All Comments (481)

http://moreaboutmen.com/genre/country/g2/

http://moreaboutmen.com/genre/country/g2/

http://moreaboutmen.com/genre/country/g2/

GOD BLESS YOU MY FRIEND! JUST KNOW JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY AND WE MUST BE UNAPOLOGETIC IN PROCLAIMING THE GOSPEL OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST!!!!!!! GOD IS A LOVING, MERCIFUL, AND JUST GOD! WE MUST REMEMBER HE IS PERFECT AND WE MUST FOLLOW ALL HIS WAYS! (AS I BELIEVE DR. JAMES DOBSON & OTHERS ARE DOING). MANY PEOPLE DID NOT LIKE WHAT JESUS SAID WHEN HE WAS ON EARTH HOWEVER THE TRUTH IS...JESUS IS THE WAY THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE, NO ONE COMES TO THE FATHER BUT THROUGH HIM - JOHN 14:6!!!! SO WE MUST SHOW NON CHRISTIANS LOVE AS WELL AS LETTING THEM KNOW THE TRUTH...JESUS AND ALL HIS WAYS...EVEN IF IT HURTS. IT HURTS US ALL, BUT THAT'S WHAT MAKES US REALIZE HOW MUCH WE NEED JESUS AND HIM ALONE!

GOD BLESS!!!!!!!!!!

Like it or not Biblical Christianity is a reality in the US and every place else.

Google

Peter – thanks for the long reply. I was recently a liberal Christian – Episcopalian, so I know what you mean. I’m sure I’d be still welcomed there as an atheist, as long as I didn’t make too much noise about it. But it was uncomfortable for me, hearing about God and Jesus all the time (on Sunday morning – never in any other activities), especially knowing that so many parishioners and even clergy were expressing or advocating beliefs they didn’t hold themselves – as a means of continuing to enjoy the warm community. Sorry to be harsh, but a community with deception at its core is not ultimately healthy, no matter how warm.

I know from what you’ve said that you don’t hold a lot of those beliefs, so I wonder what it’s like for you to be among people with numerous different beliefs, some of which are contradictory (Jesus either rose from the dead or he didn’t) and not all of which can be true.

As for Brian McClaren – I only know him from this forum (see his current essay and responses) and while I appreciate your suggestion, he’s too ambiguous for me (I often feel that way about clergy). I will check out the book, though, on Amazon or at the bookstore.

Hello, E Favorite.

I only get online M-F so sorry for the late reply. I appreciate your question. The reason I am involved in a Christian church now has partly to do with my previous interest in Buddhism--particularly the Dalai Lama's teaching that Western Buddhists are generally well-advised to practice within the religious tradition of their own culture. I saw few Buddhist churches or communities, and my approach to faith is communal as well as individual. But additionally, I was impressed by the very kind, thoughtful and responsible people I met who shattered my previous conceptions of what "Christians" were like. More often than not, they had a high respect for science and reason (and in may cases a high level of education), and had the same passions for social justice that I have. They were not exclusive and not focused on the afterlife, the "end times" or any of that other junk that sells books. My reflections led me to believe that Christianity, within my understanding, best addresses for me the human need for forgiveness and resolution for past wrongs and provides a blueprint for understanding the living God. (I say that realizing that other religious traditions effectively answer these needs for others.)

I actually agree with Matthew also, that these intrinsic values predate Christ. I believe that they have been put into the human heart by God and that God works within all religions. At the same time, I believe that all religions at some point, in some way or another are corrupted by evil--often in the form of nationalism or aligning itself with power (i.e. the Inquisition, the Catholic Church at the time of the Reformation, the Anglican church at the time of the Puritan and Quaker movements, and the current mixing of Christianity and power-politics today, just to give some Christian examples), but God can still use those religions to reach God's people.

I also agree with Matthew and the other posters who wrote that American Christians are not speaking out loudly enough about Ann Coulter and the abuse of religion for political ends. However, some of those same posters criticized (inexplicably) Mr. Livingston for doing just that.

E Favorite, you say you are interested in hearing more about the non-divisive practice of Chrsitianity I've attempted to describe here in this thread. I would recommend a book to you that came out a few years ago: "A Generous Orthodoxy" by Brian McLaren, which has had a big effect on my thinking. Also, if you ever have time on a Sunday morning to visit a church just to see what it is like, the mainline denominational (UCC, Episcopalian, Methodist, Disciples of Christ) churches located in the downtowns of large cities, in troubled urban neighborhoods, or near universities are a good bet for being welcoming and comfortable to visitors and appreciating a diversity of viewpoints. Many of them see the faith journey just as that--a journey--and are there to help people on their walk wherever they are. And it is very unlikely that folks will bombard you with inane questions about whether you're "saved" or not, because contrary to the rantings of TV preachers, that concept isn't in the vocabulary of most liberal Christians.

BRAVO !

