Baptist Church Excludes Democrats

[perfessor]

http://www.wlos.com/

I don't get it. Didn't Jesus ply his trade among tax collectors, prostitutes, and other "sinners"?

East Waynesville Baptist asked nine members to leave. Now 40 more have left the church in protest. Former members say Pastor Chan Chandler gave them the ultimatum, saying if they didn't support George Bush, they should resign or repent. The minister declined an interview with News 13. But he did say "the actions were not politically motivated." There are questions about whether the bi-laws were followed when the members were thrown out.

So my question for debate: Should the East Waynesville Baptist Church lose its tax-exempt status?

I say they should, since the pastor has turned the church into an arm of the Republican party.

[MagusYanam]

I don't disagree with much of your position, except that abortion is promoted by Democrats. It is anti-Christian absolutely. NOW, if a woman is going to die from a pregnancy, THEN, she should have every right in the world to be able to decide what to do. That is between her, and her doctor.

That is not what democrats ARE promoting. And you do make it clear that it (abortion) is a convenience.

Okay, so it's a convenience. It's a bad thing. So what are we going to do to decrease the number of abortions in this country?

Maintaining the status quo is probably unwise and unethical, and outlawing abortion will only drive it underground, as it were, and unlicensed people will perform them and more people will die because of them (think Prohibition). In my opinion, both options are undesirable.

We could start by pulling federal funding but leaving abortion legal. That would make abortions more expensive, which would mean that people would start thinking before they act, because a wrong choice would cost them. As a result, fewer abortions. And that's really what everyone all around wants, right?

The relativism and hedonism promoted by our society and grasped far more firmly by Democrat-Liberals (Hollywood, New York?) is also the root cause of every abortion for convenience.

That I highly doubt.

Relativism and hedonism have more of capitalism and consumerism than liberalism at their roots. Liberalism, particularly socialism (which was the mainstay political orientation of most of American and European Christianity for the past century, including Walter Rauschenbusch, H. E. Fosdick and Norman Thomas) has been more concerned with the Social Gospel and aid of the down-trodden than with self-aggrandisement. The attitude of 'me first' propounded by the capitalist ethos can be directly linked to the society of convenience.

Liberalism, as I see it, has very little pull in the consumer culture of today, when the biggest voices are FOX News and Clear Channel (both conservative bastions). It's a culture where, sad to say, sex and violence sell (which explains most of FOX's programming and its subsequent popularity). That culture is something that the liberals I know (including myself) don't particularly want to buy into - you're talking to a guy in a family which watches mostly old tapes of MacGyver and Star Trek TNG for entertainment.

I am not a Republican because of their stance towards the poor and needy. I CAN NEVER be a Democrat becuase I would be yoking myself to the kinds of people mentioned in the first chapter of Romans.

If that's the way you view political orientation, then don't kid yourself. No matter how you vote, you're yoking yourself to people filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. IMHO, Bush was far more wicked, covetous and malicious than Kerry, so guess what? I voted for the latter, and don't regret it.

The Democratic left is more concerned with the plight of the downtrodden than with licentiousness - they're nowhere near as obsessed with sex as the Republican right is. If you want evidence of licentiousness in our society, just watch the average prime-time programme on FOX.

[AlAyeti]

Modern world: It now goes Secularism (and of course Atheism), Socialism and then Sexualsim.

Relativism and hedonism thrive like mold in a dark place in Secular society. Capitalism where liberalism thrives, sells sexualism to a willing customer for sure, but look at where the real horror from sexualization exists. Especially and always the young children of the poor.

Eastern Europe is a perfect example. Western Europe also very licentious. America is gettingn there fast.

You contradicted yourself about Fox. Their news is a joke and has not hooked me into thinking they care about morality. They are snake oil salesmen but at least some good voices are aloud to be heard on Fox News. Their programming on every other Fox channel is not in keeping with a good Christian family.

We could end abortion for convenience if the truth of what an abortion is could be seen by the populace. Why not show some on 60 Minutes, or 20-20? Or CNN? Or how about in schools? There's a thought. Truth shouldn't hurt anyone.

If they are just getting rid of "tissue" then why would it be any difference than watching HBO's programs on forensic science, Autopsy? Or dissecting a frog?

Because we all know that a woman is lied too by the Liberal-Progressive Left that IS the new Democrat Party. And Kerry is Liberal-Progresive to the core.

Maintaining the status qou, would be for the heart wrenching choice of "having to" abort a child for real medical reasons. Legal abortion does not mean the wholesale slaughter of children of whorish behavior.

Womens rights should be choosing the right man in the first place and realizing that the innocent child that is genetically seperate from her body, has rights to life like anyone else.

