Tornado Alley (PROG)

[F6]

zitboy --

so you are not one of those Christian fundamentalists; thank you for answering that question -- but what I said about those Christian fundamentalists (and by all means not all Christian fundamentalists; in case this hasn't been clear all along, I absolutely respect every person's right to be religious [or not] in attempting [or not] to understand and answer, or to at least find some personal accomodation with, the larger questions implicit in our being here; I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with anybody based solely on their religious beliefs or practices as such, period) -- anyway, what I said about those Christian fundamentalists, precisely and solely because they do wish politically to destroy this nation as a secular constitutional republic and to remake it in their own image according to the diktats of their own particular chosen religious beliefs and dogma, everything I've said about them stands, and you have yet to reply with a single thought of any substance in response or rebuttal

I am still curious, and perhaps others here are as well -- did you support that Mississippi judge's insistence on placing that 10 Commandments monument in the entry to the public courthouse housing his court? -- do you agree with what Falwell and Robertson said re 9/11, that we deserved it, that it was god's punishment for this nation's having become too heedless of his word and commandments?

even more to the point, to help us all understand whether you really are or are not fairly lumped together, politically and agenda-wise, with those Christian fundamentalists, let me ask the question point-blank (where I do believe I've made clear where I stand on this level) (. . .) -- do you believe that those Christian fundamentalists should be entitled or allowed to cause our secular law and government to cast aside the separation of church and state, and to explicitly incorporate those Christian fundamentalists' own particular version of god and god's commandments?

and forgive me, but back to Jefferson one more time -- only someone like you, so totally unwilling or unable to understand or acknowledge what deism is, could possibly contend that Jefferson was not a deist (where the fact that he may never have written, at least not publically, that he was a deist as such is hardly surprising, given the crap he was already taking from certain Christian fundamentalists of his day for what he had dared to write publicly) -- Jefferson was the quintessential deist; and as shown again and again (in particular in language you didn't bold) in what you yourself have quoted of Jefferson, his studies and appreciation of Jesus were strictly of Jesus as an ethicist and philosopher of great wisdom, and explicitly not of Jesus as any sort of a religious figure as such -- ignore, deny or gloss over that distinction all you want, it's real and it's pertinent to, indeed dispositive of, this point, whether you agree, or like it, or not -- that's the truth of it -- and for you to have had the sheer unmitigated gall to draw a parallel between your ridiculous fantasy-of-a-pretext 'persecution' of today's Christian fundamentalists on the one hand, and the very real persecution suffered by Jefferson at the hands of certain Christian fundamentalists of his day on the other, in order to argue of all things that Jefferson if he were here today would support those Christian fundamentalists of today whose explicit agenda is to destroy the very Constitution and nation he helped to create, indeed to become entitled under color of law and with the power of the government to do to the rest of us now what certain Christian fundamentalists of his day could only do to him privately, well . . . that was just breathtakingly intellectually dishonest . . . I mean, DAMN, dude, that was COLD . . .

(btw, I gotta admit I can't say I'm suprised that I'm not the only one who's ever found your bs a little hard to take -- and my oh my but isn't that a very cute little 'saintly martyr' complex to complement that nifty little 'persecution' complex you've got going for yourself there, as if your rank bs therefore doesn't stink like any other rank bs, as if I or anybody else should therefore give your bs deference it doesn't deserve -- thanks for sharing)