|
27 Oct 04 - 12:09 PM (#1308737) Subject: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: frogprince Can someone do us a blue clicky to the item "conflicted evangelicals could cost Bush votes" which is in the newscolumn on Yahoo home page right now? I don't want to throw this in because I want to scream anything about this at anyone; it just bothers me that there is a lot of stereotyping of evangelicals going on, particularly in the "mess media", and this article goes along with my feeling that it isn't all warranted. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:16 PM (#1308742) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: CarolC Here you go: conflicted evangelicals could cost Bush votes |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:19 PM (#1308744) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: GUEST We need a URL to make one. The people who wrtie the news have become increasingly illiterate in the past generation. This is just another example. The writer likely thought 'evangelical' was a synonym for 'fundamentalist'. In the long run, it would be more productive to ask the site for a correction. Who knows, they might do it. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:27 PM (#1308752) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: Amos There is a merging tendency between the two sets, I would suggest. Fundamentalists tend to be evangelical and many evangelicals tend to be fundamentalists. But I think both are regrettable throwbacks. A |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:30 PM (#1308757) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: GUEST Reads like good news for the nation, if you ask me. I've often wondered about this, since I know a lot of evangelical Lutherans (hey, I live in Lutheranville here in Minnesota), and they aren't the same brand of evangelical as the southerners are at all. So reading about these Wisconsin folks rings much more true to my experiences with evangelical Christians, who are not the equivalent of fundamentalist Christians, despite the widespread stereotyping of them as the same sorts of people. They really aren't. While many evangelical Lutherans and evangelical Catholics around here are anti-abortion, and Minnesota had a very strong and powerful Christian led anti-abortion movement in the 1980s and 1990s, that has waned considerably. I am sensing that, in the Upper Midwest anyway, that the fundamentalist Republicanism of the Bush sort has passed it's peak, or will with this election. The change, I think, isn't because anyone has fought these folks, or gotten them to "change over from the dark side" sorts of crap. I think they themselves have come to realize they have much more in common with other Americans than the political evangelista wing of the Republican party wants them to recognize. Finally, I see more and more of them becoming disillusioned with the pettiness, political games, etc in their religious communities, and drifting away from what they once felt they needed desperately and so intensely embraced: the isolation of their religious communities that set them too far apart from other people in their communities. Very intersting article. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:35 PM (#1308760) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: CarolC I'm a bit surprised at the statement at the end of the article about Kerry not having an answer for his vote against the proposed law banning "partial birth abortions", considering the fact that he has stated many times that his reason was because it didn't include an exception to protect the life and/or health of the mother. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:41 PM (#1308768) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: CarolC BTW (slightly off topic), yesterday evening, JtS and I were watching The National, CBC's national news program for Canada. They had a "town hall" style gathering of US voters in Ohio who watched commentaries by Canadians and then commented on them. When the subject of abortion came up, one of the Ohio women in the audence stood up and said that abortion is a women's issue, and that no men have any right to be commenting on it, or trying to promoted any particular government policy on it. After she finished, most, if not all of the women in the audience applauded, but none of the men did. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 12:58 PM (#1308787) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: Amos Now that's an interesting angle on the issue. No contract to rent the room, even though contributing half the occupants, huh? :) I like it. I don't think we should actually reduce a legal issue to be decided only by one or the other gender (next thing you know sports law will be decided only by males!! Yuck!) but it does indicate that certain things should not even BE legal questions. Sorry for the thread creep. A |
|
