Political Correctness

[Randy]

There's a thread in the Pit, from a guy who saw this bumpersticker about a certain Christian belief, which he finds disgusting and self-righteous. Another thread, a while back, was posted by a gay man who was sick of hearing music containing traditional Christian themes on his radio station. If you read the SDMB with any regularity at all, you will find on various posts at various times, several jabs at Christianity, or Christians, by all kinds of people who at any other time seem to be preaching tolerance and acceptance and freedom of speech and so on. Whew.

Which leads to my thread. Isn't it true that Christian Bashing, bias, or intolerance against Fundamental Christianity, (anything you want to call it)is the Last form of Politically Correct, or acceptable Prejudice? Aren't Fundamental Christians, all lumped together and judged on the deeds of the more infamous professing Christians like Jim Baker, or Jimmy Swaggert or Rev. Falwell.

Acceptable things you can say about Christians, said about gays or minorities or cultures, whoever, will get you a "warning" or a "label" on this board and in real life. Think about it. You can call a Christian anything you want to on this board, and no one will think twice about it. And no, I'm not into to gay bashing, extolling racism or whatever you're thinking right now. I just want to bring out an observation. After all, aren't Christians just people who believe in a certain way of life, just like any other group of people.

And don't tell me that Christians bring it on themselves by being pushy and intolerant, because believe me baby, EVERYONE is preaching SOMETHING. Many are trying to force something on you that you might not neccessarily want to hear.

So what's it gonna' be, tolerance for everyone, or just people we agree with?

OK. I'm done. Go ahead, rip it apart.

[TVeblen]

This goes beyond opinion. The GD folk are best prepared to "rip it apart". They'll flay, dissect and test it, doin' that voodoo they do so well.

TVeblen
Moderator, IMHO

[Gadarene]

If you read the SDMB with any regularity at all, you will find on various posts at various times, several jabs at Christianity, or Christians, by all kinds of people who at any other time seem to be preaching tolerance and acceptance and freedom of speech and so on.

And if you read the SDMB with any comprehension at all, you'll find on various posts at various times several jabs at almost every widespread belief system, political ideology, social class, sexual orientation, or music preference.

Just as a pagan would pay closest attention to those jabs against Wicca or other earth religions, for instance, you're particularly sensitive to threads which might be construed as derogatory toward Christianity.

Take my meaning?

[super_head]

True, and as an atheist living in the Deep South, there's plenty of dirt spewn about us horrible non-believers. This crap about Christians being so horribly persecuted in the USA is exactly that - crap - last time I checked, most Americans claimed to be Christian - and last time I checked, Shrubya was a Christian. Yes, we're so oppressed that we're the majority and got our man into the office of the President (albeit with some potentially questionable tactics, but oh well, god knows all about that and we'll pay in due time, I guess).

Give me a break.

[Badtz Maru]

I read of a recent case where somebody was prosecuted under hate crime laws because he targeted his victim because he was a Christian and had some kind of 'Got Jesus?' sign on his lawn. Christians are protected too, it just seems that lately Christians have decided that they are persecuted and are overly sensitive.

[Stoid]

The OP may have a point, and I say this as one who is happy to bash Christianity at every and any opportunity.
I can't say I feel that way about any other religion or any other group of people.

I think it's because Christians set themselves up to be bashed. They are so bashable on so many levels... Christians are very vocal and visible about their religion, much more so than any other faith, and that's a good starting place. Between jesus fish and the zillion bumper stickers, the dozens of TV evangelists, the creationists fighting school boards...

That's why. I can think of no other LARGE group of any kind that can be so irritating in so many ways for so many reasons.

stoid
unapologetically antipathetic to Christianity and many Christians.

[The Flying Dutchman]

You catch on real fast Randy. I don't think there is a Christian on this board would disagree with you. I haven't come across any threads where a Christian basher was slapped down for slurring or attacking Christians, but be careful, very careful not to make any remarks that could possibly by any stretch of the imagination be regarded as a slur on homosexuals. Even the eminent Cecil himself is subject to a long continuous rant thread as a result of a benign gay stereotype joke.

[Pjen]

Societies have many subgroups which by their social position and history hold power over the way that society operates. Those groups that hold power should expect a greater deal of criticism than those with leass power- it is the only way the hegemony can be challenged. This is why we treat politicians and lawyers so badly with impunity!

It is more noble to kick at the powerful than the powerless.

The powerful in our society are White, male, heterosexual and Christian which is why they ate freely and rightly criticised by people of colour, females, people of other sexual orientation and non-Christians.

If we lived in a society that was Black, Female, homosexual and Muslim, then anti-black, anti-female, anti-homosexual and anti-Muslim actions would be defendable over those actions currently acceptable in our society.

If this latitude is not allowed, powerful hegemonies within society cannot be challenged and IMHO society would be less for it.

[Randy]

Originally posted by Gadarene


And if you read the SDMB with any comprehension at all, you'll find on various posts at various times several jabs at almost every widespread belief system, political ideology, social class, sexual orientation, or music preference.

Take my meaning? [/B]

Yeah, I take your meaning, I just disagree.

I saw a pretty malicious reply on the SDMB not too long ago by a man who used the "N word". Several postings later , most of them condemning the guy, the moderator announced that the poster had been warned. I have yet to see any gay bashing on the board. Again, let me say, I don't want to see it either, and also I haven't been reading the Board as long as most of you have. I did see a Thread by a gay man, a short time ago, actually inviting insults. He posted later, something on the line of, he was dissapointed that no one took him up on it. All the replies he got were supportive. I have seen plenty of derrogative (did I spell that right?) replies about Christians though, while not neccessarily looking for them.

So now, along with being intolerant, judgemental, and self-righteous, Christians are also paranoid and have dillusions of being persecuted? I gotta' write this stuff down, so I remember how to act.

[betenoir]

Originally posted by Randy
There's a thread in the Pit, from a guy who saw this bumpersticker about a certain Christian belief, which he finds disgusting and self-righteous. Another thread, a while back, was posted by a gay man who was sick of hearing music containing traditional Christian themes on his radio station.

I'd like to point out that the first thread is

1. In the Pit

2. Not really about belief so much as an obnoxious expression of an arrogant assumption, made not by "Christians", but by that guy ahead of him in traffic.

3. agreed with essentially by Polycarp, who is, I believe Christian, but doesn't care for those bumperstickers either.