But that is not the cry of the Democrat lobby. Pelosi and her minnions want unfettered murder. And now they want to redefine "family."

I cannot undersatnd how a Christian can vote for a Democrat NOW.

You write: "Liberalism, as I see it, has very little pull in the consumer culture of today, when the biggest voices are FOX News and Clear Channel (both conservative bastions). "

Uh yeah. What channel other than those of the "Christian Right" is not a Liberal run and Liberalism promoting? Even as you say, Fox's?

C'Mon, do the math!

Capitalism Hollywod style and New York style? Conservatives or Progressive-Liberals at the helm?

Please test me.

MY: "The Democratic left is more concerned with the plight of the downtrodden than with licentiousness - they're nowhere near as obsessed with sex as the Republican right is. If you want evidence of licentiousness in our society, just watch the average prime-time programme on FOX."

That is not the observable truth. Democrat programs in Illinois and DC keep the poor poor. Methadone programs are not the answer to the root cause of addiction. Truth is!

Morality is the cure of most of societies greatest ills, but you see what is promoted and championed by the Left.

That is empirical.

So is, raise your own kids. See them through school. Teach them to be honest. Teach them to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Abortion and the redefinition of "family" is not in keeping with Christian empiricism. But it is in keeping with the Democrat agenda.

The topic of this thread - the Pastor kicking out those who sided with those that would redefine those things- did the right thing the right way.

Kerry was not a good choice for a Christian by his record and his actions.

If you do not repent you have to leave. That is the only issue that a Pastor needs to deal with, whether in politics or the church. And seeing that the Democrats use the pulpit to spread liberal views, the Pastor was justified in his actions.

[MagusYanam]

Relativism and hedonism thrive like mold in a dark place in Secular society. Capitalism where liberalism thrives, sells sexualism to a willing customer for sure, but look at where the real horror from sexualization exists. Especially and always the young children of the poor.

Read some of Rauschenbusch's sermons, why don't you? A good, honest Christian socialist, a forerunner of the modern Democratic Party and someone who, ministering to a parish in the poorest sections of Brooklyn, saw the true ravages of capitalism. Much of the language he uses is the language of modern liberalism. His dream of democratising capitalism and equalising the distribution of wealth now seem a bit naive, but some of us still put his economic concerns at the centre. A good Victorian Social Gospeller, he spoke not a word about sex.

Sex seems only to be a central issue for the conservatives, and I'm sad to say that you have proven no exception. I've been trying to steer this conversation toward the larger issues - economy, educational, environment, foreign policy. You've done nothing but unremittingly and unrepentantly harp on issues of sexuality. This is a warped and incomplete picture of morality at best, moral heresy at worst.

You contradicted yourself about Fox. Their news is a joke and has not hooked me into thinking they care about morality. They are snake oil salesmen but at least some good voices are aloud to be heard on Fox News. Their programming on every other Fox channel is not in keeping with a good Christian family.

Where did I contradict myself about FOX? FOX is half lowest-common-denominator, sex-drugs-and-violence primetime programming like 'Desperate Housewives' and other 'reality' TV shows and half neoconservative propaganda disguised as 'news'. Good voices? Whose? Bill O'Reilly's? Sean Hannity's? Neil Cavuto's? All loud-mouthed sycophants for the Bush Administration.

Maintaining the status qou, would be for the heart wrenching choice of "having to" abort a child for real medical reasons. Legal abortion does not mean the wholesale slaughter of children of whorish behavior.

Agreed, but that's not what I vote for when I vote Democrat.

Uh yeah. What channel other than those of the "Christian Right" is not a Liberal run and Liberalism promoting? Even as you say, Fox's?

Just try to depict Rupert Murdoch as any kind of liberal. You'll find it quite the daunting task.

Capitalism Hollywod style and New York style? Conservatives or Progressive-Liberals at the helm?

As I recall when I lived in Pasadena, Hollywood's where all the rich suburban Republicans lived. More sensible people live in the inner city. As it is, capitalists in general vote overwhelmingly Republican - just look at the who's who of Bush's clientele.

Morality is the cure of most of societies greatest ills, but you see what is promoted and championed by the Left.

Of course. Good social-democrat, anti-war, pro-environment, pro-Keynesian morality with a pragmatic edge. We've got some feasible plans for alleviating some of society's greatest ills. We've got disagreements amongst ourselves over some of the particulars, but we're going to get those sorted out eventually.

Kerry was not a good choice for a Christian by his record and his actions.

