The Raving Theist

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

Goons

May 14, 2005 | 12 Comments

He calls them the Goon Squad: Austin Cline last week on Father Tom and Rabbi Marc.

Comments

12 Responses to “Goons”

  1. MBains
    May 15th, 2005 @ 6:02 am

    Austin Cline WILL be a candidate for the Presidency someday. His fact-sheets are in my Inbox daily courstesy of About.com.

    I really encourage all TRAers to check out his site.

  2. Vernichten
    May 15th, 2005 @ 7:21 am

    Austin’s good, but he probably should read his own column before submitting because it often contains typos. It detracts from his arguments.

  3. Maine_Zetetic
    May 15th, 2005 @ 8:57 am

    Vernichten said: “Austin’s good”

    On criticizing writing — I

  4. Maine_Zetetic
    May 15th, 2005 @ 9:27 am

    HA – I guess “Austin’s” might be proper after all. Found this on a grammar website:

    5. “I refuse to pay _________ this steak: “it’s not cooked properly!” (it’s = it is).

    With my luck – Vernichten is an English teacher :)

    Well – may as well provide something constructive to this thread/post. If the plight of the persecuted Christian interests you try visiting http://www.aclj.org (better yet check out their radio show found on most Christian stations) – you’ll get lots of “woe is me” kind of stuff there.

  5. glenstonecottage
    May 15th, 2005 @ 9:31 am

    Hey thumpers! Read this article by one of your former collegues:

    The Religious Right: An Anti-American Terrorist Movement
    by Carolyn Baker
    May 12, 2005

    http://dissidentvoice.org/May05/Baker0512.htm

  6. Frank
    May 17th, 2005 @ 1:19 pm

    glenstonecottage — I read the article you recommended and I’m shocked! Shocked that you would actually refer someone to it. The writer merely creates a caricature of Christianity (and an obvious and pitiful one, too) and then attacks it. My gosh, I’ve rarely seen such weak arguments in a published format of any kind.

    The writer adopts a theme which places higher education at odds with Christianity which, she says, asserts in the book of Proverbs “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” This, she claims, along with the verse that says, “…the wisom of man is as foolishness in the eyes of God,” is the reason her parents didn’t want her to go to college.

    First, the verse about the wisdom of man being foolishness in the eyes of God merely draws a comparison between our wisdom and His. It does not disparage wisdom. Solomon desired wisdom above all he could have had. Proverbs is all about wisdom. The Bible makes it clear that wisdom is a good thing. It just points out that we need not get arrogant in our wisdom because our wisdom (however great it may be) is still foolishness when compared to God.

    Second, the saying, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing” does not mean knowledge is bad. It means knowing just a little about something may be insufficient knowledge and can get you into trouble. It is actually an encouragement to learn as much as you can. It’s a saying the writer should have taken into consideration because that saying is not in Proverbs as she claims. Yeah, she should have learned some more before spouting off. In fact, when Proverbs speaks of knowledge, it presents it in a fashion completely opposite of what the writer would have us believe.

    Proverbs …
    2:10 “…and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul.”
    8:10 “Choose instruction instead of silver, knowledge rather than choice gold.”
    10:14 “Wise men store up knowledge.”
    13:16 “Every prudent man acts out of knowledge, but a fool exposes his folly.”
    15:7 “The lips of the wise spread knowledge.”
    15:14 “The discerning heart seeks knowledge, but the mouth of a fool feeds on folly.”
    23:12 “Apply your hearts to instruction and your ears to words of knowledge.”

    And on and on and on…

    She picks and chooses, as representative of mainstream biblical Christianity, people who are regarded as false teachers by most of us. Joyce Meyer is a good example. It is from these kinds of “teachers” that the writer asserts biblical Christianity claims prosperity is the natural reward for being born-again. Forgive me, but that’s crap. And if the writer of this article had bothered to educate herself a little more on what the Bible says on the matter she would know the Bible tells us that bad things are going to happen to “the just and the unjust.” The apostle Paul is a good example, he had some form of physical problem and asked God to remove it. God’s response was no, “My grace is sufficient.”

    She calls Christians “dominonists” and claims we desire dominion over women, children, the poor, people of color, bla bla bla bla … She claims Christian fundamentalism is fundamentally UN-American. I wonder if she knows that the principles that Thomas Jefferson used to write the first amendment to the constitution were first articulated by a Baptist minister? Yep, Roger Williams. Oh, I’m sure he’d be considered a “fundamentalist Christian” by the writer’s standards and yet it was Williams who taught and believed that people should be free, even to reject Christianity and its precepts, if they so desired. Not very consistent with someone desiring to “institute a fundamentalist theocracy.”

    I don’t really see where she draws a distinction between biblical Christianity and many of the false teachings she uses as representative of Christians. This is where she becomes a sterling example of her early assertion, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”

    She really needed to know more about her topic.

