More Dangerous Stupidity From the Religious Right

THIS is why I attack Christianity

Published on October 9, 2005 By Ionolast In Misc

Last night on Fox News' Heartland, John Kasich interviewed Senator Hank Erwin (R-Al.), starting with this written statement:

"New Orleans and the Mississippi Gulf Coast have always been known for gambling, sin and wickedness...it is the kind of behavior that ultimately brings the judgement of God." - Weekly Newspaper Column 9/30/05.

Kasich: "Don't you think you're driving people away from religion? I know you're not trying to do that, but don't you think it has the opposite effect?"

Erwin: "It's according to what your heart is saying. If your heart is humble and you have the lord using a message to send along to America we need to wake up. Your heart will respond in humility saying, "Lord, whatever it takes, begin with me to do what's right.
If your heart is hard, you'll turn away. I can't define what men do, I can only say what God would be honored with."

He actually believes he can read God's mind.

He and anyone who agrees with him should do the world a favor and kill themselves.

No wonder the Ancient Romans threw Christians to the lions."

Comments (Page 2)

Dr Guy

on Oct 09, 2005

First, I dont see your point. Are you saying we should harden our hearts and not listen to our inner person (God in his case)? Now dont you think that is a bit assinine? You dont listen to your instincts (in your case) when you are faced with a decision?

I fail to see your point in your article.

Ionolast

on Oct 09, 2005

My intolerance is a response to theirs.

I really don't give a fuck what you think anymore, B.S., because you hardly ever agree with anyone. And here I thought I was cynical.

Dr Guy

on Oct 09, 2005

As long as these neoconturds have an audience, they will perform. Stupidity is not limited to any political scene

And I find that intolerance of someone's beleifs (not imposed, just as guidance) to be very disturbing. Almost like Germany, circa 1933. And that is not an overstatement.

Dr Guy

on Oct 09, 2005

I dont see intolerance, or forcing of one's will in your article.

It's according to what your heart is saying. If your heart is humble and you have the lord using a message to send along to America we need to wake up. Your heart will respond in humility saying, "Lord, whatever it takes, begin with me to do what's right. If your heart is hard, you'll turn away. I can't define what men do, I can only say what God would be honored with."

Let's disect this.

According to ones heart. - You dont listen to your hunches? Interesting

If your heart is humble - i.e. listen to your hunches, but you have already discounted that.

You have the lord sending a message - Your little voice is talking to you. for him the lord, for others, their hunches.

We need to wake up. - We need to be more aware of the suffering around us? Guess that is really radical.

Your heart will respond with humility - You will see that you need to do the right thing. Now that is extreme! Yea, burn the bastard at the stake!

"Lord, whatever it takes, begin with me to do what's right. - lead me to do the right thing. Ok, if his god is a nasty one, then we get Hitler. If his god is a nice one, then we get Ghandi. So you have prejudged him?

If your heart is hard, you'll turn away - If you dont listen, you will not hear the message. so dont talk to your hunches, Harden your heart and only work from logic.

I can't define what men do, I can only say what God would be honored with." - I only know what I will do , not others (especially the ones that are using this to condemn someone for a belief not violent or condemning).

I think you blew it big time here icon. Big time.

bakerstreet

on Oct 09, 2005

My intolerance is a response to theirs.

I really don't give a fuck what you think anymore, B.S., because you hardly ever agree with anyone. And here I thought I was cynical."

If you can point out where they said people of your beliefs should "should do the world a favor and kill themselves", I mind find some equity.

Ionolast

on Oct 09, 2005

I dont see intolerance, or forcing of one's will in your article.

Erwin is intolerant of anyone he thinks is a sinner. Which is funny, because everyone is a sinner, at least according to Christianity. Even Erwin.

bakerstreet

on Oct 09, 2005

And you are intolerant of people you feel are "dangerous." So? You're saying there something wrong with intolerance while being intolerant. In reality everyone is intolerant of some things. It's called being human.

Your statement

"He and anyone who agrees with him should do the world a favor and kill themselves.

No wonder the Ancient Romans threw Christians to the lions."

exemplifies your hypocrisy, imho. I'm not sure how you can take the moral high ground while spewing more intolerance and hate than the people you are villifying.

Dr Guy

on Oct 09, 2005

Erwin is intolerant of anyone he thinks is a sinner. Which is funny, because everyone is a sinner, at least according to Christianity. Even Erwin.

Your evidence and arguement are severly lacking.

sunwukong

on Oct 09, 2005

Your evidence and arguement are severly lacking

Almost like Germany, circa 1933. And that is not an overstatement.

Ah, Irony be my harsh mistress upon whom I trust to guide me into the malestrom that is JU!