What particulars of his record and his actions? I bet they can't be as bad as, for example, pre-emptive aggression against a sovereign power, lying about its justification to the American public, rollback of environmental safeguards with regard to big business and agriculture, exposure and endangerment of CIA personnel...

Need I go on? From what I saw of Kerry's record, it was better by far than Dubya's.

If you do not repent you have to leave. That is the only issue that a Pastor needs to deal with, whether in politics or the church. And seeing that the Democrats use the pulpit to spread liberal views, the Pastor was justified in his actions.

In my experience, in every church I've been to, Democratic pastors use the pulpit to spread the Gospel. The Gospel itself is a very liberal text - 'blessed are the poor' and 'blessed are the peacemakers', et cetera. 'Love your enemies' - a very liberal idea. If this pastor wanted to kick people out who cherish the Gospel, that's his business, but it's a very uncharitable, not to mention un-Christian act.

[AlAyeti]

Liberal and Neo-Liberal are as different as a mother married to the same man for twenty years and never having cheated on him and he her and a whore.

Christians know all too well about protecting their children. And we know what from.

I mean Neo-Liberal when I use the word Liberal. I think you know that. I cannot walk with you politically until the Godless anti-Christians who promote sexual perversion are gone as a political platform issue of the Democrats. I cannot look at Jesus and knowingly support Democrats.

You are caught up in hating George Bush. I'd be a Democrat in a heart beat if they weren't bald-faced liars. And, there is no proof of Bush lying. Being wrong is not complicity. Unfortunately, no politician can ever admit they are wrong or they are doomed. But I have confidence that Bush repents. He just shouldn't cast pearls before Liberal you know whats.

Those 100% Neo-Liberal anti-war protesters, where are their voices against Al Queda? Thinking that they are anti-American socialist Liberals is not a far cry from complete accuracy.

And other social and environmenatl issues, make another thread and lets debate the two-sided Christian views.

Kerry did not fool anyone when he said marriage is a man and a woman. His Party is parasitized by sexual agendaists.

That Liberal Gospel you mentioned, does it include the wheat and the chaff or the wheat and the tares? I can agree with you easily about selfish capitalists being no goodniks, but what about unrepentant sexual degenerates? And yes, homosexual behavior fits that category,

[MagusYanam]

And, there is no proof of Bush lying. Being wrong is not complicity.

Oh, but there is. The CIA told Bush that there was no proof of Iraq being supplied with nuclear materials from Niger, and Bush went ahead and said there was anyway. After Joe Wilson called the administration on it, someone in the administration (probably Karl Rove) ratted out his wife as a CIA operative, endangering not only her life but also national security. No Democrat I know would stoop that low.

For the neoconservative, the ends justify the means. This is not a Christian ethic, and I don't see how you can defend it as such. What happened to 'Be you perfect even as your Father in Heaven'?

Those 100% Neo-Liberal anti-war protesters, where are their voices against Al Queda? Thinking that they are anti-American socialist Liberals is not a far cry from complete accuracy.

The liberals were hurt far worse by the 11 September attacks than the conservatives were. The people in and underneath the tower were New Yorkers. Some of the loudest voices against the terrorists came from the left wing, particularly those most affected by the attacks. Most people here in New England (rightly) oppose war in Iraq because we don't see how it's going to help us stop Usama bin Laden. Sure, Saddam was a slimeball, but he had no connection to al-Qaeda that we could see.

'Anti-American' is not a word a good Christian should throw around. Nor is 'socialist' if meant as an insult. Some of the greatest Christian thinkers in American history were socialists - Rauschenbusch, Mathews, Debs, Thomas, Fosdick, Niebuhr... and the list goes on. I follow in the long tradition of Christian socialism, though I'm somewhat more moderate than Rauschenbusch was.

And other social and environmenatl issues, make another thread and lets debate the two-sided Christian views.

The topic of this thread was about Democrats and their views. I think it should cover all their views.

Kerry did not fool anyone when he said marriage is a man and a woman. His Party is parasitized by sexual agendaists.

That Liberal Gospel you mentioned, does it include the wheat and the chaff or the wheat and the tares? I can agree with you easily about selfish capitalists being no goodniks, but what about unrepentant sexual degenerates? And yes, homosexual behavior fits that category

So what? Homosexuals don't make up or define the Democratic Party, any more than NASCAR fans do the Republican Party. Simple fact - half the people in this country are Democrats, but only 10% of the people in this country (if that) are homosexual.

[AlAyeti]

Mr. M-Y,

Hmm, sounds like you're judging.

I'm cool with that. Rove is innocent of anything last time I looked at the Constitution. But I like your guts for stepping up! I believe almost nothing that comes from the CIA.