And finally Blackclaw who started the thread went on to say
he would like to be a believer, all the more reason he is put off by the arrogence of those who are not struggling with questions of faith. And he want to keep the self-rightous on those toes (good for him).

This is bashing?

I don't know what the other thread is but I have a hard time seeing bitching about music you don't like on the radio as bashing. (I mean, have you heard contemporary Christian music? It may just be good taste.)


What I'm saying is, if you have a case, certainly you can come up with better examples than that.

[IzzyR]

See also a previous discussion of the same topic here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=36769). Basically, something like this is a matter of perspective, and there's nothing that can be done about it.

[IzzyR]

also, here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=594138#post594138)

[gobear]

Randy and Grienspace, Christians run the country. christians are very firmly in charge, so you need not fear persecution. Now in China, Christians have had their churches destroyed and their pastors arrested. THAT's persecution.

I have yet to see blatant anti-Christian bashing not get called on by the mods. I'm no fan of the Christian church, but I'm the first to defend them against unfair accusations.
There are many Christians on this board like Triskadekamus or Polycarp who are open with their belief in Jeus christ. they get respect because they GIVE respect. They post clever, well-reasoned comments and they are respectful to their opponents.

I think that Christians are not immune to being picked on if they act like jerks, any more than gay men are if they are jerks. heck, I'm 100% gay and I've started a thread about jerky gay guys.

[Jackmannii]

Originally posted by Randy
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gadarene
So now, along with being intolerant, judgemental, and self-righteous, Christians are also paranoid and have dillusions of being persecuted? I gotta' write this stuff down, so I remember how to act.
Nah, it's not all that hard to remember. Just concentrate on the difference between criticism and persecution. Give us some examples of how practitioners of the overwhelmingly dominant religion in the U.S. are persecuted and not allowed to practise their faith.

And Pjen, old pjal, I think some individuals are being shortchanged on their "hegemonic" role in society. I talked to a couple of WASPS recently who claimed they had never received their race and gender-specific "get-out-of-jail-free" cards and don't get preferential seating at restaurants and sporting events.

[minty green]

So what's wrong with rhetorically trashing another person's belief system, anyway? If we're going to value the free exchange of ideas, it seems to me that we'll all have to deal with complaints that is totally stupid because [insert complaint here]. Such complaints are a [i]long way from persecution.

[Pjen]

Reply to Jackmanni:

Speaking as a white, male, heterosexual, Christian (non-believing but able to pass if being difficult), I am very aware of the 'get out of jail cards I have been issued with.

I am never pulled by the police at random, unlike Black friends. The last time I was stopped was in 1968 in a car and 1971 on the street. Few blacks have that experience.

I progressed extremely quickly in my profession (nursing) as a man as much as as a good practitioner.

I am never questioned or put under pressure about my sexual actions- as a heterosexual they are not open for polite or impolite discussion unless requested. I can enter public restrooms without worrying about the police.

I only get a bad time about religious beliefs when I become obnoxiously agnostic (or if I'm in a really bad mood, atheistic or pantheistic) in the presence of fundamental christians or door-steppers.

I have also acquired other hegemonic 'get out of jail' cards: I'm fifty plus and grey haired and grey bearded, speak with a received southern English accent (probably the most valuable card available in England)and have the bearing that comes with solid middle class professional background.

I am part of the hegemony and still feel that we desrve what we get because it makes society a healthier place.

[Jackmannii]

Originally posted by Pjen
I am part of the hegemony and still feel that we deserve what we get because it makes society a healthier place.*

This gets a bit off the track of Randy's complaint, but Pjen should be congratulated for contributing a classic exposition of political correctness. In particular, note the guilt at his perception of has led to his relative success in life and his belief that others in his "group" should suffer consequences for that guilt.


*italics added

[gobear]

Pjen seems to be conflating Fundamentalist Christianity with being white and male. Last time I checked, you could be a black woman and still be a Fundie, not that I'm arguing against thw white male hegemony theory. Certainly, being a prosperous-looking white guy gets you relatively fewer hassles than being poor, dark, or female get you.


I am never questioned or put under pressure about my sexual actions- as a heterosexual they are not open for polite or impolite discussion unless requested. I can enter public restrooms without worrying about the police.


Hey, I'm a card-carrying homo and the same goes for me. My sexual actions are also not open for polite or impolite discussion. I also resent the restrooms crack. I have never had a problem entering a restroom, mostly because because I
go there to relieve myself, just like you. Gay men are not ravening toilet pigs--you've been watching too much Queer As Folk or something.

[Freedom]

The OP may have a point, and I say this as one who is happy to bash gays at every and any opportunity. I can't say I feel that way about any other sexual-orientation or any other group of people.

I think it's because gays set themselves up to be bashed. They are so bashable on so many levels... gays are very vocal and visible about their sexual-preferences, much more so than any other groups, and that's a good starting place. Between Rainbow stickers and the zillion bumper stickers, the dozens of activists, the groups fighting school boards for homosexual sensitivity classes...

That's why. I can think of no other LARGE group of any kind that can be so irritating in so many ways for so many reasons.

Freedom
unapologetically antipathetic to homosexuality and many gays.

[Gadarene]

Jackmanii: Just wanted to call you on the misattribution. I never said the quote you attribute to me...at least, not in this reality. :)

[pldennison]

Originally posted by Freedom2
I think it's because gays set themselves up to be bashed. They are so bashable on so many levels... gays are very vocal and visible about their sexual-preferences, much more so than any other groups, and that's a good starting place.

Unlike, say, heterosexuals, who have the audacity to actually put photographs of their sexual partners on their desks, talk about what they did with their sexual partners and their offpsring outside of work, and bring their sexual partners to social events. Yeah, that's practically invisible compared to homosexuals. :rolleyes:

That's why. I can think of no other LARGE group of any kind that can be so irritating in so many ways for so many reasons.

How about morons or bigots?

[xenophon41]

Um... Freedom2, you might shoulda made some reference to the Stoidela post you were paraphrasing. Good technique, in that you showed the weakness of her argument by showing the results of its application to a different group, but I suspect you've confused people about your attitude toward gays.

[gobear]

Freedom2, I have to admire you for being so blatant in your opinions, vile as they may be. It's a refeshing change to have an enemy declare himself so openly, rather than hiding behind "some of my best friends.."