And please don't forget the other GOP hacks like sean hannity who echo coulter and openly tout her sacrilege and evil.

Peter: “As a person who has only recently committed myself to the Christian life, the draw for me was an inexplicable sense that when I strive to be a better person, I am more in harmony with the universe and a higher and loving intelligence that wants me to live a moral life.”

That sounds like a very compelling experience. However, this “higher and loving intelligence” sounds very general – unrelated to the stories of Jesus or the God of Abraham. You say you’re new to Christianity. Where were you before, with respect to religion?

Regarding Matthew’s reaction – as far as I can tell, what he says sounds pretty on target – the intrinsic human values that predate Christ, the overbearing Christians, the moderate but quiet Christians who are upset about the overbearing branch, but to timid or unengaged to react. You seem to be in an entirely different category – almost a lone Christian with a personal Christianity that is whatever you make it. Which takes my back to my original question. Why Christianity? It seems like you had some kind of awakening, a transcendent experience – and you named it God – and not only God but Jesus. Why not Buddha, or another God,or just a higher power?

Another poster here, Campbellite, seems similar to you – thought she has specifically selected Catholicism, which to her version is completely mythological

I’m very interested in hearing more about your type of Christianity, but don’t want to be demanding. Whatever you can share is appreciated.

Matthew, you have misunderstood or misread my posts. Nowhere did I say that Christianity has an exclusive claim on goodness or compassion, nor did I ever say he introduced the concepts, nor did I say that non-Christians who do good are emulating his teachings. Yes, I've heard of the Buddha and have been influenced by Buddhist and Jewish teachings as well. The point of my response to you was that your experiences with those who call themselves Christians has largely been negative because they haven't been reflecting the goodness of the Christ that they claim to follow. (You even said this in your last e-mail.) Of course I don't expect followers of the Jewish religion or other religions to try to emulate Christ's teachings, and I did not say that, but it's certainly reasonable to say so-called Christians should.

Anyway, I'm not interested in "converting" you, so fear not. As a matter of fact I'm looking to my Jewish friends to help me better understand their understanding of the Truth, that I may learn from it. Thank God for them, they model their faith through being fair and giving me as a Christian the benefit of the doubt, and I model my faith by responding in kind. Unfortunately, if my experience with followers of Judaism was limited to posts such as yours, I would probably think as little of your religion as you do of mine.

To E Favorite:

"It sounds like you believe in a supernatural and Christian God, but don’t believe in some of the basic tenets of Christianity, is that right?"

I guess my way of framing it would be that I give the words and deeds of Christ priority over everything else in the Bible, while also believing that those other parts of the Bible are there for a reason and can help illuminate the Truth of Christ's teaching and purpose. I guess some Christians would say that makes me a liberal.

"You think a good atheist, or whatever, is just as good as a good Christian..."

In general, yes. We humans have limited ways of judging "good" in other people, but we should never judge someone as "bad" or "less good" merely on account of their beliefs about metaphysical concepts.

"...and will reap the same reward."

If you mean the afterlife, I really don't know the answer to that. My faith is concerned more with life on this earth. I do know that in an earthly sense, people (regardless of their beliefs) who live the way God desires us to live-- hardworking, unselfish and honest, among other traits-- tend to be 'rewarded' with self-respect, satisfaction, a sense of purpose and a clear conscience. I can only trust that the afterlife, however it may be, works in a similar way.

"I wonder what the draw of Christianity is for you."

As a person who has only recently committed myself to the Christian life, the draw for me was an inexplicable sense that when I strive to be a better person, I am more in harmony with the universe and a higher and loving intelligence that wants me to live a moral life. Conversely, when I strive only to please my egotistic, selfish tendencies, I feel separated from that higher Love. I also had a sense that I was forgiven for some of the truly hurtful things that I have done to others in the past. That is probably all I should write in this space, but suffice it to say that it was not through being "persuaded" by the likes of Ann Coulter!-- or even the likes of Billy Graham for that matter. Becausue the draw (as you call it) was instinctual and experiential rather than intellectual it is something I don't speak about unless asked--and admittedly it is easier to discuss it in anonymity on this blog to talk about with most of the people I know in everyday life.

"Most good Christians I know, in addition to following the teachings of Jesus on earth, also want to secure a place in heaven. You seem to think (unless I got it wrong) that you – and I – already have a secured place."

Again, I just don't think about it all that much because I don't understand it. Concern about "going to hell" plays absolutely no part in why I decided to follow the way and teaching of Christ. If some others want to say that makes me "not a Christian," well, the sticks-and-stones playground adage seems appropriate in this context.

"I also assume that if you stopped believing – based on lack of evidence, etc., that you would continue living your presumably good, decent life, and not be concerned about how to be moral if there’s no God. Is that right?"

I don't know. I would like to think so. Mother Theresa was apparently able to do so.