It's not so much that I support Republicans, as that I claim that they speak and act politically in ways that Christians can feel more comfortable in having a safer future. The ACLU is completely a Democrat shill organization and is anti-Christian and very anti-American. I do not enjoy knowing socialists call themselves Americans. I claim that the majority of Liberal-Progressives are as close to reprobates as we'll see in our lifetime.

Democrats loathe being held accountable. That is why the term "Politically Correct" means to "relativism away" any culpability of degenerate behavior by the degenerate. Political correctness always means liberal-progressive nonsense.

Environmentalists are horrid people in my view because they scream and rant about trees and endangered grasshoppers, while human babies are slaughtered by sluts and "players." Conservatives are not fond of elevating pimps, and ho's to respectability. But guess which political party rappers vote?

You'll find PETA kooks (LIberals) doing all sorts of stupid acts to stop Kentucky Fried Chicken but they don't seem to have the intelligence to go after Real Estate Agents and Developers with their hysteria-laden antics. Hunters and hunting has brought Endangered species in record numbers. I just had a conversation today with a man I would clearly call a Liberal-Progressive, and he certainly knows what hunting groups have done in real conservation efforts. The Black Bear is close to being a pest species by concerted efforts of organizations that know about land management.

While gas is $43.00 a gallon, we have oceans of it in Alaska. But oh, no, we can't upset a few million caribou.

Democrats speak about the poor and do nothing to challenge The Projects and the immorality that is raised there. The GOP has more guts to confront these issues. Democrats make and give excuses rather than accountability.

How many people in DC and Chicago vote Democrat? 271% if you count the votes!


Democrats (Liberals) have crossed too many lines of anti-Christian acts and votes against protecting children for me to ever want anything to do with them. I'm in California and I see what Democrats have done to our children. In fact you could say I'm an expert on it.

Please popint me to anything Democrats do that could make a Bible-believing Christians feel comfortable? The Anti-War activists are nothing more than vociferous commies and sexual hedonists to speak for America so please don't go there. An historic American is not a coward.

Until I see these Neo-Liberal-Progressive activists, protesting against communist and atheist atrocities and march against Islamic horrors committed every moment worldwide, then I will consider than something more than perverts dancing in the light.

I'd bet almost everything that these people vote Democrtat more often than any other political party.

In fact as a union member, you can consider me an expert on that as well.

It's easy to see why a good Pastor would have a problem with Democrats in his church.

[MagusYanam]

Democrats loathe being held accountable.

That statement is meaningless, since aversion to accountability seems generic to all politicians, most notably President Bush and his ilk. I'm still surprised no one higher than the rank of captain is taking heat for the Abu Ghraib fiasco. Do you think Bush will hold Rove accountable for exposing Valerie Wilson? It will be interesting to see, that's for sure...

Political correctness always means liberal-progressive nonsense.

No, PC is there so that people don't get trampled on. Civil rights and social security may be liberal-progressive, but I don't think you'll find anyone today who is willing to call them 'nonsense' (PC though they are).

Environmentalists are horrid people in my view because they scream and rant about trees and endangered grasshoppers, while human babies are slaughtered by sluts and "players."

Morality isn't just a one-sided issue. Environmentalists have the interests of the natural world (what's left of it, anyway) at heart and are hardly to be blamed for actions beyond their control.

Conservatives are not fond of elevating pimps, and ho's to respectability. But guess which political party rappers vote?

Shows how much rap you listen to. In the words of rap posse ANS-Jump, 'I'm no monsta; I'm no gangsta; I'm no hitman; I'm just me'.

You'll find PETA kooks (LIberals) doing all sorts of stupid acts to stop Kentucky Fried Chicken but they don't seem to have the intelligence to go after Real Estate Agents and Developers with their hysteria-laden antics. Hunters and hunting has brought Endangered species in record numbers. I just had a conversation today with a man I would clearly call a Liberal-Progressive, and he certainly knows what hunting groups have done in real conservation efforts. The Black Bear is close to being a pest species by concerted efforts of organizations that know about land management.

PETA may or may not be a liberal organisation, but I'll tell you one thing: they are most certainly not environmentalists. In Wisconsin, a bill was recently passed to make feral cat hunting legal to protect the songbird population (feral cats take out about eight million a year in Wisconsin) - most environmental agencies, including the Wisconsin DNR, were in favour of the bill, but guess who opposed it (aside from the cat fancy)?

That's right: PETA. Never mind that it's songbirds and the native ecosystem at risk from a prolific, invasive alien species - they want to secure the cats' rights.

Again, your point is ill-researched, ill-supported and not even really coherent, based primarily on stereotypes and caricatures of the liberal position. Where are you getting your data?

