><...> we can say, "Your idea that God says it's wrong is just your
>religious view, and trying to impose it on others is religious bigotry. We
>will fight that just as we fought the idea that the Bible said that black
>people were inferior to whites, and suited to be slaves. You have two
>choices, alter your religion so it doesn't teach that any more, or quit
>your religion, but you don't have the choice of poisoning the society all
>the rest of us live in."
Say it all you want, but they will mainly be unswayed because they'll say, "This cuntree was foun'ed on Cheeerischin vayuuules. We is a Cheeerischin nashun. Ain't imposin' nuttin' on no one. We the mahjoe-ity and we cain he'p it if'n democracy brain you Cheeerischin laws respectin' Cheeerischin vayuuules. You got a thayn agin' vayuuuules ennaway?
(aside to the offended: i'm from upstate redneck new york (hi carl!) so check your outrage button, cause it's gotten sticky or sumpin'!)
even those on the fence seem to be falling for this sort of thing, as far as I've observed. i tend to believe that the hardcore types are a pretty small minority and that the majority of believers tend to be far more tolerant. TO some extent, but on this issue, they can justify it without recourse to religion and because it's such a touchy topic. we'll see. maybe as mike noted, i'm just overly pessimistic today. and i'll admit that i was yesterday, kinda sick to my stomach about it all.
Alex wrote:
>has anyone run into mike davis' most recent work <....>
>he never really answered the question whether there are attempts by these
>movements to appropriate state power (no one asked). but it seems like not.
>this kind of feeds back into carl's point about the lack of social
>services...it seems as if the strength of the state's social support network
>is inversely related to the religiosity of its population.
>
>al
I wish I'd kept an issue of Awake that someone thrust into my hand in the parking lot of a book store not too long ago. The cover story was all about how government is bad bad bad. Christian Gregory pointed out not too long ago that one common theme among what I call "jiss christians" is that they often believe that the church should dispense services to the poor --they'll give you a variety of reasons. reduce the tax burden, supposedly, and there'll be more money for the collection plate! They hear it in church regularly. They hear it in the news. They hear it from republicans and look approvingly on Shrub's faith based initiative or whatever it was called....
Sending people on missions abroad is a big thing in this part of the U.S. I'll read some school or sports program and about half the student bios mention that the student has been abroad on 'missions'. I always have to listen to the religious members of the booster club going on about this mission or that. Oh! And the wife of the Youth Minister at one church says they're expanding! Woohoo! They're going to be holding services on still another night. Not just Sunday, but Wednesday and Saturday, too.
Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
>Kelley:
> > As for the Daily Kos link Mike forwarded, I don't know about anyone
>else,
> > but the xtian culture wars are a distraction. At the same time, it's
> > depressing and frightening that these folks can so effectively march
>to the
> > same incessant beat. I do not see a light at the end of the tunnel;
>it's a
> > friggin train headed our way. Splat!
>
>How is that different form, say, the sixties? Was not dope smoking,
>hideously ugly clothing, and the concerts on a mass scale a distraction
>and diversion from mass organizing?
i doubt it. it is my understanding that people in "the movement" and those you point to hear weren't the same groups of people. regardless, you've misunderstood. i see it as a conservative inspired distraction: shrub's desperate appeal to homo-hating NASCAR dads who are starting to wonder about Iraq and a concession to the xtians who were becoming incensed enough to want to drop heading to the voting booth altogether.
> > As Justin said, what is most disgusting is the conservatives have very
> > effectively lowered the bar as to what's acceptable.
> > The claim that it's the fault of the PC left because their extremes
>caused> a backlash is a load of donkey dung. No, the conservatives charged the
>lane> and drew the fouls. They latched on to whatever excess they could find
>and> made up or misrepresented the rest.
>
>True, but that has little to do with culture of this sort or another.
>It has something to do with the structural changes that made the capital
>more globally mobile, which in turn made the bosses stronger and the
>labor weaker. The bosses like it that way, hence their promotion of the
>conservative brand of culture to keep the left organizers out.
was there something in my text to suggest to you that i said it has something "to do with culture"?
>But if anything else fails, I will have my EU passport.
>
>Wojtek
i'm gettin' the fuck out of the limpdick state. I'm sick to death of the evangelizing jiss christians i could scream! I shouted out "shit shit shit" when we lost a three point shot the other night and I got what for by some christian who was offended.
shitshitshitshitshitshitshitshitshit