George M. Middius wrote:
Terrierdork yapped:

mainstream "leftists" like Dr. Martin Luther King

I find it hilarious that you have to grap an Icon to represent the
left who was in actuality a Christian conservative.

Politically speaking, leftist is generally used to refer to somebody who
espouses, advocates, or impels changes in society. Perhaps you're
confused again about the subject at hand, which appears to be politics,
not religious mores.

So what would a righty be in a liberal socialist society? Once again
you can't hold up to any scrutiny.

I must say, dave has you pretty riled. You're shooting from the hip
before I even start to reduce you to tears and fist-pounding.

I love it when you preface all your comments with proof of your
delusion.


To answer your childish question, a "righty" would be, as always,
someone who wants society to return to ways of the past.

and this isn't change?

I suppose this
didacticism may confuse you, inasmuch as you might, in your
simple-minded way, say that any change from the status quo is the same
as any other change.

So ... if we let the lefties have American society exactly the way
they want it... for a nanosecond.... they will forever cease to be
lefties.

I like that idea. Poof... you're gone.

ScottW

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On 3 Feb 2006 13:01:58 -0800, "ScottW" wrote:


dave weil wrote:
On 3 Feb 2006 11:03:43 -0800, "ScottW" wrote:

Yes, I'm against that sort of thing as well. However, even YOU must
admit that the preponderance of "boycott" as social commentary is
coming from the Right.

Is Islam on the left or the right?

Definitely on the Right.

Not my right. Why does it seem that the left is opposed to Western
civilization and cultural influence on Islamic nations and supportive
of Islamic resistance in the culture war?

Because you see everything through your own prism, maybe?

Islamic extremists are just a different form of Right-wing evangelical
fundamentalists. They have no tolerance for religious views that run
counter to their beliefs and they replace the Bible with the Koran as
a way of enforcing what they think people should believe and how they
should act and what they should read and see in the media. (BTW, don't
you think that a news organization has the same rights as any other
business when it comes to protecting their interests)? If WalMart
doesn't want to offend a portion of their base by not offer a certain
medication, shouldn't a news organization have the discretion not to
air potentially offensive and inflammatory material?

Can't you see that Islamic extremists are fighting the same sort of
"culture war" that President Bush and Co. are fighting?

NO. Bush and Co. believe that since theis country was founded by Christians
and that because God is mentioned in our founding documents that we are
essentially, a Christian Nation. This is of course not true, as we are are
nation that allows everyone the choice of what, or what not to believe.

Bush is not after a Christian theocracy, they simply don't want to see all
Christian values ruled unconstitutional. They beleive there is wisdom and
virtue in the Christian faith, but they don't want to legislate all other
religions out of existence.

The Islamic extremists want the whole world to be Muslim and consider anyone
not a Muslim to be an infidel and a target for murder.

They are just
using more violent means and they are far more strict in what they
"allow", which is tragic.

It's way beyond tragic, it's completely the opposite of what Islam teaches.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On 3 Feb 2006 14:41:26 -0800, "ScottW" wrote:


dave weil wrote:
On 3 Feb 2006 13:01:58 -0800, "ScottW" wrote:


dave weil wrote:
On 3 Feb 2006 11:03:43 -0800, "ScottW" wrote:

Yes, I'm against that sort of thing as well. However, even YOU
must
admit that the preponderance of "boycott" as social commentary is
coming from the Right.

Is Islam on the left or the right?

Definitely on the Right.

Not my right. Why does it seem that the left is opposed to Western
civilization and cultural influence on Islamic nations and supportive
of Islamic resistance in the culture war?

Because you see everything through your own prism, maybe?

You didn't answer the question. Do you deny the left is supportive
of Islam in it's culture war? (which is somewhat suicidal for many
segments of the left)

Yes I do. I don't deny that the Left tries to distinguish between the
vast majority of islam and the tiny minority of those who use
terrorism and fascism to further their skewed reading of their
religion.

Islamic extremists are just a different form of Right-wing evangelical
fundamentalists. They have no tolerance for religious views that run
counter to their beliefs and they replace the Bible with the Koran as
a way of enforcing what they think people should believe and how they
should act and what they should read and see in the media.

Sounds a lot like the anti-religous left and ACLU.

You're joking, of course. I really don't know how to respond to this.
Can you expand on how an "anti-religious Left" could possibly believe
that one religion should be the basis of a society and also the basis
of war?

BTW, just so you know, most of the Left isn't against religion, but
the use of religion to oppress and it's also against explicit
religious endorsement by the government.

