Persecution (Dec 2)

[Frigidmagi]

About the vietnam, from what I learn the born of the problem is when Diem government cancelled the election to reunite the vietnam because the communist seemed almost certain to win. Maybe it's it's a mistake of my part or maybe it's just a different point of view but it seem to me that this democraty lacked of rightness.

Vietnam... Ah Vietnam... A frankly stupid war and to be blunt a lost we took because we listened to the French. We were dragged in because they found their former colonial serfs to much of a handfull after the wreckage of WWII. They invoked the magic "C" word and we fresh from the slamming match of Korea and witnessing the brutality of USSR "interventions" in Hungray and Czechosloiva came running fast and hard. (first Marine sent to Vietnam went in the 1950s as an "advisor")

Catherine the South Veitnamese were not communist, the North Veitnamese were at no time were US troops given orders to invade North Vietnamese territory. It should be noted that the regular forces of the North Vietnamese Army did not play by the same rules, ironically they were hampered more by South Vietnamese Communist who intended not be just front men for their northern cousins (the Tet Offensive ended that as the VC was gutted and ruined and what was left collasped into the NVA organization, rather neat work I think).

South Vietnam fell after all US ground combat formations were pulled out and Congress cut off all money towards the South Vietnamese. Without money for training or equipment or US troops to make good the lack, they fell against USSR/Chinese funded NVA troops rather quickly after that. As Communist North Vietnam invaded South Vietnam. I will not however pretend that the South Vietnamese government was made up of a bunch guys. They were a cabal of ruthless men who fought mostly for the sake of their own power and standing more then anything else. Not much better then the communist, but then again at the time of the Korean War, the S Korean government was about the same. Same goes for Taiwan.

North Vietnam united the nation of Vietnam and would go on to attempt invasions and gureilla warfare upon it's neighbors in SE Asia such as Thailand and Camboidia. By then Cambodia was a snake's nest but that may be a story for another time.

[Lazerus]

The KKK has never been publically accepted in the US beyond a brief period where it had some influence as a secret society throughout the south.

Uh, LoneWolf?

There is significant evidence that several prominent politiciancs, including presidents, were Klan members.

It has been publically accepted in the U.S. It was more than a brief period. It was more than the South.

Hayes...

Are we in the same America? 'cause the one I live in has had an all-Christian congress for as long as I've lived...

And, once more, when one Muslim was elected, he said he wouldn't swear in on the Bible. but instead, the Koran, this was the result. (I'd like to remind everyone that there are four Presidents in American history who were not sworn in on a Bible. I'll leave it to you to find out who.)

What schools did you go to? My schools, All throughout Kentucky in Lousiville, Lexington, Versailles and Shelbyville, continued to pray at assemblies. There was a group at Woodford County Middle, who migrated with me to WC High, who prayed loudly at lunch, hands linked. No outcry. No one stopped them. Some people joined.

Hayes, I live in the America of Jerry Falwell, Rick Scarborough, Bill Rice Ranch, Gary Birdsong, Bob Enyart, Harold Ockenga, Lester Roloff, R. K. Johnson, Harry A. Ironside, Tim LaHaye, Bob Larson, Hal Lindsey, Edward John Carnell, Jack Chick (and Chick Publications), Ralph Ovadal, Terry Meeuwsen, Pat Robertson, Rebecca Brown, James Dobson, Grover Norquist, Paul Weyrich, Fred Phelps, George Allen, Rick Santorum, and all three Bob Jones.

Hayes, I live in the America of the 700 Club, the Family Research Council, the Heritage Foundation, the Project for the New American Century, the 'Moral Majority,' Focus on the Family, The Dominionist movement, Christian Reconstructionism, the Arlington Group, Bob Jones University, the ACCC, the Christian Coalition, the Left Behind series, the Defenders of the Christian Faith, and The Death Cookie.

God is still on the money. Xe's still in the Pledge of Allegiance. And Christmas is still a National Holiday.

What do you want? Do you want the Christian faith to never be attacked? Never be ridiculed? Never face a moment of scorn and for nothing to ever question it? Christianity has no greater power, is never less persucuted, in America than in any other place in the world.

You mentioned race. Do you really pretend racism is gone, or that there are more instances of abuse in the name of Christianity in comparison to race, gender, sexuality or other religions?

