Why the Christian Right is Wrong

[**Rowland Croucher**]

Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

The cover blurb sums it up well: 'I join the ranks of those who are
angry, because I have watched as the faith I love has been taken over by
fundamentalists who claim to speak for Jesus but whose actions are
anything but Christian.'

Robin Meyers is a United Church of Christ minister, a contributor to The
Christian Century, and 'professor of rhetoric' at Oklahoma City University.

In 2004 he gave a speech at a University of Oklahoma peace rally from
which he achieved widespread Internet fame. (You can find the speech by
putting the relevant words into Google - or the John Mark Ministries
website indexes). It ended with these stirring words: 'Time to march
again my friends. Time to commit acts of civil disobedience. Time to
sing, and to pray, and refuse to participate in the madness. My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

More... http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/20394.htm
--
Shalom/Salaam/Pax! Rowland Croucher

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ (20,000 articles 4000 humor)

Blogs - http://rowlandsblogs.blogspot.com/

Justice for Dawn Rowan - http://dawnrowansaga.blogspot.com/

Funny Jokes and Pics - http://funnyjokesnpics.blogspot.com/

[George]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.
The cover blurb sums it up well: 'I join the ranks of those who are
angry, because I have watched as the faith I love has been taken over by
fundamentalists who claim to speak for Jesus but whose actions are
anything but Christian.'
Robin Meyers is a United Church of Christ minister, a contributor to The
Christian Century, and 'professor of rhetoric' at Oklahoma City University.
In 2004 he gave a speech at a University of Oklahoma peace rally from
which he achieved widespread Internet fame. (You can find the speech by
putting the relevant words into Google - or the John Mark Ministries
website indexes). It ended with these stirring words: 'Time to march
again my friends. Time to commit acts of civil disobedience. Time to
sing, and to pray, and refuse to participate in the madness. My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'
More... http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/20394.htm
--
Shalom/Salaam/Pax! Rowland Croucher

He has some interesting comments. Here is a video link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9171501692229320477&q=Robin+Meyers&total=91&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

George

[Richard Eich]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.
The cover blurb sums it up well: 'I join the ranks of those who are
angry, because I have watched as the faith I love has been taken over by
fundamentalists who claim to speak for Jesus but whose actions are
anything but Christian.'
Robin Meyers is a United Church of Christ minister, a contributor to The
Christian Century, and 'professor of rhetoric' at Oklahoma City University.
In 2004 he gave a speech at a University of Oklahoma peace rally from
which he achieved widespread Internet fame. (You can find the speech by
putting the relevant words into Google - or the John Mark Ministries
website indexes). It ended with these stirring words: 'Time to march
again my friends. Time to commit acts of civil disobedience. Time to
sing, and to pray, and refuse to participate in the madness. My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'
More... http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/20394.htm
--
Shalom/Salaam/Pax! Rowland Croucher
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ (20,000 articles 4000 humor)
Blogs - http://rowlandsblogs.blogspot.com/
Justice for Dawn Rowan - http://dawnrowansaga.blogspot.com/
Funny Jokes and Pics - http://funnyjokesnpics.blogspot.com/

I'm not unsympathetic to this at all, but the thing that bothers be
is that these folks believe they are informed by the Holy Spirit. I
hesitate to criticize them out of fear of commiting blasphemy against
the Spirit.

Rather, I disagree with them in silence -- which presents its own
conundrum, since silence can be construed as complicity.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was to
convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists took over,
killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'. And they are still
supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

[Richard Eich]

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was to
convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists took over,
killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'. And they are still
supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

[zach]

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was to
convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists took over,
killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'. And they are still
supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

I have worked with many Vietnamese people for the past decade and a
half. Many of them go back to visit, but not one of them would return
to live there as long as the Communists are still in power and things
are going the way they are going. Granted, it isn't like the days
before they escaped when they were forced at gunpoint into the streets
to raise their fists and chant against American Imperialism (which
makes one wonder how many actually "wanted" Communism), but there is
still active religious and political suppression going on to this day,
not to mention abject poverty and endemic corruption. Given the
economic interests of Vietnam with the West, however, we do have a bit
more pull with them diplomatically, such as this past year when they
arrested a Vietnamese-American for spying on the US (which on the
surface didn't even make sense). So yeah, I trust eyewitnesses to
history, especially because not even knowing each other, they all have
the similar tragic stories and opinions.