Matthew: amen. and while we are calling out the crowd who are assembling to pat themselves on the back for making the world safe for bigotry of one sort or another, let's now not forget Dr. Laura. Yesterday she just complemented the fine folks of San Diego for being so wonderfully well behaved and mutually supportive for the evacuees in Qualcom stadium, and who didn't wait for the government to help, in contrast with those in the superdome in New Orleans, who looted instead, complained about the government not helping, and generally blamed Bush. Unless she was commenting on the pernicious effects of humidity, she was making a racist remark of the same sort that Coulter makes when she preaches to her kind.

Peter,

As a jew, I need no assistance in understanding the goodness of Christ, or the values he stood for - as a man, not a deity. I also know that those values and concepts were not introduced to humanity by Christ, just repeated by him, so even claiming that others who live compassionately are somehow emulating Christ's teachings smacks of exceptionalism, and is deeply offensive to the 5 billion humans who are NOT Christians.

Ever heard of the Buddha? The point is, the values taught by a fellow who called himself the Christ are deeper than religion - they strike to the core of humanity, and Christianism has tried to lay claim to these values ever since the first bible was published. Baloney.

I also see none of these values reflected in the Christianists who I meet - not the fellow on the airplane who, upon learning my religion, asked me if I were interested in being "saved;" not the zealots who threw blood at my sister on her way to a family planning clinic for birth control; and, no, not even the good missionary workers I met in Ecuador, who offer development assistance to poor indigenous tribes, but with a subtext of conversion as the real goal.

Until so-called "real" Christians stand up to save the victims of their co-religionists from the consequences of supremicist actions, I'm unlikely to put much truck in the compassionate pleadings of the silent few. Sorry.

I am heartened at several posts noting that Livingston is missing the point. That he and his kind can just as easily be characterized as the ones who have abandoned orthodoxy because they can't accept it (cause it won't sell). Not a judgment there, just a reality. Coulter and her kind didn't hijack the real church, those who pretend they are the real church are in denial that they have drifted from it. I am just sitting back watching factions within Christianity engage in intermural and intramural warfare which makes all parties look silly to the rest of us.

My biggest problem with Christianity besides the hypocracy is why they think everyone around the world needs to be saved or become a christian. The world evolved pretty well before christians came upon the scene. So why is the only way christians do missionary work is if they can preach the bible? Can you imagine a group coming to the poor sections of American and state they will help rebuild the infrastructure only if you learn their religion?

Peter, thanks for getting back to me. It sounds like you believe in a supernatural and Christian God, but don’t believe in some of the basic tenets of Christianity, is that right? You think a good atheist, or whatever, is just as good as a good Christian and will reap the same reward.

I wonder what the draw of Christianity is for you. Most good Christians I know, in addition to following the teachings of Jesus on earth, also want to secure a place in heaven. You seem to think (unless I got it wrong) that you – and I – already have a secured place.

I also assume that if you stopped believing – based on lack of evidence, etc., that you would continue living your presumably good, decent life, and not be concerned about how to be moral if there’s no God. Is that right?

Matthew, one other comment:

"Ahem. Well. The entire history of the Christianist movement - which began a couple centuries after Christ's time on earth - is one of oppression of weaker peoples and war-waging to convert the "unsaved."

I would respond that throughout history there have been plenty of atheists who have modeled Christian teaching better than many of those calling themselves Christians. Throughout history, there have also been plenty of Christians quietly doing God's work in their communities even as it has been impossible for them to stop the murder going on in God's name. They are the unknown and unsugn heroes, while the killers in high places say their prayers out loud and get the glory from this world.

Matthew, you write "I have never met a true Christian" and therein lies the problem. While none of us who aspire to follow Christ are "true Christians" (and don't trust anyone who says s/he is), it sounds like nobody has tried to reach out to you. By reach out, I don't mean to save your soul or any of that hogwash, I just mean to reflect the goodness of Christ to you as a fellow human being. The very fact that there is the concept of an Ann Coulter or a Pat Robertson belies the fact that many of us have grown smug and judgmental and put more stock into ourselves than into our comission to relate to others as Chrsit would have us do. I'm sorry.

Sir,

It would be truly refreshing if even half of those individuals who identify themselves as Christians behaved as such. With all due respect, I believe that it is wishful thinking on your part to assert that the vast majority of so-called Christians practice tolerance and inclusion. Granted, the Ann Coulters of the world represent an extreme element that is an abomination to most reasonable people, Christian or otherwise. However, Christian Identity is rapidly gaining an overbearing foothold in the workplace, in the government, in the military, in the media, and in every day life. Those of us who for one reason or another do not belong to "the club" cannot escape the suspicion and disapproval of those that preach "love thy neighbor." I understand that some Christians feel that their beliefs and lifestyles are under attack. To them I would say that tolerance begins at home and in your own hearts. The notion that we live in a so-called "Christian Nation" is understandably threatening to others. Jesus said "follow me," not "obey me, or else."

