Religion

cbayer

(146,218 posts)

87. Yes, it is what they do and anyone who speaks up against them using

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 02:39 PM

Feb 2013

whatever motivates them, I am going to support.

Again, you set these ground rules which just make no sense. I get it. You don't like religion or religionists. That's fine, but it does not move us towards what I assume are shared goals. If someone's faith, belief or use of the bible drives them to work for things I also support, I don't give a crap where it comes from.

IMHO, the religious left has been critical in accomplishing some things that I value. And those that continue to work in these areas, I fully support. To dismiss them or even attack them because their motivations are based on faith, belief or what they have taken from the bible makes no sense to me. It just divides the party and helps the republicans.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

97 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is the religious left too nice and without influence? [View all] SecularMotion Feb 2013 OP

Correct, in a way. tama Feb 2013 #1

Sometimes too nice, but the problem is multifactorial. cbayer Feb 2013 #2

Those are some serious accusations, cbayer. trotsky Feb 2013 #3

We on the left ought to be colleagues. Thats my opinion Feb 2013 #6

Getting shot down on a message board should hurt a lot less, IMHO. dimbear Feb 2013 #7

So do you have any evidence? trotsky Feb 2013 #44

So, more concisely, "Stifle!" dimbear Feb 2013 #4

I'm not saying stifle at all and a review of my views on this, cbayer Feb 2013 #5

But accusing some DUers of carrying water for the right is still a serious accusation muriel_volestrangler Feb 2013 #8

People can carry water intentionally or not. cbayer Feb 2013 #9

But as an exception, it would be OK to mock Scientology, wouldn't it? dimbear Feb 2013 #11

In my opinion, yes tama Feb 2013 #13

Yeah, in my book it would be. cbayer Feb 2013 #21

So it's OK to mock what you think it's OK to mock, trotsky Feb 2013 #45

I brought it up because I know the Scientologists aren't part of your brand. You're atheist toward dimbear Feb 2013 #54

I don't have a brand, dimbear. cbayer Feb 2013 #56

I see the ground rules emerging now. In 1601 in Lisbon, the Catholic church represented by dimbear Feb 2013 #59

You can mock specific people or incidences all you want. cbayer Feb 2013 #60

We all enjoy Monty Python tama Feb 2013 #63

I agree SecularMotion Feb 2013 #15

And there are many here whose only purpose seems to be to attack religion and religionist. cbayer Feb 2013 #18

But how is that relevant? Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #55

I don't think they have taken the cookie jar away, but I do think they hurt cbayer Feb 2013 #58

Numbers are precisely my point Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #90

Atheists are reviled? By who? I've never felt reviled for my atheism. Starboard Tack Feb 2013 #94

Which is carrying water: opposing the right's attempt to redefine the start of pregnancy muriel_volestrangler Feb 2013 #16

A discussion about the start of pregnancy is not what I am talking about at all. cbayer Feb 2013 #19

'Strongly in favour'? If you mean AU, I think not muriel_volestrangler Feb 2013 #26

It's not my wishful thinking at all. They voiced support (maybe strongly is the wrong word) cbayer Feb 2013 #27

"reaching a compromise" is "avoiding arguments" muriel_volestrangler Feb 2013 #42

You and I disagreeing on a policy point is not the same thing as the members here who cbayer Feb 2013 #43

muriel's certainly got you on the defensive. trotsky Feb 2013 #48

By supporting Obama's administration "compromise" you (generic and personal) are enabling religious idwiyo Feb 2013 #95

I disagree with you. I think a compromise is in order and I think this one is reasonable. cbayer Feb 2013 #96

Interestingly, in googling this, I found an old DU discussion about the phrase. cbayer Feb 2013 #10

If any one regularly carries water for the religious right, it's the religious left. Evoman Feb 2013 #12

we all drink from the same well tama Feb 2013 #14

Give me an example, if you don't mind. cbayer Feb 2013 #20

Ugh no. Evoman Feb 2013 #25

Have fun! cbayer Feb 2013 #28

Gladly Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #61

Disagree. Scripture is open to interpretation and adopting one interpretation cbayer Feb 2013 #64