  7. hermesten
    May 17th, 2005 @ 4:50 pm

    Frank, I haven’t read the article, but:

    “She calls Christians “dominonists” and claims we desire dominion over women, children, the poor, people of color, bla bla bla bla”

    You’re not seriously suggesting there aren’t Christian domioninsts are you? Sorry dude, but I even know people like this. There was a woman in our home-schooling group who proudly told everyone that her husband didn’t let her out of the house after 8 PM, so any meetings would have to be early enough for her to get home in time, or held at her house.

    And come on Frank, “the principles that Thomas Jefferson used to write the first amendment…” What principles were those? No one before Roger Williams ever articulated such principles? And just how can you be “sure” that the author of the artilce would consider him a “fundamentalist” Christian? He was banished by the Puritans and argued for separation of church and state. Our contemporary Bible Beaters are very fond of telling us that “separation of church and state” is a myth concocted by liberals. The kind of Baptist minister Williams represents is the kind of minister that is rejected by the majority Baptist convention today, and would be rejected by the majority of Baptist congregations. And you leap from all this to the conclusion that because a guy who was a religious aberration 400 years ago, and would be a religious aberration in the current fundamentalist landscape, advocated church state separation, that there are no Christians who want to institute a fundamentalist theocracy? And after talking about “weak” arguments?

    Frank, this “representative” Christian stuff is a load of hooey, sort of like the “real” Christian designation. I couldn’t care less whether or not George Bush and Tom DeLay are “representative” of Christians. If there is a “representative” Christian his existence is irrelevant because he’s not doing anything to oppose the “unrepresentative” and “fake” Christians who do want to institute a theocracy. There are Christians who want to impose their religious views on the rest of us, including you, and are working hard to make it happen. I haven’t read about a single weatlhy “dominionist” who isn’t a big financial backer of the republican party. These people know that some of their views would be unpopular, so they focus on what they think flies in Kansas and keep everything else to themselves –hiding, so to speak, in plain sight, since they have webistes and publish writings that openly advocate theocracy.

    The problem as I see it is simple. About 5-10% of Christians are like you. About 5-10%, maybe more, are wanna be theocrats. The 10% who want a theocracy are working hard to make it happen. The people like you are arguing with atheists and agnostics and doing absolutely nothing to thwart the highly motivated people who are acquiring political power. The sophistry and lies of the highly motivated 10% play very well to the remaining 80% of Christians who are largely followers, and this 80% hears nothing from people like you, whom, if you spoke out, they might consider “principled opposition.” These people aren’t going to listen to atheists, so if people like you don’t speak out, the only message they are going to receive is from the theocrats. The majority is just going to go along with the dominant culture. The theocrats are working hard to become the dominant culture, and are building a political base with real political power. People like you are just like us atheists, and have no political base to speak of, and no political power.

    Lest we forget in all the brouhaha, to get 51% of the vote it is only necessary to get support from about 30% of the population. The fundies have a built-in base of around 40%. Depending on the turnout, the fundies may only have to turn out a block of 20-30% of potential voters, or about 50-75% of their base, to win at the polls, which makes it possible for them to elect a president. Granted, they would be unlikely to sweep the congress, but by the time this is likely to happen, the president may be able to walk a horse into congress and make him a senator. In the meantime, they are gradually taking over the military, and it is already to the point where the military has become a religious organization and the secular military culture I served in no longer exists.

  8. hermesten
    May 18th, 2005 @ 6:10 pm

    Frank, after just hearing more about what is going on at the Air Force Academy, I think the situation may actually be even worse than I previously suggested. This country may in fact be creeping along towards the point where a coup and military imposed theocracy is within the realm of possibilty in the foreseeable future. When air force generals are officially sanctioning programs at the academy with titles such as: “Why you can’t have your God if I have my God,” and “Dangers to Christians: pluralism and secularism” ; and the air force’s top chaplain is telling cadets to interrogate their roomates about their religious beliefs and to tell them that if they aren’t evangelical Christians they’re going to burn in Hell for all eternity; and all the non-evangelicals, including Jews and other insuficiently religious Christians, are being officially ostracized and designated “heathens,” we’re all in serious danger of losing our liberty.

  9. Alex
    May 20th, 2005 @ 5:12 am

    glenstonecottage that article had no relivence towards this ‘topic’. it consists of some degenerate proud prick blabing on about his life, religion, and ‘bragging’ about articles he wrote…etc, even so to be honest couldnt be shitted reading most of it, but eh…

  10. Ionamin no prescription.
    April 5th, 2010 @ 11:47 pm

    Ionamin no prescription….

    Rxmed pharmaceutical information ionamin. Ionamin fastin. Phentermine ionamin….

  11. Isaac Harrison
    July 9th, 2010 @ 2:17 am

    i was also home schooled when i was younger and it is also a great weay to get your education.:;-

  12. Katie Patel
    September 9th, 2010 @ 6:31 am

    i was home schooled and it is quite satisfactory when providing basic education.~’

  • Basic Assumptions

    First, there is a God.

    Continue Reading...

  • Search

  • Quote of the Day

    • Fifty Random Links

      See them all on the links page.

      • No Blogroll Links