I'm enjoying this thread, but I think we need to look a bit closer at our political system in order to understand why the Christian Right and media play the roles that they do. I do not agree with any aspect of the Christian Right's agenda as far as I can tell, nor am I content with the state of the American media (which repeats as fact statements made by politicians that have been proven false, and assumes that journalists can cover subjects that they know nothing about - see democraticpiece.com for some of my critiques of Reuters, NYT, and WP).

However, I caution that we should not ignore the incentives that encourage the Christian Right (CR) and the media to behave as they do. Many of these incentives our embedded in the American political system, which, as a presidential system, promotes disagreement between the two political parties. Second terms tend to be 'lame duck' sessions for our presidents because the opposition party wants to win the next election; the opposition benefits by constraining the president and demonstrating that his party cannot get the job done.

Similarly, this system benefits those with 'black and white' political positions that can motivate the masses and appeal to their fundamental identities. In this way, attention is focussed and the arguments are difficult to rebut as they appear so genuine and socially just (for those 'true believers' among us, of course). This is very much what Bush and the Christian Right seek to do ('with us or against us!'). It's the same strategy used by populist presidents in Latin America (Hugo Chavez) and Islamists in the Middle East (not to mention Ahmadinejad; a conservative, but not an Islamist).

The US media is private and its primary goal is to make money. For some outlets, they can appeal to markets that desire 'objective' news coverage (the NYT and WP would, traditionally, be examples). These are the ones people on this thread tend to like. But for most, like the NY Post and Daily News, its those gripping headlines that get the reader to buy the paper (which, in turn, gets the commercials). So you can blame these outlets if you wish, but you are better off recognizing that they are going where the money is.

In order to affect positive change in our political system, to get our politicians and media to behave as we wish, the people on this thread need to make their voices heard; not simply by posting on threads of this nature, but by mobilizing, putting their money where their mouths are, and finding ways to support the causes that they believe in. This is not intended to be a lecture; I'm more like you all. I'm still trying to figure out how to best use my time and resources. And with that, I better finish my Latin America reading before class.

E Favorite,

In answer to your question "Does that atheist you describe go to heaven, despite rejecting god?" I can only answer that I don't give much thought to afterlife questions because they don't seem very relevant. Jesus himself rarely referred to hell-- in fact, to my knowledge he only referred to it once: in a parable about a rich man not helping a poor man. I suppose that answer would get me labeled as a "tub of goo" by another poster on this thread, but I really see afterlife questions as dividing God's people rather than uniting them. I'd rather see everyone as on a faith journey whether they realize it or not, and God as calling all people and working in their hearts whether they choose to respond or not. My belief in God as a loving God would incline me to believe that s/he wouldn't condemn someone to eternal suffering simply on the basis of "wrong" manswers to metaphysical questions that none of us really understand anyway.

I think it is terribly presumptive of Christians to claim to know the "mind" of God--anytime I hear somebody make a remark about another person's afterlife destiny I assume they are either a little bit naive or that they have ulterior motives.

In answer to your question "what if that same atheist actively states rejection of any and all Gods - whether perceived by believers to be "real" or a "caricature?" Do you think God counts that atheist as doing His will?" I would add to my previous response these words of Chrsit: "By your fruits they will know you." Yes, God loves that atheist and has a relationship with that atheist whether the atheist realizes it or not, so it is certainly possible for the atheist to be doing God's will. Google "common grace" and "reformed" to learn more about this theological concept.

E Favorite,

In answer to your question "Does that atheist you describe go to heaven, despite rejecting god?" I can only answer that I don't give much thought to afterlife questions because they don't seem very relevant. Jesus himself rarely referred to hell-- in fact, to my knowledge he only referred to it once: in a parable about a rich man not helping a poor man. I suppose that answer would get me labeled as a "tub of goo" by another poster on this thread, but I really see afterlife questions as dividing God's people rather than uniting them. I'd rather see everyone as on a faith journey whether they realize it or not, and God as calling all people and working in their hearts whether they choose to respond or not. My belief in God as a loving God would incline me to believe that s/he wouldn't condemn someone to eternal suffering simply on the basis of "wrong" manswers to metaphysical questions that none of us really understand anyway.

I think it is terribly presumptive of Christians to claim to know the "mind" of God--anytime I hear somebody make a remark about another person's afterlife destiny I assume they are either a little bit naive or that they have ulterior motives.

In answer to your question "what if that same atheist actively states rejection of any and all Gods - whether perceived by believers to be "real" or a "caricature?" Do you think God counts that atheist as doing His will?" I would add to my previous response these words of Chrsit: "By your fruits they will know you." Yes, God loves that atheist and has a relationship with that atheist whether the atheist realizes it or not, so it is certainly possible for the atheist to be doing God's will. Google "common grace" and "reformed" to learn more about this theological concept.

