Christian Persecution In The United States?

[MissyP89]

It doesn't really come from the government. It comes from normal people that we interact with in our day-to-day lives. I've been called a ton of names, idolater and Virgin Mary among them, been ridiculed for "worshiping a cracker", and criticized for causing division by holding the "wrong" beliefs and breaking the mold of secularism.

Eh. Do I care? Sometimes. But Christ Himself told us this would come.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1641644' date='Aug 29 2008, 01:13 PM']Most of my relatives are Catholic. I don't ridicule them. . .

I think you are all way blowing it out of proportion here![/quote]
I've been in on-campus 'Christian' groups where the typical anti-Catholic rhetoric was spewed at meetings. People have come to my door and 'informed' me I'm going to hell for being a Catholic. I'm ridiculed even in my own home,by my own parents, on a regular basis for holding and professing the Catholic faith. So no, [i]I[/i] don't think we're blowing it out of proportion.
No one said every single non-Catholic ridicules/demeans Catholics. But whether you agree with the fact that Catholics are still persecuted or not, does not change the actuality that we face.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1641716' date='Aug 29 2008, 01:53 PM']I've been in on-campus 'Christian' groups where the typical anti-Catholic rhetoric was spewed at meetings. People have come to my door and 'informed' me I'm going to hell for being a Catholic. I'm ridiculed even in my own home,by my own parents, on a regular basis for holding and professing the Catholic faith. So no, [i]I[/i] don't think we're blowing it out of proportion.
No one said every single non-Catholic ridicules/demeans Catholics. But whether you agree with the fact that Catholics are still persecuted or not, does not change the actuality that we face.[/quote]

Here's the thing Airways,

I agree with lots of those sediments with them. Now, before this truly erupts into something it isn't - more persecution, think about some people's behaviour here.

Some people say they don't want to be considered one of those right winged Christians because they believe in 6-day creationism. Isn't that the same kind of venom and hatred as you feel at those meetings? What makes the person I read saying that, Anti-Protestant to the extreme, any better than those who say praying to Mary is idolatry?

So, we can see the issue. One side ridicules and belittles the other side, who in turn does the same for other things, and both sides are filled with violence and anger over what they perceive as attacks on their beliefs.

So, how are you going to change that? Are you willing to take a 6-day creationist seriously, or someone who doesn't follow the pope? Or are you going to attack them continually, making them ask if you are truly the sons God talked about, who would will bring peace. . .

Maybe, one of you should say, you know, I am truly sorry for belittling your beliefs, even though I don't share them, in the 6-day creationism, and that you don't follow the Pope. It was wrong of me to be so harsh when you didn't agree with what my faith has taught me. Maybe, if you did that. . . They would forgive and apologize as well!

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1641783' date='Aug 29 2008, 03:40 PM']So, how are you going to change that? Are you willing to take a 6-day creationist seriously, or someone who doesn't follow the pope? Or are you going to attack them continually, making them ask if you are truly the sons God talked about, who would will bring peace. . .

Maybe, one of you should say, you know, I am truly sorry for belittling your beliefs, even though I don't share them, in the 6-day creationism, and that you don't follow the Pope. It was wrong of me to be so harsh when you didn't agree with what my faith has taught me. Maybe, if you did that. . . They would forgive and apologize as well![/quote]
I'm getting tired of all the assumption that's been occurring on this forum recently.
When have I ever belittled another's beliefs on this site? Mind you, disagreement is not synonymous with belittlement. Please, point out one instance to me where I have.
I strive, [b]strive[/b] to always be tolerant and level-headed when discussing theology with people of opposing views. I've never told another they were going to hell - that's between you and your maker. Likewise, it's between me and mine. I've never told anyone that their beliefs are silly or anything along those lines.
So to answer your question, I do take the sincere beliefs of protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and so forth seriously. Does this mean I have to conform to their views? No.

[jeffpugh]

Amen, Mitch! I hear ya.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1641822' date='Aug 29 2008, 04:30 PM']Amen, Mitch![/quote]
Gold star for you.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1641820' date='Aug 29 2008, 04:26 PM']I'm getting tired of all the assumption that's been occurring on this forum recently.
When have I ever belittled another's beliefs on this site? Mind you, disagreement is not synonymous with belittlement. Please, point out one instance to me where I have.
I strive, [b]strive[/b] to always be tolerant and level-headed when discussing theology with people of opposing views. I've never told another they were going to hell - that's between you and your maker. Likewise, it's between me and mine. I've never told anyone that their beliefs are silly or anything along those lines.
So to answer your question, I do take the sincere beliefs of protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and so forth seriously. Does this mean I have to conform to their views? No.[/quote]

You haven't personally, but I have read it on these boards by others, who are young and zealous.

But this is the level of interactions on this board.

And, that is why I wouldn't say anything about your faith. You have a peaceful heart that wants to build bridges. However, some do not. It is unfortunate, but some do not want the peace we would desire.