27 Oct 04 - 01:06 PM (#1308798) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: GUEST Anyone who has ever paid attention to the anti-abortion movement knows that while the public face put on the movement is female, the brains, muscle, and backbone of it is conservative men. Same is true of the pro-marriage movement, the family values movement, the Promise Keepers--but all those movements are now past their peak. The media is largely ignorning them, they couldn't whip up a frenzy in Congress or the public square over gay marriage, now matter how hard they and the gays and lesbians busy marrying one another tried. I'm telling you people, the peak of this has past. Even if Bush wins by a hair, the conservative movement in the US has peaked, and is beginning it's decline. They can't win the culture wars no matter how repressive they get, because the majority of people simply are no longer willing to live that sort of life. The loosening grip religion tradition and government laws once had over people isn't reversible. If we ignore them, they actually will not only go away, but their children will join us, even if they don't. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 01:21 PM (#1308812) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: frogprince Thanks, Guest,(First guest if not the same) for also noting that "evangelical"and "fundamentalist" aren't synonymous, and to Amos for at least grudgingly admitting the distinction; the media seems to have totally lost the distinction. I wish I didn't feel that I have to admit that Christian "fundamentalists" are really a (unfortunately large) sub-group of "evangelicals", save for a limited number of really "culty" skwerells who have little in common with anyone outside their insular group except a nominal belief in an infallible, inerrant Bible. I personally grew up as a fundamentalist, never quite so indoctrinated that I wasn't eventually able to let go of it. I migrated as far as "evangelical" for some years, & now have a little trouble saying what you should call me. I still believe that there is a lot of "good news" for the world in Christianity; but I don't think Amos, or any our Wikkan or Pagan 'catters, are facing a grim eternity unless they earn it the old fashioned way, by being rotten. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 04:00 PM (#1308926) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: Mrrzy Why be evangelical if you aren't fundamentalist? Hey, everybody, think for yourselves! Not a great Christian battle-cry, is it! |
|
27 Oct 04 - 04:35 PM (#1308953) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: frogprince I'm grinnin' Mrrzy, but not sure if I'm grinnin' despite having been poked in the ribs a little or not. What I got from fundamentalists for awhile was "how can anyone say they are an evangelical if they aren't a fundamentalist." You could tell they were just barely holding back from saying "How can you say you're a Christian if you're not a fundamentalist. It ain't all that hard, if 1. being a Christian has worked so well for you that you're inclined to share it, but 2. you realize that the Bible is a collection of writtings by fallible people trying to sort out what being a Christian is, not an authoritive document handed down in such a way that the original might as well have been in God's handwritting... And if you can write without falling into outrageous run-on sentences... Really these days I am probably just a rather liberal Christian; It's still the path I'm comfortable in, but I'm not at all inclined to think it's the only path anymore. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 04:40 PM (#1308958) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: GUEST,Frank I think it's important to distinguish between Republican Reactionary Evangelical Pseudo-Christians and the mainstream religious evangelicals who do not subscribe to the Bush fanaticism. Barbara Rossing is a Lutheran Evangelical and I recommend her book "The Rapture Exposed" for an intelligent and legitimate evangelical point-of-view. This kind of evangelical would not agree to trying to convert Jews, Muslims, Buddhists etc. Their view is that the values that Jesus represent are not prevalent in the Republican Reactionary Pseudo-Christian hoodwinking. Ralph Reed represents the politicizing of religion for Republican gains. Was Jesus a Republican? I don't think so! Frank |
|
27 Oct 04 - 04:41 PM (#1308959) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: GUEST "A crime persevered in a thousand centuries ceases to be a crime, and becomes a virtue. This is the law of custom, and custom supersedes all other forms of law...Often, the less there is to justify a traditional custom, the harder it is to get rid of it." Mark Twain |
|
27 Oct 04 - 06:33 PM (#1309041) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: McGrath of Harlow Here;s a recent thread that's relevant here BS: God is Neither a Republican nor Democrat - and here is a link to a site produced by Evangelicals who are a very long way from being Bushites. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 07:59 PM (#1309107) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: frogprince Thanks, MCG., but I got "not available" |
|
27 Oct 04 - 08:06 PM (#1309112) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: McGrath of Harlow The links work all right for me. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 08:06 PM (#1309114) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: Bobert Well, I've watched Dr. Charles Stanley's "In Touch" TV show for years and thought that if there was ever an evangelical who might have an open mind it was Dr. Stanley. Not so. In his latest "In Touch" magizine he has snuck a tacit endoresment of Bush into one of his daily lessons... That's it fir me. I can't trust any other evangelical... They are all pro-Bush... Bobert |