I think it's because gays set themselves up to be bashed. They are so bashable on so many levels... gays are very vocal and visible about their sexual-preferences, much more so than any other groups, and that's a good starting place. Between Rainbow stickers and the zillion bumper stickers, the dozens of activists, the groups fighting school boards for homosexual sensitivity classes...


If it weren't for people like you who would treat me as a second-class citizen based on the gender of those I love, the rainbow stickers and activists would be unnecessary. I see bumper stickers and Jesus fish that annoy me, but you don't hear me whine about it. I respect the rights of heterosexual couples, I absolutely support the religious liberties that America affords Fundamentalist Christians. Is it asking too much to be accorded human dignity in turn?

Why should you, as part of a heterosexual couple, be allowed to have property rights, inheritance rights, and medical visitation rights, and I should not? Why is my love inferior to yours? If you cite the Bible, I can't argue with you, but I will say that this is still a secular country, and we don't yet have a Christian version of Q'uaranic Shari'a in the US.

To quote Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, a leader of India's Untouchables or Dalit, another group subject to religion-based discrimination,

That religion which regards the recognition of human dignity as a sin, is not a religion but a disease.

Oh, and nobody wants to have homosexual sensitivity classes in school. It would be nice to teach kids, however, that "faggot" is a bad word.

[Freedom]

:)


That was my intent. I knew I was putting a line in the water, but I didn't think I would actually catch any fish.



I had a discalimer on the original post, but took it off to see the reaction I would get.



Somehow I didn't see anyone rush to criticize Stoidela's post.

[Freedom]

Man, I love not being the one who goes off half-cocked.:)


Read the entire thread like Xeno did, and then re-evaluate my post.


I picked homosexaulity not because that is how I feel, but because it is a hot-button issue around here that I knew would hit the spot.


Somewhere else I would have picked whatever other group I thought would get the best response.

[gobear]

That was my intent. I knew I was putting a line in the water, but I didn't think I would actually catch any fish.



I picked homosexaulity not because that is how I feel, but because it is a hot-button issue around here that I knew would hit the spot.

That's called "trolling," and it will get you a spanking from the mods.

[IzzyR]

Originally posted by goboy
That's called "trolling," and it will get you a spanking from the mods. [/B]Nothing to do with trolling. He made an excellent point, in the context of this thread. Did you even pause to consider it? Brilliant post, freedom.

[pldennison]

Ah. I see. Part of the problem is that I rarely read Stoidela's posts. That being the case, I think her reasoning is equally contemptible. I don't subscribe for a moment to the modern reactionary "straight white Christian males can't get an even break" school of thought, but neither do I go out of my way to mock or bash Christians. If they get in my face, or I feel some Christian group is endangering or basic freedoms, I won't be shy about stating my opinion. Otherwise, they're pretty much off my radar as a group.

[Freedom]

Did you read the whole thread?

Here's a hint, go read Stoidela's post.


Then come back and talk to me.


By your reasoning, should I take the way you thought about me and apply it to Stoidela since I'm a Christian?

[gobear]

Did you read the whole thread?
Here's a hint, go read Stoidela's post.

Oops, my apologies, Freedom2. I don't pay a lot of attention to Stoidela's posts. I have to agree with PLDennison, that her reasoning is flawed and reeks of anti-Christian bigotry. It shows a lack of breeding and class to mock the religion of other people.

[Jackmannii]

Originally posted by Gadarene
Jackmanii: Just wanted to call you on the misattribution. I never said the quote you attribute to me...at least, not in this reality. :)

So I hit the quote button on Randy's statement in your followup, not his original posting (it says "Originally posted by Randy" above the quote).

Beat me...flagellate me...cast me among the Gadarene swine...

Sorry for the confusion.

[Wildest Bill]

All I got to say is Randy excellent post. What blows my mind on this board is the line they use on me alot about this board is dedicated to fighting ignorance but they don't find bashing a religious group that they don't agree with as ignorant. Oh well as some say to me alot, "ignorance is bliss I guess".

[gobear]

All I got to say is Randy excellent post. What blows my mind on this board is the line they use on me alot about this board is dedicated to fighting ignorance but they don't find bashing a religious group that they don't agree with as ignorant.

That's a load of hooey, Bill. Did you not read what Phil and I wrote? Nobody here supports bashing Christians qua Christians. Christian posters like Polycarp and Triskadekamus get respect because they make intelligent arguments. However, we do demand better proof for the execution of homosexuals and teaching Creation Science than "the Bible sez so." That's not bashing, that's demanding evidence.

[Wildest Bill]

Goboy,

I never said I was talking about you. Ease up a little. I know you don't support bashing Christians. I was just saying that on a board that is dedicated to fighting ignorance nobody should bash anybody. We can have differences of opinion but we can still show respect to each other as humans going through this journey we call life. (man, that was profound if I say so myself. :D )

[gobear]

We can have differences of opinion, but we can still show respect to each other as humans going through this journey we call life. (man, that was profound if I say so myself).

Goodness, Bill, I think I love you!

[Screwtape]

I think we generally agree that bashing a group qua group isn't right. But it started me thinking, "Why do Fundamentalist Evangelical Pentacostal Christians (if Bill is going to pout if I don't spell out the whole bleedin' words (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=56149)) annoy me so much more than the other groups mentioned?

After all, I'm a straight white male over 21 - I should hate everybody, right? So why do I like gay people, black people...but let one SUV with a Jesusfish on the back cut me off in traffic and I want to follow them home, pick them up by the lapels and make them understand. Why is that?

I think it comes down to the fact that gay people don't think I'm a less-than-worthy person than they because I'm an unrepentant liker-of-women.

Black people have never smugly assured me that I could avoid a well-deserved eternal damnation if I would just convert to Blackness.

If gays, blacks, and other groups treated me the way that the supposed followers of Jesus do, I might feel the same way toward them.

[Sterra]

Screwtape, still faulty logic. People who are racist use logic like yours to defend their points. They are like "blacks rob you" or whatever. Same thing you are doing. No less worse than racism.

[lucie]

Maybe it's just a question of a group that has a notoriously intolerant stance toward the belifs of others crying because they feel people are not being tolerant back. No dogma requires me to turn the other cheek.