It's news that American people age 16-29 are skeptical of Christianity? That they see it as "judgmental, hypocritical, old-fashioned and too political?" Good grief, this has been the case for just about forever. It's the nature of youth to question entrenched values and to see hypocrisy. Some of us even continue in this vein into adulthood. At 48, I am amazed every day at the stunning perversions of the teachings of Jesus that are perpetrated by the Christian Right. Heresies go unchallenged every day as moderate Christians have basically stopped talking publicly and do not refute the whackos. As Bill Moyers pointed out years ago, with the selection of George W. Bush in 2000 the lunatic fringe has become the face of Christianity in the US.

Amen!
Ms. Coulter's ideas of religious absolutism, intolerance and disdain for those whose opinions differ from hers is no different than those in radical Islam who want to see harm come to this country. While I agree that she gets too much coverage for her extreme comments, that too is what America is all about. Free speech. The more she spews venom, the more her cause is hurt in the end. The vast majority of Americans, regardless of their political or religous views are sane, tolerant moderates who do not stand for such hatred.

Amen!
Ms. Coulter's ideas of religious absolutism, intolerance and disdain for those whose opinions differ from hers is no different than those in radical Islam who want to see harm come to this country. While I agree that she gets too much coverage for her extreme comments, that too is what America is all about. Free speech. The more she spews venom, the more her cause is hurt in the end. The vast majority of Americans, regardless of their political or religous views are sane, tolerant moderates who do not stand for such hatred.

The only substantial difference between the idiocies that emanate from Ms. Coulter's mouth, and the idiocies that fly around much of the Evanglical Christian-o-sphere that I have seen, is the volume that her notoriety and her fascist-harpy shtick lend to them. I long ago lost count of the number of times I have heard Christians proclaiming that Jews were indeed not only "incomplete" but doomed to an eternity of misery, that homosexuals are at best deeply troubled and in need of a cure, that Ghandi shares the same suite in Hell as Hitler and half of the murderers and rapists that pollute the news. So yes, I pay no attention to Ann Coulter, for the same reasons that I pay no attention to the absurd claims of many others who assert religious notions with an air of truth...

The only substantial difference between the idiocies that emanate from Ms. Coulter's mouth, and the idiocies that fly around much of the Evanglical Christian-o-sphere that I have seen, is the volume that her nororiety and her fascist-harpy schtick lend to them. I long ago lost count of the number of times I have heard Christians proclaiming that Jews were indeed not only "incomplete" but doomed to an eternity of misery, that homosexuals are at best deeply troubled and in need of a cure, that Ghandi shares the same suite in Hell as Hitler and half of the murderers and rapists that pollute the news. So yes, I pay no attention to Ann Coulter, for the same reasons that I pay no attention to the absurd claims of many others who assert religious notions with an air of truth...

Yes, everyone knows that the phenomena of Christianist supremacy is a recent development of the late 20th century that can be attributed to a desire for political power in the American system.

(coughs, snorts)

Ahem. Well. The entire history of the Christianist movement - which began a couple centuries after Christ's time on earth - is one of oppression of weaker peoples and war-waging to convert the "unsaved."

Sorry, Mr. Livingston, but Christianism has been selling a bill of goods for going on 2,000 years. Many of the most destructive eras in human history can be attributed to the deep-seated evil within the various offshoots of the Christianist movement (Roman Empire, the Dark Ages, Spanish Inquisition, British occupation of India, French occupation of north Africa, Spanish "conversion" of Andean tribes, Anglo "conversion" of N. American tribes, Britain's Muslim Crusades, ad infinitum) - these events alone are responsible for the deaths of untold tens of millions of people, all so that they might be "saved" in the name of Jesus.

And Jesus would have wept to see the gross bastardization of his teachings.

I have never met a true Christian, and I certainly never expect to see one on the teevee. This commentary is simply another token in a long line of excuse-making by a church that has never been as compassionate as it claims, in an attempt to distract from the destruction it continues to wreak on the planet and its inhabitants.

"Look, over here, see we're really good people!"

Not so much. Until you have tampered down the murderers and zealots in your midst, your voice will carry no weight. Remove the stick from thine own eye, and all of that.

As the American military continues to be radicalized from within by the most violent, supremist elements of the Christianist church, I have decreasing faith in your ability to police your own.

And just as an aside - radical Islam is no picnic, but how many humans have been killed as a result of Muslim expansionism and exceptionalism? No contest, Christianists, the blood on your hands far exceeds the sum total of suffering caused by all the mullahs in Babylon.

My mistake from before - I was the 'Anonymous' from earlier this morning.

K - You said, "You happen to have been born in a time in history and a country that allows you to believe in the right God, while the remainder of humanity born in other times and in many other countries where they indocrinate their children with different god(s) are just screwed?"

