I’m confused. When Conservative politicians and Christians use churches to host political gatherings, the Left starts yammering about “theocracy.” What, then, is
After the Sunday service at Antioch Baptist Church, the pastors turned their pulpit over to opponents of President Bush's proposals to change Social Security.
Nearly 100 congregation and community members attended an afternoon meeting in the church's main sanctuary, where they heard from Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Cleveland Democrat; Cleveland AFL-CIO Executive Secretary John Ryan; and Cleveland NAACP Executive Director Stanley Miller, among others.
But wait – there’s more to it.
So I have to ask the question – is the stand against “theocracy” taken by the Left based upon principle, or is it simply that they don’t want Christians who might vote Republican to participate in the political process?
1
Ahh. What we have here is a fundamental misunderstanding of the word "theocracy." A theocracy isn't a state in which Christians (or any other religious group)
participate in the political process. A theocracy is one in which the principles of a specific relgion (or at least the principles as percieved by the ruling group) are enshrined in law. That's what scares us to death. Some might disagree but holding a secular political meeting in a building with an organ is no different than holding it in a hotel conference room as far as I'm concerned.
Posted by: dolphin at Fri May 27 07:41:55 2005 (2h6qI)
2
That isn't the way your side uses the word.
And since you had a congresscritter out recruiting pastors to bring in the flock to a church meeting about secular issues and how they related to what the Church believes...
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Fri May 27 12:47:53 2005 (oyTDb)
3
Ahh... Is this a new thing that the GOP has told it's memebers to do. I'm encountering it more and more often.
That isn't the way your side uses the word.
This is like te 3 rd time I've been told, "I can't argue against your point of view so I'll just assign you a different point of view"
Posted by: dolphin at Sat May 28 05:33:40 2005 (TGO2t)
4
Hardly -- it is simply pointing out how the word is being used in contemporary political discourse by those who brought it into the discussion.
And please note -- I did respond to your original point, making it clear that this event seems to have met your criteria.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sat May 28 07:11:34 2005 (vm849)
5
My understanding is that a secular meeting took place in a church building. I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem if the neo-nazi right want to have a meeting in a church building. I DO have a problem if they want to write there disgusting corruption of Christianity into law.
Posted by: dolphin at Sat May 28 12:26:08 2005 (SVh3K)
6
Gee, dolphin, I read the article differently than you do.
And you are engaged in a tactic that, when used against the Left, is usually referred to as Red-baiting. I thought you valued honesty and logic.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sat May 28 13:24:56 2005 (zU2Lj)
7
How dare you twist the article around by not quoting every letter of it. Oh well, I guess it's just another case of an attack by The Dishonest And Intellectually Deficient Right.
Posted by: dolphin at Sun May 29 23:17:31 2005 (V5cZa)
8
I guess dolphin answered RWR's question on tge question of honesty with a short end of a stick.
Posted by: mcconnell at Mon May 30 05:43:53 2005 (UMLNq)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