While gas is $43.00 a gallon, we have oceans of it in Alaska. But oh, no, we can't upset a few million caribou.

Hyperbole will get you nowhere. It's $2.45 a gallon in this country, and compared with the rest of the world, it's dirt-cheap. Besides, whether or not we have oceans of it in Alaska is irrelevant. The issue here is simple land management: you start allowing private companies or interests to exploit federal land anywhere - not just in Alaska; nothing to do with the reindeer - and it sets a very dangerous precedent.

Democrats speak about the poor and do nothing to challenge The Projects and the immorality that is raised there. The GOP has more guts to confront these issues. Democrats make and give excuses rather than accountability.

Maybe they are more concerned with striking the head of the serpent than the tail. A Keynesian economic policy - higher minimum wage, increased education and social service funds, regulations on business - would ensure that the living conditions in the Projects are better and that people don't have to resort to crime for gain or protection. Immorality is the symptom; poverty is the disease; liberal economics and education are the cure.

Democrats (Liberals) have crossed too many lines of anti-Christian acts and votes against protecting children for me to ever want anything to do with them.

What anti-Christian acts, specifically? Why qualify them as such? How are Democrats against protecting children? From what, specifically? The Democrats I know are all in favour of protecting children from guns (their biggest killer at thirteen a day).

I'm in California and I see what Democrats have done to our children. In fact you could say I'm an expert on it.

I don't say so, because you have done nothing to prove your expertise. You have done nothing but spout generalisations, stereotypes and caricatures of liberal opinions - in short, you have built an army of straw men and gleefully lit the torch on them all, never bothering to assess the real argument. I could just as well say that the Republicans are characterised by gun-obsessed meth addicts in Montana.

So what, specifically, have Democrats done to your children? What does being in California have anything to do with it?

The Anti-War activists are nothing more than vociferous commies and sexual hedonists to speak for America so please don't go there. An historic American is not a coward.

Until I see these Neo-Liberal-Progressive activists, protesting against communist and atheist atrocities and march against Islamic horrors committed every moment worldwide, then I will consider than something more than perverts dancing in the light.

Evidence. I tire of asking this - you've already been told multiple times to support your claims. Anti-war activists in general are not communists - communism itself having been essentially a violent and militaristic political affiliation. You have not been able to prove in any way that anti-war activists are any more prone to sexual hedonism than any other group.

An anti-war activist is not a coward, though you may find it comfortable to live in that illusion.

What you should do is read Gary Dorrien's Soul in Society. One notable historical fact is that the most ardent voices against communism, while it was still a threat (back in the '50's an '60's), came from the left - Reinhold Niebuhr leading the charge a good twenty or thirty years before his time. Arguing from a moderate-socialist standpoint, he claimed in his books Moral Man and Immoral Society and The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness that communism was inherently dangerous because of its pessimism concerning democracy and its pessimism concerning morality - specifically, that the ends (a classless utopian society) justified whatever means necessary to achieve those ends.

As for Niebuhr himself, he was far from being a 'pervert'. He remained faithful to his first wife until she died, and to his second wife until he himself died. He was also a staunch advocate of FDR's New Deal, the welfare state and racial equality. He supported World War II, but ended up vehemently protesting the Vietnam War.

In fact as a union member, you can consider me an expert on that as well.

On unions or on perversion?

It's easy to see why a good Pastor would have a problem with Democrats in his church.

He can have all the problems he wants; he's welcome to them. I don't see how such things are easy to come by, however, and it still doesn't justify throwing them out and continuing to claim political neutrality.

[AlAyeti]

All right I'll step back from heated language. But I'm using accurate descriptions from real life experience.

What have Democrats done to MY children? I can no longer watch network TV for starters. Hollywood votes how? The Left Coast is called the Left Coast for what reason? My children have to hear the normalizing of sexual perversion every day. If they dare speak a word about their religion they face pure ostracizing by children of open-minded diversity promoting Liberals. Almost every day Chrstians that believe the Bible are ridiculed and nothing is done about.

But, Democrats being held to accountability starts with the truth. Show one abortion on 60 Minutes. The loathe the truth. Show deviant sexuality as it really is on the streets and bathrooms in parks and bath houses, instead of showing one tiny fringe of deviants as some sort of downtrodden hero class.

Democrats (Liberals) support and pass laws that children can get abortions or any medical needs met without parental notification. That is not in keeping with Christianity, or anything decent. And please, the amount of parental abuse being grounds to take away every parents rights is bogus. Liberals seem to me to be after promoting sexual licentiousness.

