Email from senater Santorum

[9mmMike]

Originally Posted by The Drew

Mike,

You are exhibiting the exact kind of behavior many of us have come to expect from a "religious zealot" christian or otherwise, if you feel that someone has "attacked" your religion you attack back and use nothing but your holy book to find justification.

Please be advised that not everyone in this nation is whatever flavor of christianity you happen to be and many of us aren't religious at all...

The point being, we don't want to be governed by someone else's religious law...

I have not tried to force any religious law on anyone.
Seriously. If you do not wish to be a Christian, that is your choice. I have not suggested otherwise. I will not apologize for defending Christianity though. I would expect a tolerant person to understand that.

[The Drew]

I would expect a tolerant person to agree to disagree, when it comes to religion, all there IS, is opinion and we must respect that...

That said, again the point of this thread is that many of us worry that Santorum will push HIS religious based agenda through the senate. Many of us do not like that agenda either based on our libertarian beliefs or our religious ones. Therefore even though he is pro gun, he is dangerous in our eyes in other areas... Which is why there is such a dillema in regards to the senatorial election...

[Lougotzz]

this is a real wacky thread but it is fun to read these replies. I love the fact that we are all gun owners here. Lets have a party.LOL


Fact Jesus would never hurt a gay man or woman.

Fact Jesus would tell you the way to heaven. That is believe in him!!!

Fact this country was established on judeo christian values so when you propose things that go against this be prepared to find opposition.

Fact jesus said to love one another. he did not say to love the sin people do but to love the person. judgement will be up to him. We are not to be the judge.

Fact Jesus is the fulfillment of the law. Every part of the law. Man can not keep the law.So when you believe in Jesus he takes away your sin and you are justified infront of god.

fact We are gun owners and if you vote for gun rights Rick is the guy to vote for. The dems want your guns. if you vote for other issues then try a dem.

Just for the record I never pushed my religon on anyone. I believe in free will and all americans have the right to exercise it. But the door swings both ways. We christians have the right to exercise our free will to vote and uphold what this country was built upon. That was the god of israel and his son jesus.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

I am calm. Thanks. I agree that everyone has an opinion, however when someone posts things like “but why do hardcore Christian fascits belive gay marriage will ruin society..
yet, priets ass-raping little children wont?” and repeats it with, “WHY DO YOU HUSH UNDER THE CARPET THE MENTION OF PRIESTS ASS-RAPING LITTLE CHILDREN?? THIS WAS NOT ONE OR TWO CASES, BUT HUNDREDS, IF NOT THOUSANDS WORLD WIDE”, in caps, how is this not a broad stroke against Christians?
Where, as in your post, does it say “some” or “alleged Christians”. It does not.
I have also made and assumption here that when someone answers my post and uses the word “you” (as in “you hush under”) he really means me.

I agree that the wording used by some might be abrasive. However, discussing priests who abused children is not a broad stroke against Christians. How can it be when it you're addressing a small, albeit influential, segment of the Christian population? I also believe we can agree that every religion, philosophy, etc. including Christianity, has a radical element which is almost always in the minority, and is not a broad stroke description. Again, to call them "hardcore fascists" might be abrasive, but at the same time, by definition, puts them in the minority.

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

If a person wishes to discuss Catholicism, they might wish to use the word Catholicism. If a person thinks that all Christians are catholic, it only proves my point about too much TV, not enough studying. I appreciate your trying to take both sides, (or neither), here but my points are not about arguing for Christianity in this thread. My points are arguing against people who do not really have any idea and are just repeating what they hear because it is quite fashionable these days to take shots at Christianity. It would be swell if they took the time to read and learn, not parrot.

I'm not taking anyone's side, nor am I trying to play both sides. I am merely presenting my point of view.

Some would consider the use of what is considered "modern" media, like TV, the Internet, etc. a legitimate method of study just like any form of study with books. Any medium, when properly employed, can be useful. There's just as many bad publications out there as there are bad TV shows, internet sites, radio broadcasts, etc., and an educated person needs to be able to tell the difference. Books by definition are not inherently trustworthy. Even the Bible itself has been questioned and interpreted in different ways, hence the myriad of versions, like the King James Version (KJV), the New International Version (NIV), the Catholics inclusion of the Aprocrypha, just to name a few.

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

Again, I would always challenge anyone who is not Christian who thinks they are fit to chastise Christians on how to be a Christian to take some time to study and not to repeat rhetoric from folks who hate Christians.