Putting up a nativity scene is not IMO an endorsement of religion.
Unless of course any other sort of religious holiday decoration is
prohibited.



(BTW, don't
you think that a news organization has the same rights as any other
business when it comes to protecting their interests)? If WalMart
doesn't want to offend a portion of their base by not offer a certain
medication, shouldn't a news organization have the discretion not to
air potentially offensive and inflammatory material?

and **** off the rest of us that wants to see what is so
"inflammatory".

You can certainly see those cartoons if you want to.

Sure, they have that right. Just like I have a right
to turn the channel, cancel my subscription, and call for others to do
so.

Of course you do. Pretty soon, you'll be left with only a small slice
of "the media", and this is something that you already suffer from.
You are beholden on an increasingly narrow view of the world and it's
apparent from your postings.

Can't you see that Islamic extremists are fighting the same sort of
"culture war" that President Bush and Co. are fighting?

The left isn't fighting a bit of culture war themselves?

Because the war is being brought to them by religious fundamentalists.

Hardly. The ACLU is taking to any who want to use any goernment facility
for any sort of religious purpose, such as Christian clubs in schools after
school hours.


Frankly...I don' t consider Bush and Co. fighting a culture war...
they're
fighting an anti violence, anti terrorism war. They have no concern
about Islamic culture as long as it doesn't hurt people.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/121/51.0.html

President George W. Bush, in a rare on-the-record session with
religion editors and writers on Wednesday, said his job as president
is to "change cultures."

snip

"At home, the job of a president is to help cultures change. The
culture needs to be changed. I call it, so people can understand what
I'm talking about, changing the culture from one that says, "If it
feels good, do it, and if you've got a problem, blame somebody else,"
to a culture in which each of us understands we're responsible for the
decisions we make in life. I call it the responsibility era. . I said
that when I was governor of Texas. As a matter of fact, I've been
saying that ever since I got into politics. This is one of the reasons
I got into politics in the first place. Governments cannot change
culture alone. I want you to know I understand that. But I can be a
voice of cultural change.

I have no problem with that and it is not IMO an endorsement of religion,
but of perswonal responsability.


Part of the responsibility era is the responsibility that comes with
promoting-taking care of your bodies to the point where we can promote
a culture of life. Father Richard [Neuhaus] helped me craft what is
still the integral part of my position on abortion, which is: Every
child welcomed to life and protected by law. That is the goal of this
administration.

While I am in favor of legal abortion, I'm also in favor of a culture that
recognizes that life is a value and that sex has consequences and should be
treated with some amount of care and respect.

Part of government's role is to foster responsibility and hope by
standing with those who have heard a call to love a neighbor, which is
the second point of the faith-based initiative that I think is one of
the most important domestic initiatives that I have pushed, if not the
most. It recognizes the rightful relationship between hearts and souls
and government. Again, my job is to try to distill things down so that
average people can understand it. Here's the way I put it, "Government
can hand out money, but it cannot put love in people's hearts or a
sense of purpose in people's lives."

Etc., etc...

Still hardly a call to arms for the religous right to take over the
government or the culture.


However, you misunderstood my "cultural war" reference. I was
comparing the idea that US religious fundamentalists have many of the
same goals of radical Islam fundamentalists. They both want to
restrict literature, media, and many other aspects of modern life. You
are fond of making fun of Tennessee and I often do the same thing,
when evangelicals get books like "To Kill a Mockingbird" out of
libraries.

That was the aspect of the "culture war" that I was talking about. I
wasn't talking about a "culture war" against Islam. I was comparing
the current climate in the US with Islamic radicals. They both fall
squarely on the Right.

One is on the right and one is in the center of a holy war against all non
muslims and Jews in particular.


They are just
using more violent means and they are far more strict in what they
"allow", which is tragic. But they are certainly NOT "left of center".

You appear to be espousing a tolerant left vs an intolerant right...

You would be wrong. I simply stated a fairly obvious truth in response
to your question about where the majority of Islam falls. Even the
more moderate Islamics are right of center.

but I find the left anything but tolerant and just as or more prone to
violence to impose their views as anyone. Take PITA and Earth
Liberation Front for examples.

That's because you see the Left pretty much as these two organizations
and nothing more. Certainly the Left has always had their violent
groups (SNCC, The Black Panthers, Bader-Meinhoff, The Red Brigade,
etc.). But that would be like me saying that the Right is violent and
intolerant because of the KKK, Timothy McVeigh, Pinochet, etc.

