Before we redefine marriage, let's redefine republican and Christian

[Sperk]

Republican used to mean a believer in small government, states rights, fiscal discipline and privacy rights. Now, under their control we have less rights, huge deficits, fabulous five felons and less and less privacy rights.

Christian used to mean one who believed in Christ's message of love, compassion, forgiveness and the belief that we are all one. Now it seems to mean one who says, "Christ", "Jesus", "The Lord", "Our Savior". They praise him in name only and then proceed to live by the old testament. Judge, crucify those who are different, demand control of others lives basically condemning all who disagree. I'm surprised they're not calling for reinstating state sanctioned stoning!!

Does anyone really doubt that the country is in the mist of a civil war?

[Bronco69]

1. And I have a feeling

it's only going to get worse.

[pagerbear]

2. About today's "Christians"

Those who call themselves Christians nowadays worship the Bible--or someone's selective literal interpretation of it. Hmmm....that sounds like idolatry to me!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. There's your problem.

"Christian" hasn't meant "love, compassion, or forgiveness" in a very, very, VERY long time. To wit: the Holy Roman Empire, the Inquisition, the witch hunts, the stonings you refer to... Christianity has meant little more than a way of seizing power. That is not to say there aren't millions of good Christians. There undoubtedly are. However, the institution itself has been little more than a power grab. Even look at the splintering of Christianity into different sects... each time, a minority of people felt their rights were being trampled upon or more clearly wanted power they couldn't have. Whether the issue was the eligibility of priesthood, the divinity of the Pope, or the selling of "relics", there was always someone behind it trying to seize power. Perfect example of this was King James. He felt the Pope held greater powers over his people than he did. So what does he do? Cuts ties to the Pope and forms his own version of Christianity, under which HE was the leader. Similarly, our country was founded under the pretexts of purifying their own religion, but most of the people who came didn't leave England because of religion - they came because they were dirt poor and were always going to be dirt poor unless they were able to come to a place where land wasn't grabbed already. Roger Williams did the same thing when settling Rhode Island.

Today, there is little doubt the same type of thing is happening. Republicans are using the notion that our country has become irreligious and impure. Now clearly, our country never truly was religious or pure. This doesn't stop the Republicans from exegisizing religion as a rallying point to their base. They're abusing the faith of the truly pious and bending it to their will. Yet how many of these Republicans are any more religious than any of us? Exceptionally few, and there are probably just as many truly pious Democrats as there are Republicans. The difference is there are a number of Republicans willing to sell themselves as religious in order to grab power. This is an age-old practice that shows no signs of ending any time soon. I will also note, for the record, that Christianity is far from being the only religion to engage in such a horrific practice.

[pagerbear]

4. King James?

Wasn't it Henry VIII who cut off ties to the Pope, because Pope (for political reasons) wouldn't grant him an annulment?

King James was the one who decided the Bible should be available in English, and set a team of folks working on it.

[buck4freedom]

5. Right...

James I oversaw the translation of the Bible into common English to solidify the Protestant gains made by Elizabeth I following Mary's attempts to Re-catholicize England. Later the Stuarts (of which James was a member) would lose the throne and their heads over their slipping back into their old Catholic ways. In fact, it's what had them removed completely from the succession finally.

[Maeve]

7. Actually, the authorized Catholic translation to English was before KJV

The Douay-Rheims version was completed in 1609; KJV in 1611. The argument was over who should decide which translation was most accurate, not whether it should be translated at all.

[buck4freedom]

6. "Our Country was founded.."

You state: "Similarly, our country was founded under the pretexts of purifying their own religion, but most of the people who came didn't leave England because of religion.."

Actually, our country was founded on the pretext of finding gold and making a quick buck.

Contrary to what has been taught in public schools since the Civil War... Jamestowne VIRGINIA was the first permanent settlement and predates the settlement of Massachusetts by 13 years. Likewise, the establishment of a form of government in Jamestowne predates the famed "Mayflower Compact" which is often touted as the first attempt at government in the "New World."

We can go back even further to Roanoke in North Carolina which failed but was settled also for economic reasons. Likewise, Santa Elena in South Carolina (earlier still) for economic reasons and the first permanent European settlement in North America of St. Augustine in Florida... again for economic reasons.

In fact... only Massacusetts Bay Colony, Rhode Island, Maryland, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania were established on "religious" grounds. Of those... Rhode Island and Connecticut were established because the folks in Massachusetts kept kicking out religious dissenters.

The rest of the colonies were founded on purely economic bases. Although it could be argued that Georgia, being originally a penal colony might be a social basis. But I won't split hairs.