If the most vocal members of a particular group are contstantly condemning me and my beliefs, am I wrong in assuming that the self-avowed followers of these people feel the same? Mind you, we are talking about a small but very noisy sub-set here, the ones who feel free to tell me that I am going to hell for what they imagine my sins to be, and are trying to pass laws too make sure my time on Earth is hell as well. Fundamental evangelical bible-literalist Christians have openly taken the position that they are the only chosen, and the rest of us are hell-bound sinners. Their political leaders would love to make it legal to persecute me (and a few others on this board). Statements by certain posters lead me to believe they feel the same. If they are going to stand so firmly next to intolerant leaders, nodding parroting them, they should whine about getting tarred with the same brush from time to time.

Come on guys, if a guy wears a sheet and attends Klan meetings, do you assume he doesn't agree with the goals? Or, for those who find that analogy uncomfortable, if someone pays $5000 a plate to attend a Democratic politcal fundraiser, can I be blamed for assuming they belief in the Democratic party platform?

Basically, don't look for tolerance of your ideals if your ideals are not tolerant in return.

[Screwtape]

Originally posted by Asmodean
...No less worse than racism. Asmo', I've read that post three times and I still don't know WTF it means. No less worse? "Worse" and "Less" are both absolutes - they admit no comparatives.

Tell you what - let's drop you into the tiger cage. But don't worry! Just because they have stripes, and teeth, and claws, and do a great impression of a tiger, doesn't mean that they'll act the average tiger - they may be fluffy kitties! To assume otherwise is racism.

I'm sorry that I didn't have time to explain my position further. I've got a few minutes now.

Here goes:
I like in-your-face Christians less than I like other persecuted (puhleeeze!) groups. Why? Because they feel they are better. Intrinsically better, and they are not shy about letting me know about it. Furthermore, they will use their membership among the supposed "elect" to take advantage of the rest of us, and feel no guilt about it. It's okay, because God likes them better. When we screw up, we pay for it. When they screw up they're "Not Perfect - Just Forgiven."

And the attidude toward learning! C'Mon! Don't you want to retch when you see some smug yuppie with that TRUTHfish-eating-the-DARWINfish on his soccermommobile? Such a smug, self-assured ignorance of Darwin, and TRUTH, and good manners, coupled with such a pride in this ignorance!

I also know a little history. One of the things that is vewwy, vewwy, scawwy about religion is that it can have the function of dissociating a person from otherwise humanitarian sensibilities, enabling the person to perform acts of horrific atrocity. Examples? The Crusades. The Inquisition.

So, as lucie said, when someone displays a membership logo of a group that considers me as a lesser being, don't be surprised if I don't like it.

[Randy]

Originally posted by Screwtape


I like in-your-face Christians less than I like other persecuted (puhleeeze!) groups. Why? Because they feel they are better. Intrinsically better, and they are not shy about letting me know about it. Furthermore, they will use their membership among the supposed "elect" to take advantage of the rest of us, and feel no guilt about it. It's okay, because God likes them better. When we screw up, we pay for it. When they screw up they're "Not Perfect - Just Forgiven."

And the attidude toward learning! C'Mon! Don't you want to retch when you see some smug yuppie with that TRUTHfish-eating-the-DARWINfish on his soccermommobile? Such a smug, self-assured ignorance of Darwin, and TRUTH, and good manners, coupled with such a pride in this ignorance!


A Thank-you is in order to Screwtape, for reinforcing my original observation, that led me to post this thread. I was afraid no one would believe me, but along came Screwtape.

"In-your-face Christians"? Have you ever seen a Gay Pride parade? Have you ever seen a Klan Rally? Have you ever seen a Pro-Abortion group lined up outside a clinic to support it, or the Million Man March? Talk about "in your face".

I never said Christians were "persecuted", I said that society as a whole feels okay with openly bashing Christians, and pointed out that with most groups, this is not accepted. Words are not my idea of persecution, but I do sense a growing intolerence of Christians as time goes by.

Like I said in the OP, Everyone is Preaching Something. Screwtape is here preaching his version of the Truth, with the same vigor, attitude and intolerence he accuses Christians of having, and his justification is, he feels Christians did it first, and that his Truth is more truth than Christianity? Oh boy.

[Opus1]

Oh boy, a persecuted Christians thread!

Despite what people say, Christians get way more respect than their beliefs deserve. If I say that I believe that aliens abducted Elvis because he knew too much about the Kennedy assassination, people have no problem laughing at me. If I say that a man was born of a virgin, came back from the dead and that I can commune with him by rolling around on the floor and babbling incoherently, I get to be attorney general!

Tell me randy: what belief system other than Christianity or Islam says that those who don't subscribe to it will suffer eternal torture? Do you see why I (and others) dislike Christianity more than just a little bit?

You see, that's the key difference: Christianity, unlike being gay or black, is a belief system, and one founded on remarkably flimsy evidence at that. Now, I think it's unacceptable to say "Christians are assholes," but I have no problem mocking Christians for their beliefs, just like I have no problem mocking people who believe in Roswell, or the Loch Ness Monster, etc.

Finally, just 'cuz nobody's done so yet, here's Life in our Anti-Christian American (http://www.infidels.org/misc/humor/lioaca.html).

[The Flying Dutchman]

Originally posted by goboy
Randy and Grienspace, Christians run the country. christians are very firmly in charge, so you need not fear persecution. Now in China, Christians have had their churches destroyed and their pastors arrested. THAT's persecution.
I thought so too, but when I find out the Intelligentsia of America during the revolution were primarily deists and materialists I can only assume that the christian country concept of America might be a bit over-rated. The fact is, the only place I feel Christians are verbally abused is in this particular forum, and the preponderance of posters are definitely American making me wonder if this is what it is like for a Christian living in your country. It certainly isn't evident in your national media. You probably don't know that British Columbia is rife with a bigotry towards East Indians that can rival the bigotry of the 20th century states of the confederacy. You wouldn't know it from this forum would you.


[b]goboy continues
I have yet to see blatant anti-Christian bashing not get called on by the mods.
I respectfully disagree.

[Jackmannii]

Originally posted by Randy
[QUOTE]"In-your-face Christians"? Have you ever seen a Gay Pride parade? Have you ever seen a Klan Rally? Have you ever seen a Pro-Abortion group lined up outside a clinic to support it, or the Million Man March? Talk about "in your face".
Love your linkage of causes there. I've got to admit that I've never seen a pro-abortion rights group "lined up outside a clinic to support it". This phenomenon must be unique to your area. Everywhere else, it's the anti-abortion rights people who surround the clinics.