Piss Christ is 17 years old. Is this all you got? I'm surprised you didn't mention the much-more-recent Virgin Mary painted out of dung, except that that doesn't really help your case, what with the backlash at the Brooklyn Museum, the lawsuit between Offli and Giuliani, and the pulling of the painting.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them...

There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.'" - Barry Goldwater, prophet.

Hayes, you're a straight, white, Christian republican male. No matter how much you want to believe you're being persucuted, no matter how much it would help you say what you want to say and no matter how much it would make you a poor, pathetic darling and help make right everything you say:

YOU ARE NOT BEING PERSECUTED. DEAL WITH IT.

I concur with everything you say here, but I would add something else.

In this situation, and in general, it's not persecution if you arn't being singled out. Yes, people are interpreting seperation of church and state more harshly then they used too (though, as you said, god is still in the pledge), but this is not an attack on christianity. It's as if the government decided to run off more versions of a perviously rare coin, it's a general policy shift, not an attack on coin collectors.

The simple fact is, while secularism is a rising force (go us!), it directs it's resistance towards religion in general. I would be just as opposed to a Neo-Pagan or New-Age monument as the ten commandments, more, actually, because at least some of the ten commandments make sense.

You arn't being singled out, society just isn't kissing religions ass as much as they used too.

[Mutant for Hire]

Its always funny watching Christians complain of persecution, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of our elected officials, including Democrats, are Christian. The number of non-Christians in high elected offices is not large, and look at the treatment that the Muslim who got elected had to face. Try being an atheist and running for public office.

I don't get Jewish people coming up to me and asking me to convert to their faith. I don't get atheists knocking on my door and asking me to convert to atheism. I don't get Jewish people who try to pass laws to have everyone be circumcised and keep Kosher. I don't get very many non-Christians going up to my homosexual friends and telling them that they're going to go to hell and they should immediately renounce their wicked ways, friends who have often been in relationships longer than the vast majority of ostensibly good Christian marriages and being told that they can't marry.

I don't get very many pagans trying to ban vaccinations against cervical cancer becaues they fear the vaccines will promote sexual promiscuity. I don't get very many non-Christians in my life wanting to force women to seek out illegal abortions because they can't get a legal one, after denying them the contraceptive information and access that would have prevented that pregnancy in the first place. To those who say the women should not be having sex in the first place, that is imposing a Christian value on others, the same thing that "persecuted" Christians complain others are doing to them.

The real reason a lot of people including myself tend to get fed up with Christians is that far too many of them seek to impose their values on other people. If you don't want to marry a homeosexual, if you don't want to use contraception, fine, I don't think people should force you to do that. But the problem really kicks in when you try to ram those values down the throats of others.

So Christian Churches are set on fire. I happen to know that at least one of those burnings was by a Christian who felt that the Church had become too lax and had strayed from the true path. I'd like to see some hard evidence that the persecution of Christians is somehow exceeded by the attempts of Christians to persecute others who don't share their beliefs. For all the people who get in trouble for wearing a cross at work, we have cases like Walmart being under fire from Christian groups for taking a position tolerant of homosexuality.

[TMLutas]

Given the complex state of Christian affairs. I and the fact that modern evangelical christianity prompotes nothing but socially benificial cuases, and great charitable acts.

What confuses me the most is were these guys even manage to find a reason to hate us.

I remember geting scofed at by my peers as far back as grade school for praying, and geting teased and harased all through my academic carrer. Finnaly when it got really bad one time I tolled a teacher, and she just rudly brushed me off. I was eventualy taken to the principle office. He asked me to "please stop praying, that blongs in chruch or at home". From that point on I have been very warry of praying in public, like I'm hiding something.

Were do they get off dictating my beleifs.

Even for sceptics there comes a time were ones mortality forces us to ask "what do I beleave". Fear of death sure has a way of opening up your eyes.

I would have said, and will be teaching my children to say that such requests should be placed in writing. If they're not fit to be written down, the request is very likely illegitimate.

One group that might be of interest on the subject is FIRE, a group that's sort of the ACLU of the religious set.

[TMLutas]

Wah-wah...

Seriously, try to be a (moderate) muslim nowadays!

(Not that I am, but honestly, just think about it...)

To your defense, you whould hear Jihad all over the place if you soak a Quran in Urine. Just try

My insurance agent is a moderate muslim. She's probably the best advert for the religion that I know.