Quoting that rapper was interesting. Think he was a conservative? Do you know how many children die on the streets emulating rappers. Quit blaming the gun and start blaming the disgusting immoral people who think it is OK to shoot someone for their shoes or the color of their hat. I grew up with a mother and a father, had guns in the house, knew how to shoot very well, and never once thought to put a cap in some mother-f----- if he looked at me wrong. C'Mon man do the math.

Democrats (Liberals) promote abortion. It is simply a total lie to use the term rare, safe and legal. It is not pushed onto society by Democrats as something loathsome. Which it completely IS to a Christian or any decent human being. It is washed away in political correctness hypnosis as being a choice. A choice to do what? Kill your unborn child for the convenience of not having to deal with consequences. May God soon remedy this situation.

Democrats are for high taxation to pay for their Liberal Socialistic agenda. Forcing good and honest people to have to pay the way of miscreants. A good person should oppose that. Welfare should only be paid to people who are enrolled in schools. And higher minimum wage is absurd. The median price of a decent house in in a safe and decent neighborhood in California, Massachusetts or New York is a impossible to reach unless you are making a very high income.

Political correctness should not mean the total destruction of "family." But it does. A family "to a child" is a mother AND a father. That is fact. Every child dreams of this.

Neo-Liberalism started with the Anti-war miscreants.

Now, as a union member in California, I assert that anti-war protesters are cowards and mostly interested in getting laid and what they can do to not have to deal with the real problems in the world. Please show me where in America that the anti-war demonstrators are protesting Al Queda? They'll attack anything American under the first amendment but anything that harms Americans is left alone.

No indeed the image of the dope smoking hippy wanting free love (licentiousness) is more prevalent in marchers now as when they started the downfall of American society in the Sixties. You really don't see them as that? I've been there among them. All screaming Liberals in actuality.

I wouldn't join the Army now because few Americans are worth a hang nail let alone my life.

PETA is a good example of the absurdity of liberalism. And c'mon, they are liberals.

Even Liberals drive cars. I've seen them on the way to protest American soldiers dying for them overseas. They Blame Bush for everything and don't see that Socialism is the most expensive political ideology of all.

Where are the Democrats helping the poor? The projects in Illinois or the slums in DC or Watts or Oakland or the masses of illegal aliens on welfare killing the states in which they are parasitizing the society, while bringing the noose with which to hang the capitalist pigs?

Standard Christianty (Bible believing Christians) cannot support what Democrats want to force on American society.

[MagusYanam]

Okay, now I see we're going to be involved in actual discussion.

What have Democrats done to MY children? I can no longer watch network TV for starters. Hollywood votes how? The Left Coast is called the Left Coast for what reason? My children have to hear the normalizing of sexual perversion every day. If they dare speak a word about their religion they face pure ostracizing by children of open-minded diversity promoting Liberals. Almost every day Chrstians that believe the Bible are ridiculed and nothing is done about.

I assume by Hollywood you mean the entertainment industry as centred in Southern California? If so, then they don't vote as an entire industry - many producers of movies, and many actors, are Democratic. However, political affiliation does not drive the content of movies. Numbers at the box office do. And, sad to say, sex and violence get the box office records or the network ratings. It's capitalism at work - it's one of the reasons I don't watch network TV. (I don't feel I'm missing anything, by the way.)

As a former student at an inner-city, largely liberal East Coast high school, I've never been ostracised for speaking from a Christian point-of-view. I've never been ridiculed for being Christian. Heck with it, it was common knowledge at my high school that I was an altar boy at St. Martin's, and it didn't affect my social life at school in the slightest. So, as far as the liberal ostracism and ridicule go, I'm just not seeing it and - no offense - I'm much closer to this particular issue (as a college sophomore) than are you.

But, Democrats being held to accountability starts with the truth. Show one abortion on 60 Minutes. The loathe the truth. Show deviant sexuality as it really is on the streets and bathrooms in parks and bath houses, instead of showing one tiny fringe of deviants as some sort of downtrodden hero class.

I thought it was you complaining about the graphic depictions of sex and violence on network TV, and now you're advocating more? Do you honestly think the FCC will allow such displays? Abortion is wrong and it is definitely not pleasant, I agree there; but don't you think that the truth about it can be handled with a little more tact and decency? Part of what I dislike most about modern consumer culture is the use of shock tactics.

Democrats (Liberals) support and pass laws that children can get abortions or any medical needs met without parental notification. That is not in keeping with Christianity, or anything decent. And please, the amount of parental abuse being grounds to take away every parents rights is bogus. Liberals seem to me to be after promoting sexual licentiousness.

I haven't heard of these laws, or even acts in the process of passing. The closest thing I've heard of to this is anonymous testing for venereal disease that didn't involve notification of relatives - nothing about abortion. Could you post a link for that?

