Stunning, yet someone actually posted this.

[Monty]

In this thread, Straight Dope Message Board - Getting back to traditional Judeo-Christian family values, ElJeffe posted the moronic babblings I’ve quoted below. To keep the other thread civil, I’m responding in this thread as such stupidity requires pitesque comments.

Quite the charicature you got going there, MsRobyn, blowero. I think I’ll try addressing the OP with a modicum of seriousness, though.

Your freaking serious with these comments?! Good grief! And you’re living in this area?! Good grief[sup]2[/sup].

“Family values” as generally encouraged by conservative politicians typically concerns placing children as your highest priority, and trying to raise them in as wholesome environment as possible. This includes a two-parent household if at all possible, with the parents married, and an assurance that there is someone around to take care of the kids. While career moms aren’t frowned upon in and of themselves, the practice of having both parents work while leaving little Timmy in a daycare 10 hours a day from the time he’s 6 months old on up is generally frowned upon. The general philosophy is that parents need to be around, and this need should be addressed and worked out before the kids come into the picture.

It should also be noted that those preaching family values really don’t care if it’s the man, woman, or both, bringing home the bacon, as long as somebody’s around to care for the kids.

The “general philosphy” you describe here is pure bunk. The “parents need to be around” is more often than not, from what I’ve heard from these loony pols and their supporters, is “Mommy must be at home.” As long as Daddy’s making the bacon, it doesn’t matter a whit to them if he’s around. Come to think of it, from what some of these pols have been doing, it appears that it doesn’t matter a whit to them if he’s honouring his marriage vows either!

Homosexuality is, generally speaking, viewed in a negative light.

“Viewed in a negative light”?!?! Bwahahahahahahah! The only rationale those loons have for condemning homosexuality outright (apparently “view in a negative light” is your euphemism for “hate”) is that their interpretation of one religion’s scripture tells them said scripture abhors homosexuality.

However, I can’t recall ever hearing any mainstream conservative politician espouse “family values” as excluding inter-racial marriages.

I can. I grew up in good ol’ Dixie. Heck, I even got called “n~” because I dared to hold my ex-wife’s hand in public back when we were married. That I’m caucasian and she’s Korean really got the locals fired up.

I think the propogation of that particular myth is another wonderful side effect of the “Republicans are evil” and “Christians are evil” philosophy that tends to float around.

So, what’s your decision-making process on which myths to latch onto? I mean, you’ve already posted a bunch of hooey in the linked thread.

What, you didn’t know that republicans and christians are all bigots? I’ll tell you all about it after I get back from my cross-burning.

Nobody said all were.

As far as emulating the Bradys and Cleavers, yes, that’s probably not too far from the truth. Both families demonstrated togetherness and love, and it was always clear that the parents put their children’s interests ahead of their own. The fact that the families “never existed” is irrelevant, as they still represent a good standard to try to uphold.

What standard would that be? The standard where everyone bends to the whims of the father? Or the standard where the mother doesn’t have a clue on how to raise children without some male figure telling her how?

The “Judeo-Christian” part of this whole family values-thing represents the fact that most morals in western civilization are derived from Christianity (specifically, the New Testament). Indeed, our nation’s system of laws is based in large part on the Ten Commandments.

Please avail yourself of the nearest dictionary and look up the definition of the word “fact.”

Then hie yourself to a nifty school, lawyer, or just anyone who happens to be gifted with a brain and a smattering of actual History. Perhaps there you’ll discover, as others have pointed out to you (and you ignored them) in the linked thread, that this statement of yours is bullshit.

[Monty]

ElJeffe also posted this outright manure:

Some belief systems coughIslamcough don’t value life quite as much as Christianity, unfortunately.

First off: Islam values life just as much as Christianity does.

Second: I don’t recall it being Islam that launched the Crusades.

Third: Why didn’t you just keep your posting down to four words, “I am a bigot.”? Saves time, you know.

[happyheathen]

As long as Daddy’s making the bacon

actually, Monty, I think those loons also frown on beastiality…

[Monty]

BTW, “Your freaking serious with these comments?!” should read “You’re freaking serious with these comments?!”

[Monty]

Good one, hh!