I never said Christians were "persecuted", I said that society as a whole feels okay with openly bashing Christians, and pointed out that with most groups, this is not accepted.

Oops. Check your previous posting, Randy, in which you suggest that your "dillusions (sic) of persecution" are well-founded.

I realize that the image of the Christian under assault and harried by the forces of evil is central to rallying the troops and keeping the faithful unified and all that, but the days that you represented an embattled minority are long, long gone.

[Randy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by super_head
This crap about Christians being so horribly persecuted in the USA is exactly that - crap


Jackmanni,
super_head brought up the word "persecution". My use of the word was in reply to HIS statement that Christians thought they were being persecuted. I was saying that I had never went that far with it. My fault. I should've mentioned his comment.

You must've missed it on CNN. After the Clinic in Alabama was bombed by an extremist, Pro-Abortionists were definitely lining the sidewalk in support of a "womans choice", and not only in Alabama. I didn't use the Anti-Abortionists as an example because most of them ARE Christians, and I wasn't denying that some Christians are in-your-face, just saying Christians aren't the only group. Looking back, yeah, that is quite a linkage of causes, aint it.

[Freedom]

if someone pays $5000 a plate to attend a Democratic politcal fundraiser, can I be blamed for assuming they belief in the Democratic party platform?


Actually, I could blame you.

You see, at a democratic fundraiser all the people are there to buy favors and desirable legislation. The Democrat's platform has nothing to do with their fundraisers.....:)



If the most vocal members of a particular group are contstantly condemning me and my beliefs, am I wrong in assuming that the self-avowed followers of these people feel the same?

Are you implying it is valid to judge all blacks because of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton?



A Thank-you is in order to Screwtape, for reinforcing my original observation, that led me to post this thread. I was afraid no one would believe me, but along came Screwtape.



Ahh....c'mon......

I think Stoidela and I lent a nice helping hand in there. With thanks extended to goboy and pldennison of course:)

(no hard feelings there I hope)

And I love stuff like this:

I never said Christians were "persecuted",

Followed in the next post by:

Oh boy, a persecuted Christians thread!



?????????????????????????

You see, that's the key difference: Christianity, unlike being gay or black, is a belief system, and one founded on remarkably flimsy evidence at that. Now, I think it's unacceptable to say "Christians are assholes," but I have no problem mocking Christians for their beliefs, just like I have no problem mocking people who believe in Roswell, or the Loch Ness Monster, etc.


So then, you admit that you are an intolerant religous bigot.

I can live with that.

I've got to admit that I've never seen a pro-abortion rights group "lined up outside a clinic to support it". This phenomenon must be unique to your area. Everywhere else, it's the anti-abortion rights people who surround the clinics.

I think they call themselves escorts. They walk the women into the clinic and try to sheild them from the pro-life protestors.

Plus, there are many, many pro-choice rallys. In fact, they are planning one this weekend to protest Bush.

[MrWhy]

Just a few things that, to me at least, separates criticism of evangelical Christians from criticism of black/gay/disabled/etc people.

Gay people do not approach me in the street and tell me to become gay.

Black people do not tell me that I am going to hell because I am not black.

Disabled people do not tell me that my entire world view is incorrect because I do not see the world from a wheelchair.

In fact, none of these groups say anything about my lifestyle. They just let me live. (So long as I respect their right to do so as well - which is fair enough.)

Yes there are gay pride parades etc but they are not saying my lifestyle is wrong, just celebrating their own.

This is my main problem with evangelical Christians. They presume to tell me that I am wrong about something that is none of their business.

[Screwtape]

MrWhy
I agree with your position on all points.

RandyA Thank-you is in order to Screwtape...Only too happy to oblige. Have you got enough rope there?

By the way, I notice you didn't actually address any of my points. :)

For the rest of your tirade, the logical fallacy in which you indulge is called tu quoque i.e., "you also." And no, I'm not doing it. I'm not saying I don't like them because they didn't like me first, though I could.

I'm not saying I dislike all Christians. In fact, those who actually practice the tenets of Christianity are very fine people. There's just so few of them, and the rest have earned my distrust and suspicion.

These are the people to whom I refer. The smug, self-assured, self-righteous, willfully ignorant, who have the audacity to demand tolerance when they will not give it. But why should they? Are they not the chosen? If God says they're better, who are they to disagree?

Don't claim you don't know who I'm talking about. If you are not among that number, you need not take anything I say personally. But you do, don't you? Why do you suppose that is?

[Opus1]

Freedom2 wrote:
And I love stuff like this:

I never said Christians were "persecuted",

Followed in the next post by:

Oh boy, a persecuted Christians thread!



Well, we can argue over semantics to death. I never said that Randy used the word persecuted, only that that was the crux of his OP. If you want, I can change this to "Oh boy, a discriminated-against Christians thread!" or something of the like.

So then, you admit that you are an intolerant religous bigot.

Well, let me posit a hypothetical. You're watching TV with your buddies, and a commercial comes on for the psychic hotline. Or you see a newspaper story about a recent UFO convention. Or you stumble across a flat-earth website. Tell me you've never yukked it up with your friends, or just snickered to yourself thinking about how idiotic such beliefs are. Are you an intolerant bigot for thinking that some beliefs are stupider than others?

If you've never mocked other people's absurd beliefs, either privately or publicly, then feel free to cast the first stone.

And a final word on Christianity. If I am against gun control, and I say that it would only be just if all gun control supporters were rounded up and shot, I would be condemned for my statement, and rightfully so. But, if I'm a Christian and I say that it is perfectly just for all non-Christians to suffer eternal torture, no one bats an eyelash.

[MrWhy]

Originally posted by Screwtape
MrWhy
I agree with your position on all points.



Now, if only everyone else would fall in line behind us. :D

[Randy]

Originally posted by Screwtape


Here goes:
I like in-your-face Christians less than I like other persecuted (puhleeeze!) groups. Why? Because they feel they are better. Intrinsically better, and they are not shy about letting me know about it. Furthermore, they will use their membership among the supposed "elect" to take advantage of the rest of us, and feel no guilt about it. It's okay, because God likes them better. When we screw up, we pay for it. When they screw up they're "Not Perfect - Just Forgiven."

Dude, you REALLY don't like Christians. That's all just bigotry up there man. I'm not saying a few, or some Christians aren't like that, but ALL CHRISTIANS?, come on.