I do not speak in terms of 'the right God' myself because it conveys just what you're concerned about; namely, that the whole experience of life becomes an in-group/out-group dynamic, Us vs. Them, zero sum game. I conceive of life - and God - differently, and though I claim a theistic faith and you don't, I don't see that as a sign that we need to be enemies. (I know you weren't saying that, by the way; I just add that point because I think fairly often people like framing the whole discussion of faith's role in the public marketplace in those stark, dualistic terms.)

To your main point in the paragraph that I copied and pasted, though - no, I don't think those people in other countries and cultures who have different experiences and different faiths (or no particular faith at all) are 'just screwed.' As I mentioned in my other post, what we all have in common is a conscience - or, if you have another term for that aspect within each of us that helps us to choose wisely. If we live for the good, then judgment shouldn't be a concern. I want to presume that those who speak of hellfire are doing so with the idea that they want to remind everyone that our choices have consequences, but unfortunately, that brimstone emphasis downplays the notion of a loving God. And I can't countenance any conversation about faith without that notion.

Thanks for the questions, K - it's always good food for thought, especially if we can talk to each other in a way that is positive.

Peace.

It's hard to ignore Ann Coulter because she's in my face all the time, calling me a traitor and inciting others to kill me.

She's your monster, Christianist apologists.

You get rid of her.

Yes, just ignore her, just like the majority of American Christians do, for whom she speaks.....

After the vast majority of mainstream Christians in this country sat idly by -- or worse -- for the past 25-30 years while their religions were hijacked by fanatics, we are now to believe that the media is to blame? Give me a break. You cheered them while they gained political power. You said nothing when they redefined Christianity as (false) "patriotism," greed, and bald selfishness. That is what young people have grown up on. They are reflecting back to you what you have portrayed oftentimes with great pride. You have gravely damaged the American fabric.

After the vast majority of mainstream Christians in this country sat idly by -- or worse -- for the past 25-30 years while their religions were hijacked by fanatics, we are now to believe that the media is to blame? Give me a break. You cheered them while they gained political power. You said nothing when they redefined Christianity as (false) "patriotism," greed, and bald selfishness. That is what young people have grown up on. They are reflecting back to you what you have portrayed oftentimes with great pride. You have gravely damaged the American fabric.

Amen.

Anonymous: this atheist doesn't reject "G"od, as you have correctly said, I reject gods, any of them, all of them. This doesn't mean I "believe" that they don't exist, I don't reach into my brain far enough to make the effort to actually positively believe that they don't exist.

Why you should think your God is any more or less likely than any of the other gods humanity has claimed to exist is a very curious thing to me.

All of them were wrong, and you're right? All of the humans before the bronze age jews wrote their "old testament" as we sort of know it ... all of them are in hell?

You happen to have been born in a time in history and a country that allows you to believe in the right God, while the remainder of humanity born in other times and in many other countries where they indocrinate their children with different god(s) are just screwed?

Can you see how silly this is?

And this experience of God you suggest, were something like that to happen to me I would have to wonder who slipped the LSD in my coffee before I would believe anything like some god was talking to me. Your willingness to grab on to the external god story as opposed to looking somewhere else for this emotional response ... it's just silly.

And finally when I think of this wonderous heaven I hear described by Christians, I am reminded of what Kind Arthur said in Monty Pythons and the Holy Grail: "On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place. "

Christians have no one to blame but themselves. They neglected to speak up while this particular group took over our national consciousness. They are just as guilty of silence as American Muslims after 9/11. It is not the media's fault...

I also question whether most Christian Americans are that loving and accepting. I remember an Episcopalian in the small Texas town I was living in telling me that she believed Bill and Hillary Clinton really did kill Vince Foster. I have witnessed a whole slew of uncomfortable "Christian" behavior since our current President's ascension.

I would like to say that I am not an atheist, just uncomfortable with "Christian" religions as practiced and preached these days.

Nice try, Michael.

I've been to church recently. There are definitely some nice people there, but there are an awful lot of Bush/Cheney bumper stickers, fish insignias, and abortion is murder signs. Christianity is just another wing of the Republican Party. Glad to see the youngsters catching on. Have you caught Steven Baldwins "muscular Christianity" act. The hero fo the stupid.

Good observation that is shared by many Christians. Rev. Livingston could have made a stronger case for his opinion if he had included some 60 million Catholic in this country who are puzzled by the far right and people such as Ann Coulter. The preachings of these people is not a message heard from the pulpits of Catholic churches or read in Catholic opinion publications.

Wow - I didn't expect my comments to lead this far, but it's good that people are thinking and talking.

As to whether an atheist - or anyone who doesn't fall into what some might consider a traditional denomination or faith - would make it into heaven, I have to reiterate one of my earlier points; namely, that God makes the final call. I say that not to be snarky, just to get back to basics and remind myself that I'm not a real arbiter in the whole process. (An aide and abetter to people living good and holy lives? I hope so.)