[Neurotik]

*Originally posted by Monty *
**Second: I don’t recall it being Islam that launched the Crusades. **

Right. Islam has never instituted a holy war. :rolleyes:

[Soup_du_jour]

Right. Islam has never instituted a holy war.:rolleyes:

I always viewed Crusades/“holy wars” as normal wars with religion given as an excuse by the leaders to rally support.

[SPOOFE]

Doesn’t matter what the real motivations were for holy wars. As long as the bigwigs told their mindless hordes, “We’re doing this for Christ/Allah/Bert!”, and the mindless hordes shouted, “Huzzah for Chris/Allah/Bert!” whilst killing as many of the enemy as possible, that makes it a holy war.

[Monty]

Neurotik: I was making a freaking point. The MiQ, ElJeffe, was saying that Christianity has this oh-so-much-better love of life than Islam does. I was just using the Crusades as the best example that EJ’s stance is bullshit. & as Spoofe so aptly noted, disregard of someone else’s life is not limited to the followers of only those two creeds.

[december]

*Originally posted by Monty *First off: Islam values life just as much as Christianity does.

This is simply incorrect. On this thread, e.g., have been listed recent actions by Muslims showing contempt for life – actions with no parallel among Christians. If you have any actual evidence that Islam values life as much as Chrisitianity does, you ought to present it.

Second: I don’t recall it being Islam that launched the Crusades.

I am not a Christian, but this argument is an insult to human intelligence. The Crusades took place between 1095 and 1270 – over 700 years ago! Do you know how long a seven hundred years is? It’s just silly to attribute to Christianity today to something Christians haven’t done for over seven hundred years.

Third: Why didn’t you just keep your posting down to four words, “I am a bigot.”? Saves time, you know.

I’d suggest six words for you, Monty: “I’m in a state of denial.”

[JonScribe]

Hmm, December, that’s a mighty big paintbrush you got there.

[Early_Out]

*Originally posted by JonScribe *
**Hmm, December, that’s a mighty big paintbrush you got there. **

No one’s ever accused our beloved december of being a pointilist. He wouldn’t be nearly as much fun if he were!

[SPOOFE]

This is simply incorrect. On this thread, e.g., have been listed recent actions by Muslims showing contempt for life – actions with no parallel among Christians. If you have any actual evidence that Islam values life as much as Chrisitianity does, you ought to present it.

I got three words for you: “God hates fags.”

[Monty]

Wrong again, december. The other individual made the positive assertion that Islam has less regard for human life. It is incumbent on that individual to present actual evidence for that.

[Sublight]

As far as emulating the Bradys and Cleavers, yes, that’s probably not too far from the truth.

You mean to be a good Christian, I can never go to the toilet? :eek:

[Sublight]

december, if you feel that the statute of limitations for the Crusades has expired, how about Northern Ireland?

[Neurotik]

*Originally posted by Monty *
**Neurotik: I was making a freaking point. The MiQ, ElJeffe, was saying that Christianity has this oh-so-much-better love of life than Islam does. I was just using the Crusades as the best example that EJ’s stance is bullshit. & as Spoofe so aptly noted, disregard of someone else’s life is not limited to the followers of only those two creeds. **

Re: ElJeffe’s stance. Absolutely, 100% agreed.

However, I am tired of the Crusades being brought up every time there is a thread involving violence/Christianity/religion like it was some sort of massive, unprecedented atrocity perpretrated on the Arab/Turkish folks who were just sitting there minding their own business, which is just a complete misrepresentation.

In fact, I had typed all of this out in the original post but between hamsters and sloth I opted for the short cut. I probably shouldn’t have done that.

[RickJay]

Originally posted by december *
** It’s just silly to attribute to Christianity today to something Christians haven’t done for over seven hundred years. **

Okay, then, what about

• Orthodox Christians slaughtering Muslims in Bosnia - in the 1990s?
• Christian armies razing Beirut in the 1980s?
• Northern Ireland?
• European wars of colonialism in this century?

Sorry, D, I don’t have to even look anything up to find Christians massacring people of other religions. Or of their own religion.

[Opus1]

Another good example of Christian regard for human life…

[iampunha]

Christian regard for human life?

Catholic priest pedophilia scandal.

Good grief. All you have to do is look back six months. Maybe even less than that. Whoever this carpetstain is, s/he clearly needs to learn to read more than the ingredients on a bottle of water.