Quoting that rapper was interesting. Think he was a conservative? Do you know how many children die on the streets emulating rappers. Quit blaming the gun and start blaming the disgusting immoral people who think it is OK to shoot someone for their shoes or the color of their hat. I grew up with a mother and a father, had guns in the house, knew how to shoot very well, and never once thought to put a cap in some mother-f----- if he looked at me wrong. C'Mon man do the math.

I don't think the members of ANS-Jump have an official party affiliation, but then again, they're not an American band, either. On an off-hand guess, though, I'd say no, they're liberal. And no, I don't know how many children die on the streets emulating rappers. I take it you have some figures for me?

The hip-hop I listen to doesn't say it's OK to shoot someone for the way they look. In fact, the very ANS-Jump song I quoted you has a line in it telling old folks not to presume they're disobedient kids just because they wear loose clothing or chains around their necks. But then again, hip-hop Longmenzhen-style is pretty tame.

As far as gun ownership goes, it is a very grey issue - and yes, the gun is partly to blame. I think gun owners should be required by law to take safety precautions to ensure that they don't fall into the hands of children loaded, and I think this a reasonable requirement. Guns, like any weapon, must be treated with proper caution - I have no objection to hunting. What I do object to is the complete lack of concern the gun lobby has over whose hands the guns fall into.

Democrats (Liberals) promote abortion. It is simply a total lie to use the term rare, safe and legal. It is not pushed onto society by Democrats as something loathsome. Which it completely IS to a Christian or any decent human being. It is washed away in political correctness hypnosis as being a choice. A choice to do what? Kill your unborn child for the convenience of not having to deal with consequences. May God soon remedy this situation.

From what I've heard from both Democrats and Republicans, the end goal is to reduce the number of abortions, preferably to eliminate them altogether. I've already told you why making it illegal seems to me like asking for disaster. So don't presume to judge us for going about the problem a different way than you would.

The Democratic mentality (and this is from someone who knows) says that through better education and more generous domestic policy, people will be better-equipped to make good choices. And abortion is a sure sign that people have made the wrong choice. You better equip people to handle their problems, personal and economic, and the end result is fewer abortions. Making it outright illegal doesn't help people make better decisions.

Democrats are for high taxation to pay for their Liberal Socialistic agenda. Forcing good and honest people to have to pay the way of miscreants. A good person should oppose that. Welfare should only be paid to people who are enrolled in schools. And higher minimum wage is absurd. The median price of a decent house in in a safe and decent neighborhood in California, Massachusetts or New York is a impossible to reach unless you are making a very high income.

Where are you getting this garbage? As a political liberal and a fiscal conservative, I'll tell you right now why I'm in favour of increased taxation. Here's my liberal-socialist agenda: pay off the national debt. My generation's already going to have to pay through the nose for the fiscal evils of Reagan and now for the fiscal evils of Bush, Jr. - we should at least cushion the blow now by raising taxes and cutting unnecessary spending, especially in the military sector where we least need it.

Higher minimum wage is not a cure-all, but it is a step in the right direction - definitely not an absurdity. As you are probably well aware, the price of real estate in any state is widely variable. We've got good, reasonably-priced housing in the inner city (as most of my high-school teachers will attest, not being particularly wealthy themselves), but get a few miles out into the suburbs and the prices go straight through the roof. Most of Western Massachusetts is like that, I'll bet, but that's not Boston.

Now, as a union member in California, I assert that anti-war protesters are cowards and mostly interested in getting laid and what they can do to not have to deal with the real problems in the world. Please show me where in America that the anti-war demonstrators are protesting Al Queda? They'll attack anything American under the first amendment but anything that harms Americans is left alone.

No indeed the image of the dope smoking hippy wanting free love (licentiousness) is more prevalent in marchers now as when they started the downfall of American society in the Sixties. You really don't see them as that? I've been there among them. All screaming Liberals in actuality.

I wouldn't join the Army now because few Americans are worth a hang nail let alone my life.

PETA is a good example of the absurdity of liberalism. And c'mon, they are liberals.

What does being a member of a union have anything to do with anti-war movements? And how does it make you an authority on pacifism?

I grew up in a church that was philosophically opposed to war in all forms, and in my 12 years there I never met one person in that church who smoked marijuana or who cared more about 'getting laid' than the problems in their community. Of course I don't see pacifists as dope-smoking, free-love hippies, because the ones I know just simply aren't.

