.

Interesting use of quotes.

"Swarthy"?

How would my swarthy Italian grandparents feel? And they always voted Democrat.

"Swarthy"?

You are playing the race card? Typical of hyperlibs. Conservatives decry the infamies of September 11, 2001, and the tyrannical cultures and governments of the Islamic world that foster such acts of hate and mass-murder, and you imply it is racial bigotry to do so.

Have you no shame?

Whoops, my bad. I forgot. You're a hyperlib. Of course you have no shame. It's against your religion.

.

I have no shame of the truth about the leadership of this country, just shame of THEM.

Anything true is a 'conspiracy theory' to you, height, if it doesn't brown-nose Rummy or the Prez. If anyone has shame, Porta, it's you--there's not a thread you've posted on that hasn't given you up as a philosophical match for David Duke, or some well endoctrinated Hitler Youth, as 'crypto' as you pretend to be--the 'eugenics' shit really shone it thru.

I'm a Progressive Libertarian, not a 'good cop, bad cop' imaginary 'two party' robot (like you two height and esp. Porta). Think Liberal with a gun, who likes money, HATES the idea of big government and taxation (which could be reduced significantly if we would just cut out about half our nuclear defense budget--leaving us with only fifteen times what our nearest competitor has--look it up), equal justice, freedom AND THINKING AND ACTING FOR HIMSELF. I think for myself, and being included even in the same species as you monkeys with microchip control implants makes me want to laugh. "You're doing it, too!", and "that's the pot callin' the kettle black" with no actual reason behind it, is just a dumb-ass, last resort failure of imagination, that you sub-conscious types always fall back on.

Anybody left of Bill Buckley is a 'Hyperlib' to you HyperKons--and guys, maybe it is just a coincidence that most Hamitic peoples have darker skin than those you revere, speak different languages and worship a different take on the same god--but that's beside the point--it's all about plunder economics, and international law. I'd LOVE for their race to be a coincidence. Of course, those same people you revere are the ones who regard you and our soldiers as expendable animals, just above those even more expendable foreigners, and "you'll never be asked to join George Bush's country club".

Oy... So much offensive stuff, so little time before Jeopardy... I'll be back later.

In the mean time, X-Height made a great point that was glossed over so that Reece could make an obnoxious comment about neo-nazis:

Apparently, Reece, one of the only teachings of the Bible that you like is that part when Jesus was saying the intention to sin is just as bad as actually doing it.

Obviously, Muslim extremists don't bother you nearly as much as the vague possibility of the Christian right here gaining more power... because you would rather obsess about hypothetical situations where your paranoid theories turn out to be accurate than deal with cold, hard facts.

Every opportunity you have to just be on topic for once and prove that you're not just some conspiracy theory-obsessed nut with a beef against the evangelical movement, you engage in some form of Christian baiting instead and find some way to at least allude to fascism long enough to irritate people.

How about dealing with concrete facts instead of your skewed view on politics and history just for once?

Is a neonazi skinhead not a neonazi simply because he's within a society that hasn't fallen to Nazism? For the slow-witted, the prospect of the neonazi practicing his beliefs, subjugating others to said beliefs, is the degree to which society acts as a buffer against them. The same is true of theocrats, be they Christian (as demonstrated by history) or Muslim (cf. the average Islamic state). Just because we don't live in a theocracy doesn't mean that there aren't theocrats in the US. X and you were committing a fallacy in reasoning, which is what the neonazi example was pointing out. If I were calling Christians neonazis, I'd clued y'all in by saying "Christians are neonazis." You three can't even understand me when I'm literal, so the hell if I'm going to be indirect. I suppose I should stop using analogies, as well, since y'all are like dogs staring at my finger when I point.

When is a Sophist not a sophist simply because he's within a society that hasn't fallen to Sophistry?

When I'm coronated Emperor of Earth after the Second American Revolution, stupid Christian Literalist Chicken-Hawk Fascists and Murderous Fundamentalist Muslim Extremists will all be put on the newly terraformed Moon, with only stone age implements. I'm sure the few scientific and spiritual minds (Superior Actin' Sumbitches) a generation down the road, capable of abstract thought that are produced will be either burned at the stake, beheaded or eaten, if they all don't all kill each other first. Needless to say, they won't have a creative thought coming from any of them, and will eventually die out, and never get off that rock. It's TRUE! John Titor told me so!

