Muslim extremists are, for lack of a better word, extreme. ISIS thugs in Iraq are mass murdering their enemies, severing their heads, and lining the roads with them. Muslim extremists represent a not so small minority of Muslims in this world, tens of millions of whom would cheer the total destruction of this country.

 

There is no moral equivalence between the millions of Muslims in this world who actively support terrorism and conservative American Christians. None.

 

I think the figure "tens of millions",is grossly exaggerated. And how is this different from the millions of Christians, especially American Christians, who call for killing Muslims as a whole because of the actions of a minority of their faith.

I think the figure "tens of millions",is grossly exaggerated. And how is this different from the millions of Christians, especially American Christians, who call for killing Muslims as a whole because of the actions of a minority of their faith.

I really think you've lost your marbles. And I mean that in the most sympathetic of ways.

I think the figure "tens of millions",is grossly exaggerated. And how is this different from the millions of Christians, especially American Christians, who call for killing Muslims as a whole because of the actions of a minority of their faith.

You may think so, but that number is in line with surveys taken across the Muslim world in recent years. How is killing people and carrying their heads around as trophies different than Americans exercising their First Amendment rights? Are you serious?

 

I believe we would all agree that there are some groups none of us would have anything to do with.

The average conservative Christian is not in that category.

 

To add to #3, Colonel Allen West posted on his site a story about the genital mutilation of 58 Muslim girls in Sweden. Far more than the extremes you post in #2 about Christian groups yet to be named.

 

I'm aware of that mutilation. I'm also aware of the same occurring in the US. I'm also aware that this is a cultural custom, and is NOT the act of terrorists or extremists. This example is not an example relative to my point.

 

Christian theocrats are just as dangerous in the way they prey on the fears of the People to gain power and push their agendas. I don't believe that the leaders of either the Tea Party or Al Qa'ida, for instance, are motivated by faith, but by power. But they gain their momentum and their power by striking fear in their followers and by convincing large numbers of people that there is a higher purpose in supporting their agenda that will ensure them a place in Heaven.

I really think you've lost your marbles. And I mean that in the most sympathetic of ways.

 

Nope. Not at all. Keep your sympathy for someone else. It's not needed here.

Nope. Not at all. Keep your sympathy for someone else. It's not needed here.

I'll keep that in mind.

So, no one else worries about the internal threats to the American way of life? Threats to the Separation of Church and State? Infringement on the rights of minority faiths? Laws that bind all to consequences established on the foundation of one particular religious line of thinking? No one else questions the motives of politicians running on a platform that caters to only those who hold the same religious beliefs? No one else questions the sincerity, or purity, of what they are saying?

 

Internal threats to our rights are much more dangerous than outside threats.

So, no one else worries about the internal threats to the American way of life? Threats to the Separation of Church and State? Infringement on the rights of minority faiths? Laws that bind all to consequences established on the foundation of one particular religious line of thinking? No one else questions the motives of politicians running on a platform that caters to only those who hold the same religious beliefs? No one else questions the sincerity, or purity, of what they are saying?

 

 

 

Internal threats to our rights are much more dangerous than outside threats.

 

While I agree with your quote, you are so far off base.

First, other than being made up, show were "separation of church and state" exists in the Constitution.

The First Am. states there will be no state religion, which has been twisted by illogical liberal thinking.

Next, we managed very well for almost 200 years with that thought in mind about the First Am., with some corrections along the way. Most of the problems we face today have come about because of those who wish to believe in this made up "separation of church and state". Madalyn O'Hair for example.

While we were making needed correction in the areas of race and sexism, we have lost our way by those who have been trying to totally remove God from public view.

 

The internal threat is those who wish to stray from the Constitution and make up nonexistent clauses to the Constitution.

So, no one else worries about the internal threats to the American way of life? Threats to the Separation of Church and State? Infringement on the rights of minority faiths? Laws that bind all to consequences established on the foundation of one particular religious line of thinking? No one else questions the motives of politicians running on a platform that caters to only those who hold the same religious beliefs? No one else questions the sincerity, or purity, of what they are saying?

 

Internal threats to our rights are much more dangerous than outside threats.

 

I know of no candidates who are advocating a platform based on one faith. The candidates I prefer are those who support the Constitution with individual freedoms as the main point. The right to choose one faith or for that matter not to believe in any God. The freedom to make basic choices for theirselves and their families, such as health care and education. Less reliance on government and more individual responsibility. If you look at the history of those who came to this country that is what they were looking for.

 

If you know of any candidates supporting a theocracy please inform us all.

1. I don't think anyone (on this board, anyway) is arguing for a theocratic state. That's what people came to America to escape.

2. America was founded on Judeo-Christian principals...as witnessed by the writings of our Founding Fathers, the scriptures that grace the walls of numerous buildings in Washington D.C., and by the prayers offered at the Continental Congress by a wide diversity of men who wanted to see this new country succeed.

3. To suggest that a conservative, Bible-believing Christian is as dangerous to America as a radical Muslim is a delusion of fantastic proportions.

4. To my knowledge, the Tea Party...while conservative in nature...does not necessarily align itself with the Christian faith.

5. I would agree that everyone's claim to faith be examined by what he/she does compared to what he/she says...from the President on down.

 

Would like an explanation on your claims of:

1. "internal threats to the American way of life"

2. "infringement on the rights of minority faiths"

3. "American Christians, who call for killing Muslims as a whole because of the actions of a minority of their faith" -- Can you name two such American Christians?

I think the figure "tens of millions",is grossly exaggerated. And how is this different from the millions of Christians, especially American Christians, who call for killing Muslims as a whole because of the actions of a minority of their faith.

 

Who has called for killing ALL Muslims? One of my favorite Docs is Muslim he changed my wife's quality of life 100%, I'd fight for that man. There are millions and millions of peace loving Muslims just as there are millions that adhere to a radical fringe that would kill all non-muslims because their faith says they should. Show me any where that a Christian is saying that non-Christians should be killed because they are not Christians.

I don't see or hear of Christians killing anyone for not being Christian whereas that's not the case for Islamic extremist and there are no moderate Muslims wanting to condem this for fear.

At Sharp Middle School science is only taught in the 7th grade, as it is not part of the testing agenda.

Highly ironic given whom the school is named after ... a Nobel-winning scientist.

The church I attend is a conservative group, while we have had discussions of creationism vs a big bang, no one one has ever pushed for evolution to be taken out of the curriculum. As far as a lack science, the problem is more with the need to push the curriculum to get ready for testing. At Sharp Middle School science is only taught in the 7th grade, as it is not part of the testing agenda. I believe a part of the problem with math is how it is being taught today and too much reliance on calculators.

 

This article is more about the author's prejudices. Again, there are some like the Westboro group, but not to the point of destroying education. His charges of those opposed to a belief in global-warming leaves out facts like the earth has not warmed over the past 17 years and the rigging of data by the group in England (East Angelica Un.?) How about we look at those who might be able to name the Kardashians, but not name their Senator, Representative or the VP of the US? I'll put money on most who have closer leanings to the Tea Party that they can name their elected officials and give most answers to questions on our Constitution.

 

Sad.

I don't see or hear of Christians killing anyone for not being Christian whereas that's not the case for Islamic extremist and there are no moderate Muslims wanting to condem this for fear.

 

True.

 

The original article tries to paint extreme conservative Christians in the same manner as militant Islamist. Not even close. Not even remotely close.