|
27 Oct 04 - 08:20 PM (#1309126) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: frogprince Bobert, along with all the deliberately goofy stuff you've regailed us with, you said enough to indicated you're brighter than that; evangelicals ain't out there putting up ant-Bush websites as a covert plot to re-pseudo-elect him. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 08:21 PM (#1309128) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: Ebbie Wow, McGrath, that is a good site with lots of meat. (The link, by the way, worked fine for me.) I hope others will go over there. Among the things the writer, Amy Smith, says is; "Sitting in Madison Square Garden in the midst of thousands of cheering Republican delegates (during the Republican National Convention. Eb) - a disturbing number of whom had chosen to accessorize with giant elephants on their heads - I felt distinctly like a member of the away team, sitting on my hands while those around me whooped at attacks on "Paris" or "The New York Times" or "Massachusetts." When I heard the arena announcer introduce Michael W. Smith, I thought I could at least blend in for a few minutes. After all, I spent much of high school listening to the contemporary Christian singer's music, attending his concerts, and playing his songs at church; as recently as just a few months ago, my neighbors gathered around my piano as we channeled our teenage selves and belted out a rendition of "Friends." "But Smith wasn't there simply to entertain the crowd. Throughout four days of what one friend described as an "extended mega-church service" - complete with praise songs, worship leaders, testimonials, and even a pulpit adorned with the outline of a cross - a steady stream of Christian performers had appeared, each one prompting queries of "who the heck is that?" from the hard-bitten journalists around me. Before "Smitty" lent his raspy voice and keyboard skills to the proceedings, however, he testified to the spiritual side of his friend, the president. The two of them had spoken in the Oval Office just a few months after Sept. 11, 2001, he told us. And during that conversation, he got a glimpse of the president's true heart when Bush turned to him and said, "Someone should write a song about this." That was all the inspiration Smith needed to write "There She Stands," the ballad he performed during the last evening of the convention. And Snip : ""Politicians should be careful about claiming divine endorsement in electoral contests, and American voters should follow this closely. Because in this country we shouldn't elect presidents (or any other official, for that matter) based on how many Christian rock stars they can line up on a stage, or whether televangelists call the election for them based on "talks" with God, or if they claim their unofficial running mate is Jesus Christ. Any politician who appeals to voters in that way is more than likely trying to deflect attention from their actual record, from what they have done. But talking the God-talk is no replacement for walking the walk." |
|
27 Oct 04 - 09:13 PM (#1309176) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: Bobert Well, gol danged, frogprince... I maybe goofy but I'm also a Christain and like to give folks the benefit of the doubt. All the other TV preachers got the hook after about 30 seconds but Dr. Stanley has walked the line purdy good for a TV preacher over the years dealing with a lot of issues with a certain amount of wisdom but now....... As fir "rock stars"? Hey, I'm real proud that Bruce Springsteen, an old acquitance of mine, is stepping up against Bush... Bobert |
|
27 Oct 04 - 10:46 PM (#1309223) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: Peace Evangelicals: What are they? People who believe God has only one way of seeing things? People who are correct? Right? Evangelicals give me a pain where I sit, because they have only one way to see the world. They seem to see through the eyes of Christ, and I thought only He could do that. Excuse me for being rude, and I shall excuse you, too. |
|
27 Oct 04 - 10:48 PM (#1309225) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: CarolC Bobert, you might want to have a look at that Sojourners site (second link in McGrath's post). I'm impressed with it, and I'm not even a Christian. |
|
28 Oct 04 - 01:17 AM (#1309315) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: GUEST,Boab Insert the two "L"s missing from "Bushite" and I'll argue the validity of the thread title! |
|
28 Oct 04 - 09:34 AM (#1309510) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: McGrath of Harlow Bobert - take a couple of seconds to check that link to www.sojo.net I gave you, before lashing out with " They are all pro-Bush." That's not really all that different from saying "All Muslims bacl Al Qaeda". |
|
28 Oct 04 - 02:14 PM (#1309743) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: GUEST,Frank Evangelism is a problem in that it implies that somehow religion needs to be sold to non-believers. But it could also mean an enthusiam in wanting to make your position known. A problem is when you have missionaries trying to foist their views on other cultures. Frank |
|
28 Oct 04 - 09:14 PM (#1310108) Subject: RE: BS: Evangelical and Bushite not synonymous From: McGrath of Harlow Evangelism and evangelicalism are different conepts, overlapping but by no means identical. |