In the few times we've discussed religion, she's been highly critical of how the local mosque is organized.

[Greatbeast]

I don't really see HOW Christians can be considered "victims" of anything.

To be honest, the "religious/conservative" groups are almost completely made of Christians.

I will admit...there have been MANY cases where in public places religious statues of Christian messages have been moved or removed.

In many cases without reason....

BUT the fact is this:

Freedom of Religion is guaranteed in the Consitiution.

In my opinion, that also means that ONE FORM of religion should NOT be made "official" in any way. Your belief systems are a personal thing.

Mine may be different. and I may simply not want to be forced to attend prayers or be exposed other's ideas of god/God/s/esses.

The issue I see that some of the more aggressive Christian groups have is this: They feel that unless they can spread their "Message" to everyone, even in a public place, IE THEIR type of Prayer in schools, or THEIR list of religious rules displayed in public places.... WELL then, they must be persecuted!

The fact is this: If Christians want to have their religious icons or symbols displayed, or their prayers read in schools, or any other non religious public place, then they will NEED TO BE READY to have other religions symbols and rules displayed and prayers read as well.

I don't know about anyone else....But I would rather NOT be forced to listen to chanting to other peoples dieties. whether they be Hindu, Buddhist, Moslem, or anything else out there when I do not necessarily follow those beliefs.

Not to mention, even in Christian groups there are a great many individual churches that I find extremely offensive. (I attended a Baptist church a couple weeks ago when the "preacher" announced to the whole congregation at a Sunday service that he was "Glad" that someone who questioned what was being taught to the children left the church. Because this so-called preacher could NOT stand anyone questioning anything said by him. I will not be going back to that particular church. I find people like that to be an embarassment.)

[Mutant for Hire]

Given the complex state of Christian affairs. I and the fact that modern evangelical christianity prompotes nothing but socially benificial cuases, and great charitable acts.

There are Christians who I genuinely respect. Rev. Joel Hunter is one of them. He was going to be the leader of the Christian Coalition of America, until he resigned his position. Why did he resign? Because he wanted to expand the Christian Coalition's agenda from just being anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage to addressing issues like helping the poor, fighting the spread of AIDs and doing something about the environment.

"These are issues that Jesus would want us to care about," Hunter said.

And what was he told? In his own words:

"They pretty much said, "These issues are fine, but they're not our issues; that's not our base,' " Hunter said.

So explain to me why their base isn't in favor of supporting these issues? Jesus went out helping the poor and the diseased. He also had a few pointy things to say about those who would condemn others for their sinful behavior. I would be far more impressed with the evangelical movement if it genuinely followed the teachings of the person they say they do instead of trying to criminalize the things they don't like.

[Namrepus221]

I'm gonna go ahead and quote a button a friend of mine has on one of her bags here in relation to me viewing this new comic.

"How dare you presume I'm christian"


In regards to the "Kramer" thing... I watched the video of it, I looked at the stuff of the 2 gentlemen that were the "victims" have said and yes I do believe that he overreacted. Should he have used the "N-word"? Hell no he shouldn't have. Was he in the right for going on a tirade? possibly if they were truely heckling him, yes. If not, then no.

Honestly, the N-word has lost all meaning in the US for the most part. When you have hip-hop artists using it in their songs and kids as young as 12 calling their friends that as a term of endearment. There is something terribly wrong.

Do I still think that word should be used by everyone? Hell no I don't. I'm white and even I am offended when someone uses it arround me because they don't understand what the hell the word truely means.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0u7mZeCGko <- Honestly I love the fact this was able to be shown on network television nearly 3 decades ago...and no one had a damn problem with it.

[Axelgear]

That was HILARIOUS! I must admit, Richard Pryer always had a comedic flare...

[The JAM]

I find it interesting that this thread is proceeding without actual flaming.
As for persecution against Christians, well, fasten your seat belts, fellow Christians. Things are going to get uglier in the near future, yes, even in the US.

[Siirenias]

YOU ARE NOT BEING PERSECUTED. DEAL WITH IT.

This struck me as very true and rather funny.

Oh, and I agree with the mutant for hire. I honestly don't have much against people of religion. I just wish everyone kept theirs the way I keep mine: among friends; among family; private.

