country?
While the apology I received was genuine I've no doubt it was prompted more
by concerns for the general public's opinion of the congregation than any
real conviction that the original complaints were wrong.
We should all be afraid, very afraid and all the more vigilant as a result.
More information about the SpamCop-Social