There seems to be a lot more violent leftists than violent rightists.

Nobody from the right would ever want to be linked to any of the extreme
groups above, but plenty of leftists seems to think that the extemeists have
the rioght idea, just the wrong methods.


Let's not forget that the Left has been most successful and effective
when it's followed people like Dr. Martin Luther King. On the Right,
for every intolerant and venal personalities like Dr. James Dobson,
you have reasonable and "tolerant" people like George Will. The Right
isn't a monolith and I have focused my comments on those who seem to
have intolerance toward alternative viewpoints and lifestyles *and*
neo-cons who have thrust the world squarely into a dangerous situation
(and no, I'm not forgetting who gave them the rationale for doing it.

Then they didn't thrust us, they simply acknowledged that we have been
thrust into a war.
That so many are not prepared to stand their ground and fight is truly sad.

I'm just very worried about the unfettered attack on certain parts of
the Constitution based on fear. Fear has been used to take away
freedoms and enslave populations throughout history.

Sure, by guys like FDR.

I'd just hate to
see it happen here as well...

There's been a lot more chipping away at liberty from the left than from the
right.

On 6 Feb 2006 09:43:31 -0800, "ScottW" wrote:


dave weil wrote:
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 10:41:19 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 22:23:50 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
...

Yes I do. I don't deny that the Left tries to distinguish between the
vast majority of islam and the tiny minority of those who use
terrorism and fascism to further their skewed reading of their
religion.


Heres your tiny minority in action

http://www.forbes.com/technology/fee...ap2500417.html

Here's *your* tiny minority in action:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/07/chu....ap/index.html

Of course, you probably blame it on "The Leftists", considering that
you've turned Dr. Martin Luther King into a "Christian Conservative".

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On 6 Feb 2006 09:43:31 -0800, "ScottW" wrote:


dave weil wrote:
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 10:41:19 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 22:23:50 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
...

Yes I do. I don't deny that the Left tries to distinguish between
the
vast majority of islam and the tiny minority of those who use
terrorism and fascism to further their skewed reading of their
religion.


Heres your tiny minority in action

http://www.forbes.com/technology/fee...ap2500417.html

Here's *your* tiny minority in action:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/07/chu....ap/index.html


More random accusations, Dave? Your comment is as rational as Arny's
sockpuppet accusations.

ScottW

From:
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 21:01:53 GMT

I'm just very worried about the unfettered attack on certain parts of
the Constitution based on fear. Fear has been used to take away
freedoms and enslave populations throughout history.

Sure, by guys like FDR.

"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."-- FDR

"True individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and
independence. People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of
which dictatorships are made."-- FDR

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we
now know that it is bad economics."-- FDR

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance
of those who have much it is whether we provide enough for those who
have little."-- FDR

"The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong
enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong
enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over
the goverment."-- FDR

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the
growth of private power to a point where it comes strong than their
democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership
of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private
power."-- FDR

"Selfishness is the only real atheism; aspiration, unselfishness, the
only real religion."-- FDR

"Self-interest is the enemy of all true affection."-- FDR

"If civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of human
relationships - the ability of all peoples, of all kinds, to live
together, in the same world at peace."-- FDR

FDR sure sounds evil to me. I can see why you hate him so much, nob.

There's been a lot more chipping away at liberty from the left than from the
right.

nob, you really should have your medicine cocktail looked at. I think
it's effecting your mental processes again.

Where did you get your degree again, corporal? The Rush Limbaugh Skool
of Politix, Ekonimicks and Filosofy? LOL!

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 18:06:35 -0800, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

Heres your tiny minority in action

http://www.forbes.com/technology/fee...ap2500417.html

Here's *your* tiny minority in action:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/07/chu....ap/index.html


More random accusations, Dave? Your comment is as rational as Arny's
sockpuppet accusations.

Just following *your* "randomness", I suppose.

Guess you're too nonplussed to respond appropriately...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 18:06:35 -0800, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

Heres your tiny minority in action

http://www.forbes.com/technology/fee...ap2500417.html

Here's *your* tiny minority in action:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/07/chu....ap/index.html


More random accusations, Dave? Your comment is as rational as Arny's
sockpuppet accusations.

Just following *your* "randomness", I suppose.

IKYABWAI.... nice one Dave.


Guess you're too nonplussed to respond appropriately...

Actually my nonplussed response was appropriate given the irrationality of
your comment.
You need a new straw... this one slipped through your grasp.

ScottW