[**Rowland Croucher**]

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was to
convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists took over,
killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'. And they are still
supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

(If I, the original poster in this thread, might answer this question, I
was there during the Vietnam War, on a speaking/counseling trip for a
couple of weeks. HTH).
--
Shalom/Salaam/Pax! Rowland Croucher

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ (20,000 articles 4000 humor)

Blogs - http://rowlandsblogs.blogspot.com/

Justice for Dawn Rowan - http://dawnrowansaga.blogspot.com/

Funny Jokes and Pics - http://funnyjokesnpics.blogspot.com/

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was to
convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists took over,
killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'. And they are still
supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

You are asking the wrong questions. I don't have to be there to know that they
are supressing human rights. Google is good enough for that.

See, for example, http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/07/20/vietna16441.htm, which
shows how as recently as this July, they seized protesters who were protesting
government seizure of their land. As they put it, "The Vietnamese government
repeatedly says it s committed to reform and the rule of law, yet it stops
citizens from peacefully protesting about abuse by local officials"

That evidence is clear enough; I don't have to go there to confirm it.

[George]

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was
to convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists
took over, killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'.
And they are still supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

If a tree falls alone in the woods, do we actually have to be there for it
to make a sound?

George

[Richard Eich]

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was to
convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists took over,
killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'. And they are still
supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

You are asking the wrong questions. I don't have to be there to know that they
are supressing human rights. Google is good enough for that.
See, for example, http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/07/20/vietna16441.htm, which
shows how as recently as this July, they seized protesters who were protesting
government seizure of their land. As they put it, "The Vietnamese government
repeatedly says it s committed to reform and the rule of law, yet it stops
citizens from peacefully protesting about abuse by local officials"
That evidence is clear enough; I don't have to go there to confirm it.

That actually isn't any different than protesters at a Bush-Cheney
campaign rally being arrested for wearing t-shirts critical of Bush.

Or the arrests in NYC at the 2004 RNC convention there.

Yes, they were almost immediately released. Those, that is, who
weren't classified as enemy combatants and given an indefinite stay
at some spot in the world where torture isn't really torture.

So pardon me, but human rights aren't really any better in the US.

For more than 20 years, I have been in direct, daily contact with a
wide range of people who have immigrated from Vietnam, or who are
here visiting. Of those who live here, the popular plan is to return
to Vietnam to retire. And they're well-informed about what is going
on back there.

Without Google.

[B.G. Kent]

Post by George

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved was
to convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the Communists
took over, killing many and exiling many more to 're-education camps'.
And they are still supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

If a tree falls alone in the woods, do we actually have to be there for it
to make a sound?
George

B - What determines a sound? a being with equipment to capture sound. Yes
you have to be there to KNOW that it is sound to begin with.

Bren

[George]

Post by B.G. Kent

Post by George

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved
was
to convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the
Communists
took over, killing many and exiling many more to 're-education
camps'.
And they are still supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

If a tree falls alone in the woods, do we actually have to be there for
it
to make a sound?
George

B - What determines a sound? a being with equipment to capture sound. Yes
you have to be there to KNOW that it is sound to begin with.
Bren

Did Jupiter's moons exist before Galileo discovered them? Of course they
did. No we don't have to be there at all. The laws of physics are
universal, meaning that they apply everywhere in the universe. We don't
have to be witness the tree falling to be reasonably certain that the tree
made a sound when it fell. Any sound made is independent of our
observation or lack thereof. Any sound made is dictated by the laws of
physics, not the observation of man. We can observe after the fact that
the tree fell, and then, using our brains and knowledge the laws of physics
surmise that it must have made a sound when it fell. Just because we
weren't there to witness it doesn't mean that no sound occurred. To suggest
that we must experience it for it to be real is arrogant and implies that
we have powers over nature that don't exist. The fact is that nature could
care less whether or not we are there to witness the event.