And the attidude toward learning! C'Mon! Don't you want to retch when you see some smug yuppie with that TRUTHfish-eating-the-DARWINfish on his soccermommobile? Such a smug, self-assured ignorance of Darwin, and TRUTH, and good manners, coupled with such a pride in this ignorance!

You are aware that the Theory of Evolution is, um...a Theory, right? Listen, you can believe everything that your sixth grade teacher taught you if you want, but I'm telling you, there's lots of holes in that Theory. But, here's what gets me, the Truthfish is smug, self-assured and prideful, the Darwinfish is not? Do you know that the Jesusfish, or the fish that symbolizes Christianity has been around since the First Century?


I also know a little history. One of the things that is vewwy, vewwy, scawwy about religion is that it can have the function of dissociating a person from otherwise humanitarian sensibilities, enabling the person to perform acts of horrific atrocity. Examples? The Crusades. The Inquisition.

You're talking about ORGANIZED RELIGION here, some of it being mixed in with Official Government Policy. That's never good. I'm talking about Christianity.

So, as lucie said, when someone displays a membership logo of a group that considers me as a lesser being, don't be surprised if I don't like it.

There, you wanted me to address your points. The reason I didn't earlier is because I could tell by the attitude of your reply, it really wouldn't matter. Anyhow, since you've labeled me in your last reply as smug and arrogant and all that stuff, let me label you. Your proconceived notions of what Christians THINK, are making you a bitter man. Real insight there on my part, eh? We're not all that bad, really.

[pldennison]

Originally posted by Randy
You are aware that the Theory of Evolution is, um...a Theory, right? Listen, you can believe everything that your sixth grade teacher taught you if you want, but I'm telling you, there's lots of holes in that Theory.

Really? For those of us who are less informed on the topic, could you detail those holes for us?

By the way, what does "theory" mean? What does it mean when referring to something like "the theory of universal gravitation"?

[Testy]

and, (IMHO) they deserve to be. Here's why I think that.

Fundamental religious organizations, and I'm NOT just talking about Christians here, tend to lust after political power, the ability to judge another's actions as right or wrong, and the physical force to back it up.

I'm from the US but working in a Moslem country where the Sharia (sp) is used as the basis for civil law. Although this is a very SAFE country, almost crime free, there are also public beheadings of murderers dopers, or rapists, amputation of limbs for theft, and stonings for (female) adultery. Male adultery is blamed on the female. The (officially promoted and praised) religious bigotry and intolerance of ANY different religion is a source of constant amazement to every Western visitor. Religious police, who prefer the term "Commitee for the suppression of vice and establishment of public morals." stand around in shopping malls, prodding women in the legs with sticks if they aren't covered head-to-foot in black drapery. The commitee also has the power of arrest, the ability to drag you off to jail and KEEP you there until you see the error of your ways. Meetings between women and any male not a blood relative is considered strong evidence that some kind of sex has taken place. etc etc. The list goes on.

Now, before someone accuses me of Moslem-bashing, that's not the point. The point is what happens when a religion, any religion, gains political power. I cannot truthfully say that I believe Christian fundamentalist leaders to be more tolerant or intelligent than the Moslem ones, somewhat less so if anything.
This in turn leads me to believe that, given the chance, Christian fundamentalists would turn the US into a copy of what I see here. This HAS happened in the Christian world, the Crusades and the inquisition being examples that spring immediately to mind.
OK, if you've stuck with me so far, we're at the final bit of this rant. *S* Christian Fundamentalist leaders in the US pay court to the President and any other political leader they can influence. They also run in their own right. A fundamentalist of ANY sort influencing the government is (for me at least) cause for alarm. I see the inevitable end of that process as being something similar to what I'm living in now. At the end of the day, I bash fundamentalists because I fear them, I fear what they would do if they could only get around that troublesome "separation of church and state" thing.

OK, that's my contribution to the "Fundy Bashing" debate. As an Oh-bye-the-way, I feel much better now. Is that an indication I should have posted this in "The Pit?"

Testy.

[hawthorne]

[cuddly friendly mode] Before you take up pldennison's invitation randy do a search for previous threads on this and related matters. There is a perception here that certain types of christians are unduly confident in such matters. You probably don't want to reinforce that perception. [/cfm]

[Screwtape]

Originally posted by Randy
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Screwtape
Dude, you REALLY don't like Christians. That's all just bigotry up there man. I'm not saying a few, or some Christians aren't like that, but ALL CHRISTIANS?, come on.

And where did I say ALL CHRISTIANS? I have pretty emphatically stated that those who practice the true form of Christianity are not the ones that I have a problem with. The ones who are secure in their faith and content to let their God judge me, rather than taking it on themselves. This doesn't include you, does it?

Originally posted by Randy
You are aware that the Theory of Evolution is, um...a Theory, right? Listen, you can believe everything that your sixth grade teacher taught you if you want, but I'm telling you, there's lots of holes in that Theory. You have no idea what you are talking about. Very well. I'll try once again. A Theory, when used by the scientific community and spelled with a capital "T" denotes a principle which has such a preponderance of evidence supporting it that to deny it would be delusional. Evolution is supported by biology, geology, zoology, taxonomy, palenotology...to name but a few disciplines.

You're aware, I suppose of the Theory of Gravitation? It's about as reliable as Evolution.

You're talking about ORGANIZED RELIGION here, some of it being mixed in with Official Government Policy. That's never good. I'm talking about Christianity.Oh. My mistake. And to think all this time I though Christianity WAS an organized religion. This is going to come as a surprise to the Pope.

[The Flying Dutchman]

Originally posted by Screwtape
Oh. My mistake. And to think all this time I though Christianity WAS an organized religion. This is going to come as a surprise to the Pope

Roman Catholicism is perhaps the most organized religion in the world, but as far as generic religions are concerned, I believe Christianity is the most fractured,hundreds if not thousands of different denominations and many Christians feel no need to participate in public displays of faith.

[Randy]

Originally posted by pldennison

By the way, what does "theory" mean?