People are chastising Christianity here, yes. That doesn't mean they're trying to tell Christians how to live. We're just offering our opinions on the religion. And yes, to your eyes, most of these opinions may be uninformed, and you'd be right, because we're not Christians. That doesn't mean the opinion is any less valid. Sometimes, the best way for one to objectively assess one's self is to ask for an outside opinion. Although uninformed, that outside opinion may provide a fresh point of view.

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

As far as the false claims go,

“Jesus said marriage is final yet since the majority of Christians don't want to be tied down to one spouse they search the fine print to find the 'loopholes' in the Bible to allow divorce.
Remarriage after divorce is Adultery. Pure and simple. We as a nation endorse adultery by allowing remarriage. Where are the Christian leaders while this is going on? They know better than to say anything since it will hurt their collection plate.”

And

“Why not convince the church to help make a better world, instead of telling people in poor countries to not use birth control, or even condoms!!!???

Why should I be forced to live my life by a book... that was written, re-written, and edited by men.”

And

“And last time I checked, the bible orginiated as a much, much larger text, and it was later edited and cut down into our modern bible.”

And

“Again, why do Christians go crazy and play victim at the mention of Gay-marriage or if somebody disagrees with the holy book,”

Are all examples of false claims and generalizations by folks who are not Christian and yet see fit to explain “how it is” with Christianity.

Not all of these are generalizations of Christianity, some are just opinions. But I will not pretend to debate with you the ones that are generalizations, as I myself have no supporting facts to back any conclusion I would make at the moment.

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

My point is that there is no substance to the posts. The language used is what one often sees when a person has nothing to offer as proof. Add a few expletives and suddenly, the post appears to have some weight. Christians may occasionally let a swear fly but it would be very unlikely to see one write one down. I have not suggested that anyone here is not “a good person”. Several others have suggested that Christians do not care about pedophiles or that they hate gay people etc.

Many times, opinions don't have substance. Again, not going to argue that point.

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

I do practice what I preach. I do not do any of the things that Christians are supposedly doing according to this thread. You are greatly misinformed if you think that tolerance and acceptance are the same thing. And just because I have not posted “I am praying for you” does mean that I am not.

I understand the difference between tolerance and acceptance, and it doesn't seem, by your comments, that you are very tolerant of some of the opinions on this thread. It's obvious that you're NOT accepting, and that's your right.

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

Also, I am not sure where I claimed to be worried about “feeding the fire”. I did not broadly classify anyone as vulgar. I suggested that the use of vulgar language was a lame way to make a point. It is wrong for you to claim that I called someone vulgar. I did not.

Let me clarify the meaning of my comments here. I was not claiming that you were calling someone vulgar. I WAS, however, claiming that my interpretation of your comment seemed to infer the generalization that all non-Christians are vulgar. This seemed hypocritical when you were criticizing those generalizing Christians. If I misinterpreted your comment, then I stand corrected, but on the surface that's how it came off to me.

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

It was never my intent to post anything negative about non-Christians other than to suggest that they do not have the research to back up what they’ve said. If they do, bring it.

Neither was it my intent to post negative comments about Christians if that was how it was interpreted.

[Lougotzz]

Here you go. go vote democrap.


http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06249/719329-85.stm

[LorDiego01]

Originally Posted by Lougotzz

Fact this country was established on judeo christian values so when you propose things that go against this be prepared to find opposition.

With all due respect Lougotzz.. but your quote above is complete bullshit and utter fabrication.

FACTThe founding fathers were FAR from judeo christians.

Here are some quotes, from their personal correspondence and writings.

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." - James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785

What havoc has been made of books through every century of the Christian era? Where are fifty gospels, condemned as spurious by the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are the forty wagon-loads of Hebrew manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope, because suspected of heresy? Remember the 'index expurgatorius', the inquisition, the stake, the axe, the halter and the guillotine." - John Adams, letter to John Taylor

"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon than the Word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind."
Thomas Paine

"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works ... I mean real good works ... not holy-day keeping, sermon-hearing ... or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity." - Benjamin Franklin Works, Vol. VII, p. 75

====

I hope you liked those. You can find more quotes at these two webpages,

http://www.anotherperspective.org/advoc550.html
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism...g-fathers.html

or you can simple do your own research. Before you can say "not everything written on the internet is true", please, look these up like I did, and you will find it that in fact, the Founding Fathers came here to ESCAPE from religion, rather than impose a new empire based on it.