George

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My
generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they
achieved was to convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant
that the Communists took over, killing many and exiling many more
to 're-education camps'. And they are still supressing freedom in
Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was
the last time you were there?

You are asking the wrong questions. I don't have to be there to
know that they are supressing human rights. Google is good enough
for that.
See, for example,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/07/20/vietna16441.htm, which shows
how as recently as this July, they seized protesters who were
protesting government seizure of their land. As they put it, "The
Vietnamese government repeatedly says it s committed to reform and
the rule of law, yet it stops citizens from peacefully protesting
about abuse by local officials"
That evidence is clear enough; I don't have to go there to confirm it.

That actually isn't any different than protesters at a Bush-Cheney
campaign rally being arrested for wearing t-shirts critical of Bush.

Sure, it is. Did you even read the article at the link?

Post by Richard Eich
Or the arrests in NYC at the 2004 RNC convention there.
Yes, they were almost immediately released.

And that is a huge difference already. You should be ashamed of
yourself for making such an outrageous claim, then contradicting
it yourself.

Post by Richard Eich
Those, that is, who
weren't classified as enemy combatants and given an indefinite stay
at some spot in the world where torture isn't really torture.

You should be ashamed of this too, since NONE of those arrested either
at the campaign rallies or at the RNC convention were treated that
way.

Post by Richard Eich
So pardon me, but human rights aren't really any better in the US.

Pardon me, but you have no clue what you are talking about. Even under
Bush, human rights are far better here than in Vietnam.

Post by Richard Eich
For more than 20 years, I have been in direct, daily contact with a
wide range of people who have immigrated from Vietnam, or who are
here visiting.

So? I know people who have been in "direct, daily contact with a wide
range of people who have immigrated" from other countries, yet
misunderstand both the immigrants and the countries they immigrated
from. I know, for example, people who still believe there is support
for monarchism in Russia.

After your posts in this thread, it is all too easy to believe that
you are one of these people who completely misunderstands his
experience of "direct, daily contact".

Post by Richard Eich
Of those who live here, the popular plan is to return to Vietnam to
retire. And they're well-informed about what is going on back there.

That they are "well-informed", I do not know; I have only your word on
that. But since you make the outrageously false statement that "human
rights aren't really any better in the US", I know better than to take
your word.

For that matter, how do I know you aren't twisting the facts as you
repeat them? These acquaintances of yours, for example, might really
be planning to return there, but only _after_ the government changes
its ways; they might be hoping against hope that the Vietnamese
Communist Party will finally choose to follow the same path the
Chinese Communist Party has chosen, which though still not democratic,
would be a vast improvement. Or they might be thinking that human
rights violations won't affect them, that they can live off their
wealth accumulated in the US.

Post by Richard Eich
Without Google.

And you still made a big mistake. You might have known better if you
knew how to use Google. Then again, you might have still not known
better.

But all of this is getting further and further off topic for this
NG. To try to bring it back on topic, I will close with the comment
that there is nothing _Christian_ about pretending to have "stopped a
tragic war", when all they did was change which tragic outcome the war
ended in.

[Matthew Johnson]

[snip]

Post by B.G. Kent

Post by George
If a tree falls alone in the woods, do we actually have to be there for it
to make a sound?
George

B - What determines a sound?

That depends, of course, on which sense of 'determine' you have in mind.

Post by B.G. Kent
a being with equipment to capture sound.

This is true only if by 'determine', you mean, 'perceive and discriminate
between that sound and other sounds'. But that is only one sense; there is an
ontological sense to 'determine' also.

Post by B.G. Kent
Yes
you have to be there to KNOW that it is sound to begin with.