Oh boy. Well....I looked it up in Merriam Websters and heres what it says:

theory

1. abstract thought
2. the general principles of a subject
3. a plausible or scientifically acceptable general
principle offered to explain observed facts.
4. HYPOTHESIS, CONJECTURE. (caps Websters, not mine)


I know you wanted more, but it seems there's several definitions for the word, none of them being "Absolute Truth"

Listen though, if it's coming down to a Scientific debate, I have no problem admitting that many, if not most of you are more educated on the subject than I am. I am intelligent enough to know this; for 150 years Darwins Theory (theory?) has been debated by well informed, educated, intelligent folks, and it will be till Christ returns. It has been hotly debated, and not only by the Christian community. Have all those years of debate been in
vain? They could've just asked you?

Sorry, but my faith tells me differently. If that's arrogance, and worthy of bashing, so be it.

Anyway, my topic was Political Correctness. I should've known better than respond to the Evolution comments.

[Randy]

Originally posted by Screwtape
Oh. My mistake. And to think all this time I though Christianity WAS an organized religion. This is going to come as a surprise to the Pope. [/QUOTE]

Chrisitianity is a belief, or a way of life. Take what the Bible says, then mix in mans interpretations and laws with it, make a doctrine out of that, then it becomes a religion. For example, 1 John 1:9 says, "if we confess our sins, He (God) is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness". That is Christianity. The Roman Catholics say (not exactly this, but for illustration purposes) that if you sin, confess TO A PRIEST, say some Hail Mary's, then you're forgiven. That is Religion.

Of course that's MY definition of it all, But if you're allowed to use your definition of "Theory with a capital T", then I'm allowed to use mine.

[Randy]

Originally posted by Testy
and, (IMHO) they deserve to be. Here's why I think that.

Fundamental religious organizations, and I'm NOT just talking about Christians here, tend to lust after political power, the ability to judge another's actions as right or wrong, and the physical force to back it up.

Christian Fundamentalist leaders in the US pay court to the President and any other political leader they can influence. They also run in their own right. A fundamentalist of ANY sort influencing the government is (for me at least) cause for alarm. I see the inevitable end of that process as being something similar to what I'm living in now. At the end of the day, I bash fundamentalists because I fear them, I fear what they would do if they could only get around that troublesome "separation of church and state" thing.

Testy.

Testy, do you hate all groups who lobby politically for what they want, or just Christians? Should Christians step aside and not speak up while other groups lobby?

I don't have any statitistics here, but I would guess that MOST Christians do not want to "get around that troublesome separation of church and state thing". ALL, the Christians that I know, are very happy with that arrangement. If we're not careful though, the Nations Leaders and Lawmakers might want to join the two someday. That would be trouble.

[Mr2001]

Randy:

Evolution is a Fact and a Theory (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html).

In everyday speech, "theory" often means a hypothesis or even a mere speculation. But in science, "theory" means "a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles, or causes of something known or observed", as the Oxford English Dictionary defines it. The theory of evolution is a body of interconnected statements about natural selection and the other processes that are thought to cause evolution, just as the atomic theory of chemistry and the Newtonian theory of mechanics are bodies of statements that describe causes of chemical and physical phenomena.
--Douglas Futuyma

[pldennison]

Originally posted by Randy
Listen though, if it's coming down to a Scientific debate, I have no problem admitting that many, if not most of you are more educated on the subject than I am. I am intelligent enough to know this; for 150 years Darwins Theory (theory?) has been debated by well informed, educated, intelligent folks, and it will be till Christ returns. It has been hotly debated, and not only by the Christian community. Have all those years of debate been in
vain? They could've just asked you?

Gee, you're right. You're absolutely right. The fact that a scientific theory is subject to constant and rigorous debate and revision rather than simple acceptance on faith must mean it is full of holes and probably invalid.

Oh, can you please explain for us (since it's so well accepted, it should take mere moments to find an online cite) exactly how gravity works, how its effects are transmitted across a distance, and the speed at which it occurs?

[Testy]

Originally posted by Randy
Originally posted by Testy
and, (IMHO) they deserve to be. Here's why I think that.

Fundamental religious organizations, and I'm NOT just talking about Christians here, tend to lust after political power, the ability to judge another's actions as right or wrong, and the physical force to back it up.

Christian Fundamentalist leaders in the US pay court to the President and any other political leader they can influence. They also run in their own right. A fundamentalist of ANY sort influencing the government is (for me at least) cause for alarm. I see the inevitable end of that process as being something similar to what I'm living in now. At the end of the day, I bash fundamentalists because I fear them, I fear what they would do if they could only get around that troublesome "separation of church and state" thing.

Testy.

Testy, do you hate all groups who lobby politically for what they want, or just Christians? Should Christians step aside and not speak up while other groups lobby?

I don't have any statitistics here, but I would guess that MOST Christians do not want to "get around that troublesome separation of church and state thing". ALL, the Christians that I know, are very happy with that arrangement. If we're not careful though, the Nations Leaders and Lawmakers might want to join the two someday. That would be trouble.



Hi Randy.
No, I don't hate every group that lobbies for what it wants. After all, that's just the way things work. And I agree with you about the leaders and lawmakers getting in bed together. Also, I have no problem with Christians that isn't applied to EVERY religion, the religiously-oriented country I'm living in is Islamic. As far as Christians being happy with the present separation of church and state, I have a different perspective on that due to several comments about the US being a "God-less" country. To me, this implies a desire to chanage that.

I believe (yes, I realize it's a BELIEF.*S*) that most religious leaders, regardless of their faith, desire power and will try to gain it in any way possible. I don't consider a religious leader to be a monster, just a guy that likes to run things. The problem with someone running a government on a religious basis is that he has, or can manufacture, a religious justification for nearly anything he wishes to do. After all, if he is sincerely religious, he is enjoined to spread the "Word," and what better way of doing that than establishing a church someone HAS to belong to and a lifestyle he or she HAS to publicly support?

An extremely religious leader, a "Fundy," would change laws in ways that I consider highly intrusive and would have not only the here-after to threaten me with, but the here-and-now as well.

As I mentioned, I've seen first-hand what religious dictatorships can be, and I have very little faith that Christian-led governments would be any more tolerant or fair.

All the best.

Testy.

(Still looking for a good sig file.)