But there is no objective way in which to justify one's interpretation Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #68

What difference does it make who is "correct"? cbayer Feb 2013 #69

No one is "correct". That's the point. Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #77

One interpretation is as good as any other okasha Feb 2013 #79

It isn't the conclusion that concerns me, it is the method Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #83

Except I didn't say anything remotely close to what you ascribe to me. cbayer Feb 2013 #84

Wait, you want me to interpret passages from the bible? cbayer Feb 2013 #80

So you're saying this passage is up for interpretation? Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #81

Again, what does it matter? Unless you are a literalist, and I am assuming cbayer Feb 2013 #82

This is precisely what I mean: Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #85

Yes, it is what they do and anyone who speaks up against them using cbayer Feb 2013 #87

But I'm not dismissing or attacking them Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #88

I have nothing more to say to you, but you are about to experience a significant cbayer Feb 2013 #89

Before leaving, you can mull this over... Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #91

The part where you substituted *atheist* for *anti-theist* to begin with. cbayer Feb 2013 #92

And there is no objective way to prove tama Feb 2013 #72

Appeals to solopcism? Could you present a more neutral argument? Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #76

... tama Feb 2013 #78

Did you even read the link? Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #86

Nothing much tama Feb 2013 #93

I know that I already asked you to provide examples of this, and you refused, cbayer Feb 2013 #33

Huh? Where did I reassert it? Evoman Feb 2013 #73

Sorry, I thought you had posted it in two different places. cbayer Feb 2013 #75

really? you make judgments about people you do not know madrchsod Feb 2013 #53

Yeah, all the time. You don't? Evoman Feb 2013 #74

I think it may be about behavior. longship Feb 2013 #30

Good points. When the religious right really co-opted the label of "christian" cbayer Feb 2013 #34

I did see that thread and commented there, too. longship Feb 2013 #41

I think you're pretty close the mark there Act_of_Reparation Feb 2013 #65

I don't think the religious left is 'without influence'... LeftishBrit Feb 2013 #17

I agree and actually think the religious left has a lot of influence, but cbayer Feb 2013 #22

I also think that the religious who are left-leaning Leontius Feb 2013 #23

Good point and I agree. cbayer Feb 2013 #24

Yes moman Feb 2013 #29

Agree. (nt) pinto Feb 2013 #32

"the rest of the left"? trotsky Feb 2013 #47

The right is certainly more adept okasha Feb 2013 #49

"....all the money can`t another minute buy..." madrchsod Feb 2013 #62

Conundrum. The religious right has essentially become a political organization / movement. pinto Feb 2013 #31

I don't think so. They became single (or double) issue voters and cbayer Feb 2013 #36

Good points. I'd love to see a broad, vocal coalition re-emerge around common causes and objectives. pinto Feb 2013 #40

I'm not sure I understand what the author wants from the "Religious Left". patrice Feb 2013 #35

Well, her working hypothesis pretty much gets shot down by everyone cbayer Feb 2013 #37

The Left...which includes some religious denominations..in my experience is characterized by thought libdem4life Feb 2013 #38

Great post, libdem4life. I agree that the way the religious left approaches cbayer Feb 2013 #39

Thanks. In some groups, it's called Holding the Space. That's where I generally find myself. libdem4life Feb 2013 #46

You got me interested tama Feb 2013 #50

What a gift...the web sites and as a pianist, the You Tube karaoke. Many, many blessings to you. libdem4life Feb 2013 #51

Thanks for filling space tama Feb 2013 #52

cool site....thanks! madrchsod Feb 2013 #67

the words attributed to jesus are far older than the times he lived in. madrchsod Feb 2013 #57

Yes, they are. They are Universal archetypes like the Creation and the Flood libdem4life Feb 2013 #66

my "hobby" is archaeology ancient civilizations. madrchsod Feb 2013 #70

I got hooked on this somewhere between my 60s Soc-Anthro BA and fleeing my childhood Right Wingers. libdem4life Feb 2013 #71

The "religious left" isn't actually that religious... MellowDem Mar 2013 #97