Not true. You would know better if you had read the mini-course on Epistemology
at http://radicalacademy.com/prcminicourseepistemology1.htm.

You do not "have to be there to know that it is sound". All you have to know is
that at some point in time, the tree fell. For we all know from previous
experience (not even demanding much logical analysis), that whenever a tree
falls, it makes a sound. So I don't have to be there when it happened to know
that it made a sound.

[B.G. Kent]

Post by George

Post by B.G. Kent

Post by George

Post by Richard Eich

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
Subtitled: 'A Minister's Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your
Flag, Your Future', by Robin Meyers, Wiley, 2006.

[snip]

Post by **Rowland Croucher**
My generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!'

But they did _not_ "stop a tragic war". Instead, all they achieved
was
to convince the US to pull out of it. But this meant that the
Communists
took over, killing many and exiling many more to 're-education
camps'.
And they are still supressing freedom in Vietnam to this day.

How much time have you, personally, spent in Vietnam? When was the
last time you were there?

If a tree falls alone in the woods, do we actually have to be there for
it
to make a sound?
George

B - What determines a sound? a being with equipment to capture sound. Yes
you have to be there to KNOW that it is sound to begin with.
Bren

Did Jupiter's moons exist before Galileo discovered them? Of course they
did. No we don't have to be there at all.

B- then how do we know it is a sound?


The laws of physics are

Post by George
universal, meaning that they apply everywhere in the universe. We don't
have to be witness the tree falling to be reasonably certain that the tree
made a sound when it fell. Any sound made is independent of our
observation or lack thereof. Any sound made is dictated by the laws of
physics, not the observation of man. We can observe after the fact that
the tree fell, and then, using our brains and knowledge the laws of physics
surmise that it must have made a sound when it fell. Just because we
weren't there to witness it doesn't mean that no sound occurred.

B - doesn't mean that it did either. We construe sound as what we hear and
to hear it we have to either be there and catch it or record it as sound
and hear it later. We will never know if sound actually happenned unless
we witness it.


To suggest

Post by George
that we must experience it for it to be real is arrogant and implies that
we have powers over nature that don't exist.

B - Not at all. I never said that perhaps vibrations happen etc. but what
we humans refer to as sound means that we must be there to decide if it is
infact sound. If we humans decide what sound is...then we have set up
parameters to base it on and we can't say a resounding 100% assuredness
unless we are there.


The fact is that nature could

Post by George
care less whether or not we are there to witness the event.

B - you seem to think we are not a part of nature. You also think that
somehow we will know that a thing happenned ...by 100% without any proof.
Even if a sound happens 300,000 times in a row you cannot be sure that it
will happen 300,001 times. You can assume all you want..but you will never
have proof unless you are there all the time.

Post by George
George

Bren

[Matthew Johnson]

In article <NztYi.11452$***@trnddc03>, B.G. Kent says...
[snip]

Post by B.G. Kent
B- then how do we know it is a sound?

Only if you don't know what sound IS would this question make sense. Of _course_
we know it is sound that the tree makes when it falls in the woods.

Post by B.G. Kent
The laws of physics are

Post by George
universal, meaning that they apply everywhere in the universe. We don't
have to be witness the tree falling to be reasonably certain that the tree
made a sound when it fell. Any sound made is independent of our
observation or lack thereof. Any sound made is dictated by the laws of
physics, not the observation of man. We can observe after the fact that
the tree fell, and then, using our brains and knowledge the laws of physics
surmise that it must have made a sound when it fell. Just because we
weren't there to witness it doesn't mean that no sound occurred.

B - doesn't mean that it did either.

Are you paying any attention at all? As George said: "the laws of physics are
universal". We know from these that the sound _did_ occur.

Post by B.G. Kent
We construe sound as what we hear and
to hear it we have to either be there and catch it or record it as sound
and hear it later. We will never know if sound actually happenned unless
we witness it.

This is gibberish. You really _don't_ know what sound is. Why are you digging
yourself deeper and deeper into the hole you made for yourself?

[snip]