Anything that keeps us from worshipping at the alter of liberalism. They seek to replace belief in anything but government from which all “good” things come.

No matter what she says, these commentators are determined to take a dissecting microscope and twist her words into what they wish she had said so that they then can attack it.

It’s simply utter hatred of the person and intent to murder in the Sermon on the Mount sense.

This has gone far beyond political disagreement; this is personal malice.

n/t

It seems whenever someone has run out of intelligent things to say – however quickly that may come – he or she resorts to the “oh yeah?” argument. “Oh yeah? Well you’re dumb and crazy.”

And that is apparently where Huff Post contributors find themselves – not least of which, Frank Schaeffer, who this week enlightened me about how southern, backwoods, and uneducated I am.

Thank you, liberal illuminati, for showing the rest of us how we belong with the Clampetts.

Or is it you, who need a federal bailout from your intellectual bankruptcy?

I don’t visit the Huffington Post very often (once a year maybe), but, over the course of frequent exchanges with self-superior left secularists at other venues, I’ve never found a single one of them willing to admit whether they believed that Barack Obama was a lying hypocrite or that he was a fool whenever he testified about his coming to Jesus as an adult. Our President-elect doesn’t even have the “excuse” of being able to claim that he was merely brought up in a certain religious-cultural tradition. Apparently, if you’re on the left, that old time religion is good enough for “brilliant” editors of the Harvard Law Review, but not good enough for thee and me.

The boobs of the left have found their church in government. You need only look at the faces, the zealotry, the gibberish that constitutes their own kind of prayer, to see plainly the religious fanaticism they claim to see in others.
If it wasn’t so ironic and dangerous you could be amused by the reactions of these simpletons towards Christianity.

And of course it’s Christianity that is the focus of their uncontrolled bile, perish the thought a smattering of criticism might be directed at islam and never at their conceptions of the god called government, which as we know will bring heaven on earth.

When did the default become to allow Christianity to run rampant? Christians complain that non-Christian hate Christianity – that’s not true. I hate Christianity getting forced down my throat, not Christians. That’s a big difference. Instead, Christians turn this into a “did you say something about my mother” argument insisting that dissent equals hatred. It doesn’t.

There is very little reciprocal respect for non-Christians. In fact, as witnessed by the post, the secular among us are not allowed to give voice to our beliefs. If we questions Christians we become anti-Christians. To add insult to injury, when secularists criticize Christians, we’re accused of want to “destroy” religion (usually in that broad term) a la COMMUNISM. We become demonized and gleefully so.

Religion, I thought, was supposed to be a personal thing. Secularists feel besieged. Christians feel besieged. What’s the solution? More religion?

Roger Williams didn’t want to keep religion out of government – he wanted to keep GOVERNMENT out of RELIGION. He wanted his religion PROTECTED from gov’t interference like…say…503c laws.

This is America. You have your beliefs but so do I. This needs to stop being a situation about who “wins”.

Anything sound familiar here?

“The fall of Rome is often regarded as an object lesson in the wages of sin. Its contemporaries, however, more frequently laid the blame on the rise of Christianity…. Although they do not inquire into the future, and either forget or do not know the past, yet defame present times as most unusually beset, as it were, by evils because there is belief in Christ and worship of God, and increasingly less worship of idols.”)
Paulus Orosius

Hufpo today features this NYT story on how the Mormons tipped the scale in favor of prop 8.

The intention of the article and (hufpo by posting it, since the vote is over) is clearly to fuel the ‘Blame the Mormons’ narrative, and to stoke the anti-religious bigotry of the gay-marriage left crowd.

This quote from the article gives a sense of the tone, refering to Mormons as…

…the final *spice in an unusual stew * that included Catholics, evangelical Christians, conservative black and Latino pastors, and myriad smaller ethnic groups with strong religious ties.

(emphasis mine)

The thrust of the article is to give the inside details of the Mormons part in the effort to protect marriage in Calif.

The article is posted today, 11-15. Considering the violence so far agianst the Mormons by the anti 8 crowd, the article seems to be obviously and intentionally stoking the anti religious bigotry and violence.

This bears careful monitoring to see if it dies down with the emotion of the loss, or builds into even more open bashing of people of faith…

that people twist what their political opponents say all the time. How many times has it been said here that Durbin called US troops Nazis (when in fact he said no such thing)? Should it happen? Probably not in a perfect world. Still stones, glass houses, and all that.

as many ultra liberals, as many others here probably do, but I can’t begin to tell you how many times I have been criticized or outright made fun of for either showing any glimpse of christian faith. Further, I’ve been portrayed as a religious nut job for supporting the GOP/McCain/Palin et al. I never talk about religious issues when discussing politics and really don’t ever comment on anything related to spirituality (I won’t hide my faith though), so it is not like I’m talking about these topics and these folks are critiquing me for it – they just openly call people religious nuts for being conservative. Moreover, they also think we want to lock women up in chastity belts, hang homosexuals in the town square and don white hoods to rebuild the South – all for supporting fiscal conservative beliefs and believing in the right to life. The most interesting thing about all of this is that this election cycle the GOP has probably moved much further from the social issues than we were in say 2000 (i.e., pre-9/11), with the exception of some of Sarah Palin’s stances. What’s most annoying, though, is that the folks in New York and California still don’t realize that the majority of voters throughout the nation typically allign themselves with conservative issues. So, the question for us is where did we lose them in the process. Of course, there’s plenty of speculation on that question, which I’m sure we’ll be talking about for the next 2 to 4 years. But, more importantly, what is it going to take for these conservatives to get rounded up again and show that the Republican Party is not made up of “religious wackos” (as many liberals put it)? And, when will lilberals come to the realization that there is nothing wrong with letting faith guide one’s decisions?

meeting? I’m no expert on who uttered the benedictions at a meeting of prominent Democrats, but the one instance within the last three years when I did witness a televised ending to a Democrat party convention ending with benediction, it was done by a Muslim. So, the libs aren’t necesarily anti religion, just anti-Christian a majority of the time. And the Koran is anti Christian in a majority of the texts, so once you get past the first few chapters, the militancy is obvious and anti Christian, anti Judaism and anti polytheistic. – Anti prop 8 supporters are clearly anti Christian as well among other things and support this comment’s thesis.

You claim that Democrats despise religion, but this claim is shown to be clearly false when you consider that the just-elected president is very openly religious. Not to mention that the entire legislative branch except for some congressmen you can count on one hand, considers themselves Christian. That includes Democrats and Republicans. So maybe this article should be retitled “Democrats (except for all those in elected positions, those who speak for the party, and a large majority of their supporters) Really Do Despise Religion, Don’t They”.

1. Bill Pryor was a Bush judicial nominee and the anti Catholic religious test theat that Dems were applying was obvious. He wasn’t the only one.

2. Obama doesn’t belong to a church as much as a political organization. Not much religion there at all but alot of politics.

It is difficult to get elected in this country in most places if you are an athiest. So people like Teddy Kennedy pay lip service to the religious nuts they despise. If you actually believe in a religion the MSM will go after you big time. Sarah Palin and John Ashcroft are two examples.