Ionolast

on Oct 09, 2005

And you are intolerant of people you feel are "dangerous."

And you aren't? You defend Christians just because they hide behind a book that anyone could have written, put the word "holy" in the title knowing it would probably sell a lot of copies, made hyped and exaggerated claims about, and has been edited to fit what some people wanted other people to believe so they could obtain power.

I'm not sure how you can take the moral high ground while spewing more intolerance and hate than the people you are villifying.

What's moral about it?

Ionolast

on Oct 09, 2005

As for deleting HC's comments and blacklisting him, I've also blacklisted aeryck and preacherman, which I have freely, openly and proudly admitted before. No one raises hell about that.

Ionolast

on Oct 09, 2005

Do what you wanna Do what you will.
Just don't mess up your neighbor's thrill. - Frank Zappa

The people who Erwin feels God was justified in killing were not harming anyone except maybe themselves. I find it funny that Baker doesn't think Erwin is intolerant and dangerous, since Baker admits to being a sexual deviate.

bakerstreet

on Oct 09, 2005

"And you aren't?"

Did you read the whole thing?

" And you are intolerant of people you feel are "dangerous." So? You're saying there something wrong with intolerance while being intolerant. In reality everyone is intolerant of some things. It's called being human."

The difference is some people are just intolerant, and others are wackos who think the world would be a better place without the people they differ with. One is admitedly intolerant. The other, well... is a little sick.

I honestly thought you were trying your hand at the absurd, and after reading it twice finally realized you probably didn't intend to seem twice as intolerant as the people you were talking about. Kind of sad...

Chakgogka

on Oct 09, 2005

This is a very odd thread, to say the least. The comments that Senator Erwin made attibuting the devastation of Katrina to God's judgement, although distasteful (to me, anyway) do have a lot of Old Testament 'precedent' to them. Icon was clearly upset by this remark and suggests that anyone who agrees with this should "kill themselves". (This is unlikely to happen).

Icon in turn has been accused of being even more intolerant than the apparently intolerant people he is condemning (fairly in my view) - and here we have it the usual left/right, religious/secular hate fest doing its usual merry dance.

I have to say that, to an outsider, this is a very American problem. Not for the immediately apparent reason that there are more 'religious' people in the US than in, say, Europe, but because of the kind of religion that we are talking about. Try to imagine a prominent European christian (let's take the Pope as an example, or maybe Tony Blair) making a comment like Erwin's. It just wouldn't happen. (I'm assuming that Senator Erwin is a prominent American. I don't know)

America's religious right contains a lot of christians of a particular fundamentalist stamp, tending much more toward the Old Testamant rather than the New, much more into the idea of smiting the enemies of God, rather than turning the other cheek. Perhaps this is exactly the kind of robust and muscular religion needed by a frontier people who now find themselves masters of the world, but it is hard to reconcile it with the love, forbearance and forgiveness at the heart of the christian gospel.

Trying to understand the vehemence of the argument from the outside, I can only conclude that this rather harsh and spiritually immature version of the christian message in turn gives rise to a harsh and intolerant secular criticism in the manner of an 'equal and opposite reaction'. Another problem of course is that these spiritual views are immediately lazily equated with political positions (pro-christian = conservative, anti-christian = 'liberal'), so that even non-christian conservatives feel the need to pile in and 'defend' "christianity" (at least the type of christianity which has the largest overlap with conservative political views).

I would be interested in any christian on JU who could humbly and kindly explain to Icon that there are all kinds of christian viewpoints and that Senator Erwin's rather silly comments are not necessarily representative of the faith as a whole. As a non-believer I'm not in a position to do so myself, but I have enough respect for christianity to believe that at least one of you out there will have the patience to do so without getting aggressively defensive about the whole thing.

bakerstreet

on Oct 10, 2005

"I would be interested in any christian on JU who could humbly and kindly explain to Icon that there are all kinds of christian viewpoints and that Senator Erwin's rather silly comments are not necessarily representative of the faith as a whole."

I'm just mulling over the usual reaction to such statements about non-CHristian religions. No offense intended, Chak, and I agree with what you are saying, but I get tired of "cultural sensitivity" only applying to those of media-friendly beliefs.

We understand that we have the responsibility to treat people of, say, fundamentalist Islamic beliefs in fair way. I can imagine the hell I would get if I were to say that fundamentalist Islamic people in the US that I differ with should all go kill themselves.

It's chic to say such things about fundamentalist Christians, though. It makes Icon feel all cool and smart, I guess. In reality, he's no different with a statement like that than someone who might wish all those "towel heads" would kill themselves.

I could sit here and debate the doctrine of the situation, but I don't think it merits it. I think it would be granting the original, hateful statement more validity than it is worth.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!