[tomndebb]

It has been hotly debated, and not only by the Christian community. Have all those years of debate been in
vain?
Actually, in the scientific community (where they like to mess around with facts and things) the heated debates of Darwinism died in the triumph of Neo-Darwinism (made viable with the recently-at-that-time understanding of genetics) over 70 years ago. In the ensuing period, the debates regarding Darwin's theory have fallen into one of two categories:
a) people who debate the finer points of the events while accepting the obvious truth of the process (E.G., Gradualism vs Punctuated Equilibrium)
and
b) people who struggle with Darwin's solution as a matter of belief and attempt to construct alternative solutions to their stumbling blocks (E.G., "Intelligent Design" supporters--who have provided interesting arguments, but have provided no information to actually challenge Darwin's Theory). (Some of these folks actually accept Darwin "to a point," then can't get past some aspect of their perception of the Theory. It is not a hotly debated topic, however, within scientific circles.)

[Screwtape]

Originally posted by tomndebb
[quote]...two categories:
a) people who debate the finer points of the events while accepting the obvious truth of the process (E.G., Gradualism vs Punctuated Equilibrium)
and...I lean more toward Punk Eek, myself. it seems more likely that Gradualism. But maybe some later evidence will change my mind.

[Randy]

Originally posted by pldennison

Oh, can you please explain for us (since it's so well accepted, it should take mere moments to find an online cite) exactly how gravity works, how its effects are transmitted across a distance, and the speed at which it occurs?


Okay. I'll put it on the list, but in another Thread I started, a Poster already asked me to do a brief write-up on the complex ocellus of the Agriolimax reticulatus. I'll jump on that gravity thing, first thing after that one though.

Anyhow, if this is turned into a theory of Evo. debate, you won't mind if I slide out, will you?

[pldennison]

Originally posted by Randy
Anyhow, if this is turned into a theory of Evo. debate, you won't mind if I slide out, will you?

Actually I will, since you brought it up. It will demonstrate that you feel comfortable making assertions you can't defend about topics you don't understand. Not a good track record to establish in GD.

[Blackclaw]

Wow. A rant of mine in the pit spawns a GD and I didn't even realize it until now.

I suppose I will have to admit to a prejudice of mine. After all, while I feel I didn't bash Christianity as a whole, I did bash someone. My prejudice is against those who feel they know all the answers to life's great questions. It drives me nuts. The religion or the belief don't really enter into it. A new religion dedicated to the belief that a big orange spotted dinosaur named Genima could sprout up tomorrow and their "I will live forever cause I love Genima" bumper stickers would irritate me too. But that doesn't mean I feel they don't have the right to say such things. I just feel I should have the right to be annoyed by it.

I think betenoir stated quite well what my post was really about.

Christian fundies tend to raise my annoyance level most often because they are one of the most numerous groups in the US of those who believe that they have all the answers and you don't so nyah nyah. The core values of Christianity certainly are not what offends me.

Addressing the OP is bashing Christian fundamentalism more tolerated in the US than other forms of prejudice? I don't believe so. Few public officials are willing to cross them. Even in this forum there certainly is a an inclination to dive in and protect the belief in Christianity should it be attacked. Meanwhile the public figures of Christian fundamentalism seem to have no problem denouncing homosexuals and others. It's hard to take seriously calls that one group is under unfair prejudical attack while that group is making similar attacks against others.

[IzzyR]

Originally posted by Blackclaw
Addressing the OP is bashing Christian fundamentalism more tolerated in the US than other forms of prejudice? I don't believe so. Few public officials are willing to cross them. Even in this forum there certainly is a an inclination to dive in and protect the belief in Christianity should it be attacked. Meanwhile the public figures of Christian fundamentalism seem to have no problem denouncing homosexuals and others. It's hard to take seriously calls that one group is under unfair prejudical attack while that group is making similar attacks against others. [/B]It is misleading to compare public officials to public figures. If your claim can survive this correction, please restate it (with details).

[Blackclaw]

I disagree. Both public officials and public figures rely upon popular support to continue their operations.

If you feel this is unfair of me, please state the reasons. I'm willing to reconsider this position.

[IzzyR]

BlackClawBoth public officials and public figures rely upon popular support to continue their operations.Public figures can appeal be successful by appealing to a narrow constituency that agrees with them. Public officials must take into account the reaction of those who do not share their views. This will tend to temper their statements.

A Farrakhan or a Robertson (not to equate the two) is not overly concerned with the fact that a large portion of the electorate finds him abhorrent - he is preaching to a large constituency that wants to hear someone "tell it like it is". Either of these men would have a hard time getting elected.

[Blackclaw]

So you're position is that because public officials must appeal to a large audience that public figures it is unfair to create them. Ok.

Revised statement: The OP is incorrect because few elected officials are willing to cross fundamentalist beliefs and allow gays full rights in marriage or the military. The prejudice against homesexuals still, in legally allowed rights, outweighs any that may exist against Christian fundamentalism.

[Randy]

Originally posted by pldennison
Originally posted by Randy
Anyhow, if this is turned into a theory of Evo. debate, you won't mind if I slide out, will you?

Actually I will, since you brought it up. It will demonstrate that you feel comfortable making assertions you can't defend about topics you don't understand. Not a good track record to establish in GD.

Sorry. I went away for the weekend so I couldn't respond sooner.
pldennison, you have a couple things wrong here.

1. I never "brought it up". Screwtape did and I tried to ignore it the first time till he remarked that I hadn't addressed any of his comments. Believe me, I immediately regretted acknowledging it, but I stand by the FACT that although SOME members of the Scientific Community now regard it as a Fact, it is not 100% accepted. Now, we could both put up different links to different sites to "prove our point" on the subject FOREVER, but why? In the end we wouldn't convince each other of anything. (I was just at "askjeeves", and there's plenty of debate, even on that one site!) If you scroll up, you will see that I admitted that many people here are more "educated" on the subject than I am. So, I have this sneaking suspicion that you know quite a bit on the subject and you want alot of people to know that you know alot, OR, you are trying to make a fool of me, or maybe a little of both. What do you want?

2. I wasn't trying to establish a "track record in GD".
As a matter of fact, I originally posted this in IMHO, the moderator moved it here to GD, and my OP had nothing to do with Evolutionism at all. If you will look at the OP, it was my humble opinion that you could say most anything you want to about Christianity here, and no one would notice.

Anyway, that's it for me on Evolution. Please, start a Thread on Evo., if you want to debate it.

So far as to the OP, there's been three or four posters who have said yes, they bash Christians because they deserve it, more or less. The point of the OP was eloquently proven by Freedom2, and some have said that any group is up for ridicule. It has been fun to read EVERYONES opinion. So, thanks to everyone who bothered to respond (except pldennison, heheh. [just kidding]).