Further more, as has already been stated, the Founding Fathers did share certain beliefs that are associated with Christiniaty, like no killing, no stealing, ect. However, these are not only Christian beliefs, but they are beliefs found on just about every single other religion on the planet.

[phillyd2]

Originally Posted by Siobhra

I am both a Gay and a Witch.

Well, I did not see that one coming, I mean the Witch part.

Some notes....

Jesus is quoted as saying that he was here not to repudiate the "old" testament but to fulfill it.

Using pervert priests to refute Christian thinking on gay marriage is about as silly as you can get.

Not legislating morality based on a "book"? Almost all basic laws can be traced back to the Ten Commandments as its foundation. Thou shall not kill = murder is illegal. You could not legislate morality more if you tried.

We should more smartly explain what we mean by marriage. On one level it is a religious activity, a union in front of God with all of its rule and traditions. Here the churches or religion should have the final say on who they will ordain as married or not. On another level marriage is a social contract with benefits approved by the state such as death benefits, tax rates, property transfers, ability to testify against each other in court, etc. Here the state should set the rules.

For the former I have no issue with Churches not approving gay marriage. For the latter all citizens should have the exact same rights. So instead of gay marriage I would rather the debate be about civil unions that are legally binding on all citizens regardless of religion or sexual preference. Consider that a unmarried couple (straight or gay) has none of the legal rights as do married couples, and this to me seems wrong.

My preferred approach would be that the government completely got out of the marriage business. What business is it of theirs who our partners are? A single person should not have to pay more taxes than a married couple. Each citizen should be allowed to name another person as their partner who for example would inherited their estate upon death. Otherwise lets get the state out of our lives.

Of course there is Christian bashing. Always have been and it will get worse, as it is written. To me if 99% of the world does not disagree with me - I'm just not trying hard enough. Lefties hate Christians almost as much as they hate guns. I say, praise the lord and pass the ammo.

[LorDiego01]

Originally Posted by 9mmMike

I would recommend that you do not use the TV as a source for studying....

....it only proves my point about too much TV, not enough studying....

...I would always challenge anyone who is not Christian who thinks they are fit to chastise Christians on how to be a Christian to take some time to study and not to repeat rhetoric from folks who hate Christians....

...I really do believe that many people are just repeating what they hear with no regard as to what they are saying. It’s OK to offend a Christian afterall. In fact, it seems to be a hobby for some. If these posts were racial, there’d be outrage but since Christians are fair game, there is little to no complaints....

This is just drivel I found from a few of your posts. You really are a piece of work man.... ever heard of "Debate" or "Logic"?

It seems like you repeat over and over and over again, you know.. "to catapult the propaganda", and whoever you disagree with, you demonize, you know.. because "they hate you for your freedom".

I hope you understand what Im trying to say, "ad hominem" attacks do not a logical argument make.

And demonizing those who oppose your views, whether it be anti-christian or those terrorists, do not a logical argument make.

I do not hate christians, or catholics for that matter. At least not the ones who voluntarily practice their faith, without coercing others to abide by their doctrine. And as already has been so well stated on this thread, Santorum is dangerous, because he'd like to use the power of the government and legislature to force his moral views on others.

And you think that voting that moron into office would be a good thing, that is because you believe in the same things, but whats gonna happen in 10, 20 years from now, when somebody who doesn't share your beliefs gets in power. THIS is why its bad to legislate morality.

and FYI, I have not had television at my house for over 6 years.

One last thing, if profanity offends you. Too bad. Just do yourself a favor, and watch this video. It will do you good.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ller+profanity

[phillyd2]

Love the BULLSHIT

Great Link - I had no clue these shows were on the web.

But lets also not forget the liberal's more sinister efforts to kill free speech.

[Lougotzz]

Like I said Everyone has their free will to believe what they wish. I have never insisted in any of my post that you must believe in Jesus. It is very hard to talk about christianity to people who dont believe or understand it because you think all religon that refers to Jesus is a christian religon. There is a big difference between organized religon and a true christian who has a relationship with Christ. The point of the thread was who to vote for. If you hate Rick that much dont vote for him. I am voteing for him not because I think he is the greatest guy but he is the lesser of 2 evils IMO. Unfortuneatly these are the choices we have and none of us can do anything about it. I love the fact we can have these debates and it was an experience. I am going back to talking about guns cause that is what I came here for. Good luck with this thread guys.