It's the nature of the human race. They want to create divisions and each side attacks the other, because of a cycle of violence. Each wants to prove they are right and the other is wrong!

Edited August 29, 2008 by MakeYouThink

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1641832' date='Aug 29 2008, 04:44 PM']You haven't personally, but I have read it on these boards by others, who are young and zealous.[/quote]
I could agree with that.
[quote]But this is the level of interactions on this board.[/quote]
Like Smokey would say:
"Only YOU can prevent forum fights!"
[quote]And, that is why I wouldn't say anything about your faith. You have a peaceful heart that wants to build bridges. However, some do not. It is unfortunate, but some do not want the peace we would desire.[/quote]
Thank you, I appriciate that. Don't misunderstand me - there are certainly bigoted protestants and Muslims, so forth, and there are also certainly Catholics. It is unfortunate that people of any creed would not approach things with an open mind (yet a stout heart).
[quote]It's the nature of the human race. They want to create divisions and each side attacks the other, because of a cycle of violence. Each wants to prove they are right and the other is wrong![/quote]
Refer to my second point.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1641329' date='Aug 29 2008, 08:13 AM']Because Christians--especially Catholics--challenge the staus quo. They challenge the entire world order. Lots of people don't like that.[/quote]
Yet it's strange, most Christians like to argue that U.S. law and the Constitution are based on the Bible and Christian values... it would seem then that they ARE the status quo, not against it.

Just playing devils advocate here. I do understand your original point, but I'm making an argument anyway.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1641921' date='Aug 29 2008, 07:12 PM']Yet it's strange, most Christians like to argue that U.S. law and the Constitution are based on the Bible and Christian values... it would seem then that they ARE the status quo, not against it.

Just playing devils advocate here. I do understand your original point, but I'm making an argument anyway.[/quote]

Fidei,

Madame, like myself, are learning that despite the expressed opinion of politicians saying they are Christian, and that the morals and laws of the land are Christian, there is a movement that is entirely against Christianity.

All you have to do is open a book like the Jesus Family Tomb, and see the attack right away. (One day, I will have to trounce that book. I have it, and in some portions of the book, where they have paintings, a familiar mark - the all seeing eye of Free Masonry/Horus/Lucifier is there. . . I wonder if this is a free mason hoax!)

And then you have the Divinci Code. After my brother read it, he asked me a ton of questions about my belief in God and the Bible, and I went, I've read a lot about church history - and yes, there were people who voted this and that, but the overwhelming response was for this.

Christianity is being attacked. . . for a reason. . . and it's the danger we bring. It isn't so much the contrast of the Status Quo, but who we have as a Father, and how far he will go to protect his children. The ones who are warring against it now witnessed a huge flood that destroyed them 5000 years ago. They want to win by diverting people from God and our lord Jesus Christ.

So, yes, the world order is against true believers, but it's not like they can win!

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1641928' date='Aug 29 2008, 06:21 PM']Fidei,

Madame, like myself, are learning that despite the expressed opinion of politicians saying they are Christian, and that the morals and laws of the land are Christian, there is a movement that is entirely against Christianity.

All you have to do is open a book like the Jesus Family Tomb, and see the attack right away. (One day, I will have to trounce that book. I have it, and in some portions of the book, where they have paintings, a familiar mark - the all seeing eye of Free Masonry/Horus/Lucifier is there. . . I wonder if this is a free mason hoax!)

And then you have the Divinci Code. After my brother read it, he asked me a ton of questions about my belief in God and the Bible, and I went, I've read a lot about church history - and yes, there were people who voted this and that, but the overwhelming response was for this.

Christianity is being attacked. . . for a reason. . . and it's the danger we bring. It isn't so much the contrast of the Status Quo, but who we have as a Father, and how far he will go to protect his children. The ones who are warring against it now witnessed a huge flood that destroyed them 5000 years ago. They want to win by diverting people from God and our lord Jesus Christ.

So, yes, the world order is against true believers, but it's not like they can win![/quote]
I'm not talking about politicians. I'm talking about written law and the constitution.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1641929' date='Aug 29 2008, 07:26 PM']I'm not talking about politicians. I'm talking about written law and the constitution.[/quote]

You mean the document that Bush gutted with the Patriot Act. Or how 26,000 priests and pastors who would work with the government to tell their congregations to give up their fire arms during a national emergency, I thought there was a separation of church and state. I am glad I am not going to church anymore. I'm one of those wacko Christians who won't be involved in a church that is corrupt.

[url="http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987"]http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987[/url]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRIDNQNsUss"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRIDNQNsUss[/url]

These are against the constitution that was created by Christians. . .

[Vincent Vega]

Show me a legal document that mandates the separation of church and state, and I'll show you a man who has been proven wrong.
You won't provide it, because it doesn't exist. Even if it did, the spirit of the separation is to prohibit a religious institution from running the government. Remember the historical context of the revolution. The CoE being tied so closely in with the English Throne didn't exactly sit with the colonists. The spirit of the terminology was to prevent a situation like this from arising in the US.