More specifically, each of us has to act according to our conscience; each of has to choose freely, and that includes choosing to believe in and follow God. This path cannot be one of compulsion. I think it is safe to say that all of us know someone - maybe several someones - who have not had an experience of God, and so the very notion of being a believer is not merely foreign to them, but beyond the pale.

For those of us who claim the name Christian, it's our task to witness to the love of God - and our experience of God - in such a way that people feel inspired to ask questions and want to know more. Jesus' words come to mind: "See how they love one another."

Another note about atheists - strictly speaking, they don't reject God, because they don't believe in God in the first place. They reject believing in God. Now I know I might sound like I'm splitting hairs, but I think it matters. Think about it this way: if you have had an experience of God - a conversion of some sort, let's say - then you have within you a powerful sense of how God can and will guide you to live out of love for Him and others. If you have not had that experience, well, you aren't explicitly rejecting God simply by saying that you don't think God exists. Rather, you are being honest to your own experience and acknowledging that based on your own subjective field of observations, you cannot claim a theistic belief.

Now let's all pray for each other - and witness to each other.

let me say this. i am not a christian and i am not a conservative. but the basic stance of the livingston piece is pitiful. "religious" people of this ilk are marked by mellow benevolent friendliness to all and by an almost complete inability to think. what does it mean to be a christian? well in the new testament and throughout the tradition, it means to accept jesus as the savior and as the only means to redemption. obviously this directly contradicts the doctrines of more or less all other religions. if a 'christian' sort of in a friendly way thinks that all these religions are true, this can only be in a complete transcendence of basic logic or in its rejection or simply in a kind of ignorance of the basic structures that make human thought, and the attempt to get at the truth, possible. it's exactly as though you both endorsed and opposed the iraq war simultaneously, both ways around with real enthusiasm, both ways around as organizing your political life. to say that you shouldn't listen to folks like these is redundant: once they're throwing out the extreme explicit contradictions, they have created a set of sentences which it is literally impossible to believe. they don't believe it. they can't expect you to believe it. coulter simply has the guts actually to be a christian, to declare frankly that she meets the absolutely minimal conditions to be a believer; the folks that wrote that livingston believes everything, hence nothing at all. obviously, things like consistency or commitment make you a raving reactionary who ought to be suppressed. on the other hand, being a raving reactionary is a lot better than to be a tub of goo incapable of rudimentary ratiocination.

A quote from Eric Hoffer's The True Believer is instructive here: "The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. "

You can deny Ann Coulter and Dobson et al are representative of your "real" religion, just as the muslims can deny the extremists represent theirs ... but this isn't really the battle you are losing with the youth.

It's not the reason I never bought your stories, no, there is a much larger reason.

You Christians aren't losing the youth because they think you're all Ann Coulters, you're losing the youth because they think you are silly.

Yep, Jesus died for the sins of bush (though bush's sins are likely not fully covered).

Jesus also died for the sins of all the racist, bigoted, bush supporting, republican, "good christian" southern and mid western, red-state, red necks,

AND little annie coulter (who really can't be blamed; she's just another run-of-the-mill, white-trash hick - just like cheney).

2nd try.

Yep, Jesus died for the sins of bush (though bush's sins are likely not fully covered).

Jesus also died for the sins of all the racist, bigoted, bush supporting, republican, "good christian" southern and mid western, red-state, red necks,

AND little annie coulter (who really can't be blamed; she's just another run-of-the-mill, white-trash hick - just like cheney).

You know, I have a somewhat stock answer for attractive, ultra-conservative talking-head fundamentalists-who-wouldn't-know-a-scriptual-fundamental-if-it-fell-from-the-sky Republicans who consistently stir the neo-con-fascist pot with their venom and bile - and I would be honored to take this opportunity to address Ann Coulter as an Episcopalian-Jew Democrat -
"Get naked or I'll punch you in the mouth!"
Sweet Jesus... Amen.

i agree with mr. livingston's assessment of ms. coulter, that what she promotes is sick and twisted and has little or nothing to do with what jesus christ taught. but, he misses a greater and to me, a more sinister point. although what coulter, hagee, dodson et al spout doesn't comport with what mr. livingston believes, it is the face of fundamentalist, right wing political christianity. one hagee or robertson church probably has more fannies (and more voters) in it than a thousand of the "main line" congregations who agree with livingston. like it or not, the falwells and the hagees have a more legitimate claim to be the main line of american religious belief today. what we are seeing is gresham's law as it applies to religion: the bad has driven out the good. those who hold that christianity is the doctrine of the mild, the merciful and the caring are the fringe of modern religious thought.

