Christian right marks start of 'a good 4 years'

[CShine]

Well, it's nice to see that some people are being right upfront about their goal of destroying the 1st amendment.

A couple of hours after President Bush took the oath of office, the indefatigable Rev. Lou Sheldon, founder and chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, was more upbeat than usual.

On Wednesday, Sheldon had tossed a Christian bash for more than 800 people at the Ritz-Carlton hotel. The host committee was virtually a who's who of politically important evangelicals, including Gary Bauer, Ralph Reed and Rev. Jerry Falwell. On Thursday, Sheldon played host to an indoor gathering of about 300 fellow Christians, people who wanted to experience the inauguration events with like-minded people but weren't inclined to brave the weather.

"This is the beginning of a good four years," said Sheldon, who is given to quoting historical figures and this time offered a snippet of George Washington's 1796 farewell address: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."

"Religion and morality," Sheldon repeated. "That's what is happening--that fusion of religion and morality and public policy has now come about."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...tofagood4years

[Paq]

gag me with a wooden spoon...

[irateplatypus]

God forbid a minister is in blind lockstep with George Washington.

[doubleaught]

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

God forbid a minister is in blind lockstep with George Washington.

No.... you're a bit off.

Washington said: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."

Sheldon said: "[a]fusion of religion and morality and public policy has now come about."

These are not the same things. Sheldon is misinterpreting the words, twisting them for his needs. Washington said religion and morality are indespensible supports, not that religion should guide public policy. There is a subtle but distinct difference.

[Rekna]

I fail to see why this has signifigance. Some reverend said he wants religion and politics to be mixed. It isn't like congress passed a law saying they must be mixed.

[doubleaught]

Originally Posted by Rekna

I fail to see why this has signifigance. Some reverend said he wants religion and politics to be mixed. It isn't like congress passed a law saying they must be mixed.

Tossing all subtetly aside, because Bush is a bible thumper, the current administration is quite obviously radical compared to traditional republicans, and the three branches of government that are supposed to be checks and balances to each other are all controlled by republicans for the next four years. (NO, not all republicans are the new radicals - "neoconservatives" - but the Bush and his close advisors are. And they happen to hold a bit of sway )

So this quote has significance because people are very legitimately worried that religion will directly influence policy, not to mention Bush's "morality" campaign could (will? has?) do (done) more to harm the nation than help it.

Oh and to address your latter statement - afaik laws cannot be passed that nullify the meaning of the first amendment. You can either strike the amendment or create another one (or laws?) that "redefine" how it works, but you cannot directly go against it as long as it's there. Again, I could be wrong here on this last part, it's afaik

[Bauh4us]

I would not worry about Bush "bible thumping". He only uses religious issues such as gay marriage as a screen. Get everyone thinking that the world will end if gays get to marry and you can pass all kinds of freedom killing and big buisness helping laws.

No, bible thumping is the very least of our problems...

[projectself]

honestly, im quite terrified of all the radical conservatives that were hiding in dark shadows until the Bush administration. its apparrent something is very off in the whole religion aspect - but <b>Bauh4us</b>, you're right - how else would have Bush won the election without factoring in the horrible though of gay marriages? it certainly got all those people who didn't vote before to come out and express their hatred of the idea.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

First off, it wasn't the Conservative anti-gay vote that carried Bush in the last election, they had already comprimised 25% of the total vote in the first election. Keep telling yourself otherwise though, I'm sure it will address the problems as to why the democrats lost again. I suppose that the same homophobes also added more republican congressmen on the same platform too right?

Originally Posted by Thomas Jefferson

We are firmly convinced, and we act on that conviction, that with nations as with individuals, our interests soundly calculated will ever be found inseparable from our moral duties.

[Charlatan]

I doesn't bother me that they are having the party and making outrageous statements, per se... It is just the implied smugness with which those statements are made...

The idea that now, at last, they can get their way with policy.

I don't think these is any arguing that they at least have the ear of the party in charge.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

Well that's the point of electing officials is it not? You guys act like this is the first time stuff like this is happening.

[jimbob]

"Religion and morality," Sheldon repeated. "That's what is happening--that fusion of religion and morality and public policy has now come about."

I bet there's a similar soundbite spoken in Iran after their revolution. Let's just hope this is more of the Good Samaritan-type religion and less of the Leviticus-type.

[Devoid]

What's been bothering me lately is how our government is quickly becoming like those middle eastern theocracies that we consider to be so dangerous. Not much good can come from a fusion of religion and government, as we've seen all across the world.

[chickentribs]

Originally Posted by Devoid

What's been bothering me lately is how our government is quickly becoming like those middle eastern theocracies that we consider to be so dangerous. Not much good can come from a fusion of religion and government, as we've seen all across the world.

Yeah, it ain't the beards that make them scary! Fundamentalist, Evangelical, Extremist, put whatever lipstick you want on it, power with a sense of holy entitlement justifies a lot of things away. When G.W. talks about answering a calling from above to run for President, he is dead serious with a Pat Robertson "batphone to Jesus" level of fervor. Believe it.

As for the celebrating ministers, I am sure that they were just happy for George, it had nothing to do with the millions - yes, millions of federal tax dollars being taken from social services and funneled into Sheldon's Traditional Values Coalition, and anything with the word Family in it (Hmm, Tilted FAMILY Project?? Halx...) for the Faith-Based Initiative program. All proceeds go exclusively to Christian-based organizations, with the exception of $5000 going to a Mormon church in Utah so that no one could accuse them of not including other religions. (Joseph Smith always was a kiss-ass.)

Money is already being dispersed without a job costing system in place to track program metrics and validate expenditures. In a world of sinners, that would almost sound like kick-back for mobilizing and driving all of those voters to the polls in Nov. complete with How to Vote brochures. Eh, I'm sure the money will find it's way from the suburban white churches to the inner city kids playing in the streets. Move along people, nothing to see here.

Next stop, The Rapture. The plot is a little thin, but I hear the special effects are to die for... (natch)

Pre-emptive strike: I respect the Faith, just not how the Faith is weilded. Jesus couldn't have comprehended "swagger".

[drakers]

Well lets see how far the Christian conservative agenda goes, it probably won't get much farther than the White house lawn or the farthest spot where the white house dog took a crap.