By the by, that oh-so-common buzzphrase comes from a private letter from Jefferson to a recipient who I do not remember at the moment.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1641966' date='Aug 29 2008, 07:34 PM']Show me a legal document that mandates the separation of church and state, and I'll show you a man who has been proven wrong.
You won't provide it, because it doesn't exist. Even if it did, the spirit of the separation is to prohibit a religious institution from running the government. Remember the historical context of the revolution. The CoE being tied so closely in with the English Throne didn't exactly sit with the colonists. The spirit of the terminology was to prevent a situation like this from arising in the US.

By the by, that oh-so-common buzzphrase comes from a private letter from Jefferson to a recipient who I do not remember at the moment.[/quote]
Typical cookie-cutter answer. Saying that the government can dictate religious morals on the country is against the spirit of the first amendment and the idea that everyone has the right to their own beliefs. There may not be some scripted out law, but you won't find anyone who actually believes that it would be a good thing for the government to dip into the realm of religion.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1641783' date='Aug 29 2008, 04:40 PM']Here's the thing Airways,

I agree with lots of those sediments with them. Now, before this truly erupts into something it isn't - more persecution, think about some people's behaviour here.

Some people say they don't want to be considered one of those right winged Christians because they believe in 6-day creationism. Isn't that the same kind of venom and hatred as you feel at those meetings? What makes the person I read saying that, Anti-Protestant to the extreme, any better than those who say praying to Mary is idolatry?

So, we can see the issue. One side ridicules and belittles the other side, who in turn does the same for other things, and both sides are filled with violence and anger over what they perceive as attacks on their beliefs.

So, how are you going to change that? Are you willing to take a 6-day creationist seriously, or someone who doesn't follow the pope? Or are you going to attack them continually, making them ask if you are truly the sons God talked about, who would will bring peace. . .

Maybe, one of you should say, you know, I am truly sorry for belittling your beliefs, even though I don't share them, in the 6-day creationism, and that you don't follow the Pope. It was wrong of me to be so harsh when you didn't agree with what my faith has taught me. Maybe, if you did that. . . They would forgive and apologize as well![/quote]
THere is a difference between belittling and disagreeing. Belittling gets warnings and vacations, disagreement is fine.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1641832' date='Aug 29 2008, 05:44 PM']They want to create divisions and each side attacks the other, because of a cycle of violence. Each wants to prove they are right and the other is wrong![/quote]
It has nothing to do with violence. If one thing is true its opposite must be false. Pointing out something that is false is not a bad thing, it can lead you to the truth. And the truth will set you free.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1641969' date='Aug 29 2008, 08:39 PM']Typical cookie-cutter answer. Saying that the government can dictate religious morals on the country is against the spirit of the first amendment and the idea that everyone has the right to their own beliefs. There may not be some scripted out law, but you won't find anyone who actually believes that it would be a good thing for the government to dip into the realm of religion.[/quote]
This is not a legal document either, but since we're taking Jefferson's letter excerpt to heart, we'll also take this one from Adams.
[quote name='LETTER TO THE OFFICERS OF THE FIRST BRIGADE OF THE THIRD DIVISION OF THE MILITIA OF MASSACHUSETTS']We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.[/quote]
[url="http://personal.pitnet.net/primarysources/adamsmilitia.html"]http://personal.pitnet.net/primarysources/adamsmilitia.html[/url]

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1641973' date='Aug 29 2008, 07:47 PM']This is not a legal document either, but since we're taking Jefferson's letter excerpt to heart, we'll also take this one from Adams.

[url="http://personal.pitnet.net/primarysources/adamsmilitia.html"]http://personal.pitnet.net/primarysources/adamsmilitia.html[/url][/quote]
I'm not "taking Jefferson's letter to heart," I'm saying that for our country to be as great as it is today, no matter who suggested it, the idea of separation of Church and State is a good one. If you don't like it, move to the Vatican. Nothing is stopping you.

[Vincent Vega]

I'm saying, in the spirit which Jefferson wrote of it, yes, it is a good idea.
I'm also saying, I agree with Adams that, the constitution is not suited for the government of any but a moral people.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1641977' date='Aug 29 2008, 07:53 PM']I'm saying, in the spirit which Jefferson wrote of it, yes, it is a good idea.
I'm also saying, I agree with Adams that, the constitution is not suited for the government of any but a moral people.[/quote]
I would argue that you don't have to be religious to be moral, or at least, not everyone who is moral shares the same religion as you, hence the point of the separation. It allows freedom of belief. But the government is responsible to the people, and whatever morals the people have, the government should also have. But they dont need to be tied to a religion. You can have your morals because of your religion, but you can't tell people they must follow that religion in order to be moral.