And what would the point of protesting al-Qaeda here be, exactly? It isn't an issue and it isn't a controversy - it's widely agreed that what al-Qaeda did to this country was well beyond the pale, among liberals just as much as conservatives. People march over controversial issues, not over consensuses - I don't see conservatives marching against al-Qaeda either, just against gun regulations.

I wouldn't join the Army now because few Americans are worth a hang nail let alone my life.

Congratulations on another straw man well-lit.

PETA is a good example of the absurdity of liberalism. And c'mon, they are liberals.

Then explain the prevalence of Seventh-Day Adventists in animal-rights and vegetarian movements (including PETA).

Even Liberals drive cars. I've seen them on the way to protest American soldiers dying for them overseas. They Blame Bush for everything and don't see that Socialism is the most expensive political ideology of all.

Anyone who's been in a real anti-war demonstration knows perfectly well that it isn't the soldiers who are being blamed but the people who order them about from afar, Bush included.

Socialism may seem an expensive economic policy to the individual taxpayer, but I've seen enough of the ravages of laissez-faire economics and consumer culture to know that in the long run, socialist policies may very well save the society from bankruptcy. I'm willing to pay those extra few cents on the dollar to clear my part of the check.

Where are the Democrats helping the poor? The projects in Illinois or the slums in DC or Watts or Oakland or the masses of illegal aliens on welfare killing the states in which they are parasitizing the society, while bringing the noose with which to hang the capitalist pigs?

Standard Christianty (Bible believing Christians) cannot support what Democrats want to force on American society.

I know that in Providence, they run the soup kitchens and in Boston, the homeless shelters. In Madison they did municipal services for the downtown, did volunteer work for the library system and helped old people repaint and replaster their dilapidated homes. I'd hardly call these activities parasitic.

What do these terms mean, 'standard' and 'Bible-believing' Christianity? Is there any other kind?

[steen]

I'm not distorting anything. Millions and millions of "Evangelicals" see things they way I do.

And you are ALL distorting God's message to suppoirt your personal, right-wing policies of intolerance.

This thread is about Democrats being asked to leave a Bible believing Church.

Yes, because the pastor was not Bible-believing, instead seeking to turn his church into a political machine, thus directly spitting God in the eye. Yes, we have been over that already.

Homosexual marriage is being FORCED onto a populace who knows very well what will happen to further unsettle the fabric of an already ravaged society.

Fascinating misrepresentatioon you are spewing here, claiming to be forced to be in a homosexual marriage. NO? You are still free to marry the one you love? Then homosexual marriage is not forced onto you, and your claim is false. You are bearing FALSE WITNESS. And THAT is most definitely in the Bible.

Homosexual licentiousness is the nail or at least one of the last nails in the coffin of a decent society.

Ah, but the point is marriage, not licentiousness. OR are you saying that married people are licentious? What a weird accusation you are making.

Why "Marriage?" Why that word? Because it will make a wierd and aberrant lifestyle on par with the nuclear family.

No, rather that this is the defining word used in public law and public documents. Yopu are now suffereing from not enough separation of Church and State. It the Church can impose on the State, then the State can also impose on the Church. You can not have it just one way unlkess you are very hypocritical.

Who is kidding who? We all know what is going on AND that is why I support the Pastor in the thread topic in doing what he did.

Because you seek to USE God for your personal political crusade. Yes, we all DO know that htis is what is going on as you imply.

No Christian can talk to Jesus about supporting abortion and homosexual marriage anymore than the myriad of other Secular and unholy things Democrats want to force on our society.

Fascinating misrepresentation, as the conservativbes are "breaking" a multitude of God's commands to us themselves. The hypocricy of your claim is rather astonishing.

Christians cannot align themselves (yoke) with anti-Christians.

Ah, and anti-Christians are political? Fadcinating claim you make, politicizing Christianity in DIRECT VIOLATION of God's word. But probably you are not even ashamed of thus misusing God, as you already are merely USING GOD AS A PAWN for your political agenda.

Why is that it goes Secular-Socialism-Sexualism!?

Well, it isn't, so that's just another nonsense generalization of yours.

Eastern Europe and Communist Asia are slaughtering their young in the sex slave trade.

Are they now? And the Christians are not "slaughtering their young" in their own religious institutions? (Well, the Catholics, anyway. The fundie rightwing controlling fathers rape everybody in the family, not just the kids.)

Lascivious Licentiousness is a major part of the Democrat agenda.

Ah, once again are you resortiong to outright falsehood, flagrantly BEARING FALSE WITNESS to nobody's surprise. Spitting God in the eye as usual.

They Liberal and Progresive parasites dominate and control what was once a noble political party.

Ad hominem hyperbole at its most STUPID. Yes, you are indeed a prince among conservative fundies.