Anyway...I had something more pertaining to one of the issues talked about in the last one of these new "Hard Onions" comics. I honestly don't have to read them. I grazed over it a little, no offense. It's just not something I'm really interested in. I enjoy all three of his other comics, what's one of four, eh? I think he's clever, smart and stuff. He's not perfect. It's plain to see I'm not either. I'm just going to go over there now and eat this raw onion.

[Rbos]

I think it's a little silly to claim that Christians in the USA are being persecuted. Prejudiced against, certainly. They're a big target, and big targets, all things equal, will get a proportionately larger number of attacks by people dissatisfied with their lot in life, or trying to make a statement. This is just what Christians have to put up with, currently being on top of the religious heap as they currently are in the USA.

Artists are going to make nonsensical statements to try and rile you guys up. That's just going to happen. The Internet has a word for people like this: "troll". Ralph, I'm afraid you, and a lot of the Christian community, did exactly what those artists wanted: you were troll-baited by the guy who did the cross-in-urine thing. The sensible thing to do is to ignore them. They have the freedom to say what they like; that's one of the beauties of the Constitution. It does not harm you in any way to see a crucifix dunked in urine.

In fact, doesn't Jesus Himself teach, that the symbol is not the thing? That artist slapped you; does it not behoove you to offer the other cheek? "Here, does it make you happy to dunk a cross in urine? Also have this Bible. Are you pleased with yourself, yet?"

You reacted very strongly about Muslims' reactions about 'mistreatment' of the Quran; are you going to do the same thing? The Quran is just a symbol. I'd like to submit to you that it is hypocrisy for you to say that Christian outrage to the mistreatment of the Crucifix is justified, while Muslim outrage to the mistreatment of the Quran is not. They're both stupid.

Talk to me about persecution when the government sanctions their socioeconomic disadvantaging, or outright attacks them.

Lack of support is not persecution. Removing support is not persecution. Read the New Testament and see persecution. Look at China, and see persecution. Look at the fat Christian-American politicians trying to legislate their morals.. frankly, I don't see it.

[Rbos]

addendum to previous post: you'll probably bring up the fact that it was government-funded. Probably a grant.

Grant givers rarely know what the artist will do with the money, and they don't generally specify things like "don't trash Christians with it". The artist, while I think he was a troll, was perfectly free to do it with the money he had. It's not like a politician went to some dipwad artist and said "here, here's some cash, go dip a cross in pee." At least, I hope not.

[Frigidmagi]

You reacted very strongly about Muslims' reactions about 'mistreatment' of the Quran; are you going to do the same thing? The Quran is just a symbol. I'd like to submit to you that it is hypocrisy for you to say that Christian outrage to the mistreatment of the Crucifix is justified, while Muslim outrage to the mistreatment of the Quran is not. They're both stupid.

One group grumbled, wrote letters and speaks about it on the internet. The other group rioted, killed people and burned down buildings. I would submit lumping the behaviors togather is in and of itself less then smart.

As for myself. The artist is perfectly free to make what he wishes. That is his right, granted by the Constitution. I am just as free however to express anger, dismay and horror at what he made, as long has I do no harm and break no law. That is my right, granted by the Constitution.

[Steltek]

How can a majority be oppressed by a minority? That question, and the implied answer "It cannot." lie at the core of the declaration that Christians are not persecuted in this country, and we should stop "whining".

But I propose to offer a different answer to your question. Many of you ask "How can a minority oppress a majority, particularly in a democracy?" Well, if the democracy perfectly operates as it should, then I concede that it cannot.

But, let us take a step back. We see that in the absence of democracy, a majority can certainly be oppressed by a minority. That fact is plainly expressed in the discarded systems of feudalism and monarchy, wherein a few lords and kings rule over serfs and peasants. What insight does this offer into the question at hand? Merely to illustrate a historical precedent for the oppression of a majority by a minority. Where it applies in our modern society is what I propose to examine next.

So, in a democracy, to oppress the majority, you must simply find away around democracy. You must, in short, resort to some less than democratic means to achieve your goals. I contend that such means are exactly those employed against Christians. The methods are much the same as they were in the days of feudalism.

First, if you want to set an elite minority above the majority, then seek for yourself special protections and special status under the law, using whatever pretense you can find. Because most people are not inclined to raise the black flag and start slitting throats at the first sign of tyranny, they are likely to accept injustice so long as it's official, legal injustice.