We were talking about acts of terrorism, and you would rather talk about why other people, who aren't committing acts of terrorism, are just as bad for ideological reasons.

Random bus bombings are, objectively, worse than James Dobson or Pat Robertson saying something you disagree with at a pastor's conference.

Pat Robertson may have complained a lot about "The Last Temptation of Christ," but the religious right didn't agree to kill Martin Scorcese for offenses against the faith.

What's difficult to understand here? You're allegedly the quick-witted one.

One of the many ironic things about this post is that many of the people who you would label as "far right nutjobs" feel disenfranchised and like this country is way too far to the left.

They don't feel like they're in charge, and they say the country is going down the toilet because of... wait for it... the liberal media, moral relativism and people generally not being conservative enough.

Considering how many people on both extremes think the U.S. is going in the wrong direction, it seems to me that either there's a lot of cognitive dissonance going on right now... or we're really somewhere in the middle. Because, otherwise, at least one set of extremists would be happier right now.

Just to use one of the favorite hot button issues here at Comicon, you don't get precedent-setting laws allowing gay marriages and civil unions if the religious right has control.

Or to use another issue, so-called "activist judges" wouldn't be a big deal unless the current sociopolitical climate was sort of in the middle somewhere.

If things were swinging toward the extreme left, the right would not be able to do anything except complain and if things were really that far to the right it, would be easier for conservatives in Congress to get their way.

As far as the Bush administration goes, I think it would be more accurate to say Bush has pandered a lot to the religious right, so he was able to convince people that he was more serious than, say, John Kerry about traditional Christian values.

However, and this is just my opinion, I don't think it worked as well as people on the left like to say it did.

His approval rating keeps hovering somewhere around fifty percent, and a USA Today poll from last month indicates a lot of Republicans aren't happy with things like how he handled the Schiavo case.

One respondent even said "It's the one thing I really don't like about Bush: He's guided by his religious beliefs more so than what the American people want."

According to another site that is probably a better source than USA Today, Bush is losing the support of moderate conservatives and most respondents in a recent poll disagree with Dubya's stances on a lot of things.

This part is interesting:

So... There is evidence to suggest that even most politically conservative people think Bush swings too far to the right on religion and politics.

I know polls aren't the most accurate way to judge these things, but W. doesn't have quite as much support as you guys think he does.

Now, I can see what you're saying here... to a point, because some Christians really haven't taken the time to figure out why they believe what they do. And there is an awful of jingoistic "support our troops" stuff going on right now... but methinks you're exaggerating a tad.

I wouldn't characterize the religious right as "mindlessly hateful" so much as "indignant."

They see evidence all around them in contemporary pop culture that seems to undermine their core values and they don't know what to do--so they borrow a page from the Tipper Gore playbook and blame the media and popular musicians for their teenagers being interested in things like sex and cussing. They try to distance themselves from the world around them and put more "my boss is a Jewish carpenter" stickers on the mini-van.

That part just makes it hard to socialize at parties. Where the trouble comes in is when pundits start getting on TV and the radio and trying to motivate other people to adopt higher standards of decency and morality.

Sensible people realize they're really talking about personal responsibility (usually, anyway) and knee-jerk lefties start spazzing out about how those crazy Jesus freaks want to censor Desperate Housewives and take their porn away.

They tend to react to current events in a similar way. When your world view is largely shaped by the Bible, it's easy to have knee-jerk reactions to a lot of current social trends. Take gay marriage, for example. The Bible doesn't condone it... so what do you do?

So, you get protests and petitions and a lot of hand-wringing over a lot of things that aren't that big of a deal to people who like moral relativism.

... it's called trying to live by your convictions while being good citizens...

I don't know about you, but being compared to a sociopath doesn't exactly put me in a good mood.

I think you and Reece need to give evangelical Christians a little more credit.

I'm certain you have read the "Paulist B.S." about respecting authority and the laws of the land. I know you must have read "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and render unto God the things that are God's" at some point.

I know there are wacky sects that refuse to pay income taxes and stuff like that... but the vast majority of Christian people have some kind of concept of respecting secular authority and the rights of others.

There are all sorts of guidelines for being a "good neighbor" to others.

People just don't like it when "evangelistas" tell them they need a saving knowlege of Christ.

And even that is done out of concern for others (usually, anyway)--not out of a desire to force people to conform to some oppressive code.