i agree with mr. livingston's assessment of ms. coulter, that what she promotes is sick and twisted and has little or nothing to do with what jesus christ taught. but, he misses a greater and to me, a more sinister point. although what coulter, hagee, dodson et al spout doesn't comport with what mr. livingston believes, it is the face of fundamentalist, right wing political christianity. one hagee or robertson church probably has more fannies (and more voters) in it than a thousand of the "main line" congregations who agree with livingston. like it or not, the falwells and the hagees have a more legitimate claim to be the main line of american religious belief today. what we are seeing is gresham's law as it applies to religion: the bad has driven out the good. those who hold that christianity is the doctrine of the mild, the merciful and the caring are the fringe of modern religious thought.

while we're on the subject of Coulter's crowd, I just heard Dr. Laura comment on the wonderful people of San Diego at the evacuation stadium and how they are doing a marvelous job of helping each other without waiting for the government and feeling all warm and fuzzy about how their neighbors are stepping up to the plate. Then she contrasted that with the crowd at the Superdome in New Orleans who couldn't think of anything better to do than loot, complain about the lack of help and blame Bush. Even Bush is saying there's no comparison, but unless Dr. Laura is suggesting that hot humid weather explains the different responses, she has just made the worst kind of bigoted racist remark.

When you cited the fact that OVER HALF of the members of the National Council of Churches USA do not ordain women, you lost my sympathetic ear. Frankly, I am insulted that you have chosen that statistic to present the organization you lead in a positive light, especially when you are trying to convince us that the majority of American Christians are far more tolerant and inclusive than the media-darlings of the Christian Right.

When you cited the fact that OVER HALF of the members of the National Council of Churches USA do not ordain women, you lost my sympathetic ear. Frankly, I am insulted that you have chosen that statistic to present the organization you lead in a positive light, especially when you are trying to convince us that the majority of American Christians are far more tolerant and inclusive than the media-darlings of the Christian Right.

When you cited the fact that OVER HALF of the members of the National Council of Churches USA do not ordain women, you lost my sympathetic ear. Frankly, I am insulted that you have chosen that statistic to present the organization you lead in a positive light, especially when you are trying to convince us that the majority of American Christians are far more tolerant and inclusive than the media-darlings of the Christian Right.

When you cited the fact that OVER HALF of the members of the National Council of Churches USA do not ordain women, you lost my sympathetic ear. Frankly, I am insulted that you have chosen that statistic to present the organization you lead in a positive light, especially when you are trying to convince us that the majority of American Christians are far more tolerant and inclusive than the media-darlings of the Christian Right.

When you cited the fact that OVER HALF of the members of the National Council of Churches USA do not ordain women, you lost my sympathetic ear. Frankly, I am insulted that you have chosen that statistic to present the organization you lead in a positive light, especially when you are trying to convince us that the majority of American Christians are far more tolerant and inclusive than the media-darlings of the Christian Right.

When you cited the fact that OVER HALF of the members of the National Council of Churches USA do not ordain women, you lost my sympathetic ear. Frankly, I am insulted that you have chosen that statistic to present the organization you lead in a positive light, especially when you are trying to convince us that the majority of American Christians are far more tolerant and inclusive than the media-darlings of the Christian Right.

When you cited the fact that OVER HALF of the members of the National Council of Churches USA do not ordain women, you lost my sympathetic ear. Frankly, I am insulted that you have chosen that statistic to present the organization you lead in a positive light, especially when you are trying to convince us that the majority of American Christians are far more tolerant and inclusive than the media-darlings of the Christian Right.

BONNIE JACKSON wrote: I've often felt that the religion (Christianity) that I grew up with has been hijacked in the last 15 years by some of the most mean-spirited people.

I agreed. See my comments below. Not only was religion hijacked, so was the GOP.

K wrote: As long as any of you are saying "this is a christian country", found by christians and for christians, you're going to get resistance from large numbers of people - not just the atheists.

Agreed. That is probably THE BIG LIE of evangelical fundies, used to justify their efforts to insert their version of doctrine into public law via the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF). The ADF was set up by what I call the American Taliban (AT) of Dobson, Robertson, Falwell, Haggard, et al.

IMO, Coulter is a total whack job, saying outrageous things purposefully in order to get airtime, ratings, and of course, money. She should be ignored totally.

As for what happened to the GOP and religion in America, my opinion is: the same thing has happened to them both, the same thing that happened to Iran, to Afghanistan, to the Weimar Republic. They were hijacked by radical fanatics who want everyone's blood on their sword as they seek to purify their nation of some perceived stain or sin. And yes, they are very mean spirited people, to be avoided like the plague. They are zealots, the stuff that bring catastrophe and debacle, like Nazi Germany, like Islamic fundies. The USA's own evangelical fundies out on the far right are foaming at the mouth. If haters like Robertson and Falwell could have their way, America would burn gays alive at the stake, like the old Puritans did to witches in Salem, MA. Falwell is gone now, I hope the others of that ilk follow soon enough. They are a pox on us all.

"Nothing raises money more than hate..." Ron Kaufman, GOP Fundraiser