Second, manipulate cultural expression to make yourself seem better than the majority. Portray the majority as destructive buffoons in fiction, and slant news coverage of them the same way. It's all the more effective if you can create sympathy on the part of the majority, or in other words get the very people you're trying to suppress on board with your propaganda against them.

Finally, it's rather hard to get any legislation against a majority, even using the above methods, so focus on the least accountable authority to secure the legal clout you need. In the case of the USA, that's the judicial branch. It's much easier to pack the courts with your shills and idealogical cronies than to pack the legislature with the same, at least for any length of time.

The above comprises the recipe of various anti-Christian organizations for doing an end-run around democracy, and forcing the world view of a minority upon the majority. They may not always command the government, but they don't need to -- commanding education and the media (which they do in spades) is a surer bet in the long run. After all, the philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next. They are smart enough to know that if they can control what people see and hear and learn, then the political battle is secondary, and will be won in due time anyway.

In a perfect democracy, an elite minority cannot oppress a majority. But our democracy, while great, is not perfect.

Incidentally, I do not blame the anti-Christians for this state of affairs -- I blame Christians. The elites and their followers mistakenly believe we want to play the victim -- they complain about that because as far as they are concerned that's their little schtick, and it's no fair of us to steal it. This is part of why we will win -- because the other side does not even begin to understand us. We don't want to be victims, because unlike them we don't buy this silly aristocracy of failure, weakness, and mediocrity where victimhood is some kind of twisted nobility. We want to cultivate a culture of victors, not a culture of victims.

But we have been lax, we have been apathetic. In spite of everything, we have more capability than we are using, far more. We let this happen. Fortunately, the trend is shifting. You see, the "whining" you hear is actually a yawn -- unfortunately for our enemies, we are waking up from our too-long sleep. We are about to get to work, and we have a lot of lost time to make up for.

[Merry]

In the few times we've discussed religion, she's been highly critical of how the local mosque is organized.

Yeah, good point. In Switzerland, we have 7 different groups of muslims. Dont ask me why, I thought for a long time there where only 2 different groups of them. But they organize small, it seems. And they handle stuff very different. So, if someone says in the paper he speaks for all muslims, he is probably lying (by not telling the whole truth) because he is speaking for 20% of them, tops. Very, very unorganized.

I myself was targetting something different with: "Try to be a muslim". I should have elaborated that and said: "Try to be a muslim and fly a plane". I frequented London Stansted Airport in the last few Months, and boy, I didnt want to be one of those guys. It was bad enough standing in a mile-long-que, but the treatment everyone of this religion, with a sufficient "brown" skintone got, was something RHJ would probably declare "Spanish Inquisition" if he feels prosecuted atm.

[Tom Mazanec]

I hope Christians "wake up". However, when we do, I hope we do not prove that, in a democracy, it is possible for a majority to unfairly persecute a minority. It may be a tough balancing act.

[Canis_lupus]

How can a majority be oppressed by a minority? That question, and the implied answer "It cannot." lie at the core of the declaration that Christians are not persecuted in this country, and we should stop "whining".

I think its not realy that they are persecuting them, but more that they can get away with what would be deemed offensive if it were reversed. exp. a black man can call a white man a honkey and get away with it no problem, but if the white man calls the black man a n-----r then he gets rioted against and called a racist.

[Rbos]

One group grumbled, wrote letters and speaks about it on the internet. The other group rioted, killed people and burned down buildings. I would submit lumping the behaviors togather is in and of itself less then smart.

I wasn't talking about that; I was talking specifically about Ralph's reaction: one of barely repressed glee about desecration of Muslim symbols, and outrage at desecration of Christian symbols.

"The other guy is worse" is not a defence of your own actions.

[Sapphire]

addendum to previous post: you'll probably bring up the fact that it was government-funded. Probably a grant.

Grant givers rarely know what the artist will do with the money, and they don't generally specify things like "don't trash Christians with it". The artist, while I think he was a troll, was perfectly free to do it with the money he had. It's not like a politician went to some dipwad artist and said "here, here's some cash, go dip a cross in pee." At least, I hope not.

As I previously explained, government money went to that photograph second hand. NEA endowment went to a museum/art center who held a contest and gave the top prize to the stupid thing. Combined with your info removes the government from the... thing... even further.

The way everybody's trying to frame it is that Big Ol' Evil Liberal Government PC Christian-Hater came down and laughed his head off at a crucifix in urine and gave the guy a buttload of taxpayer money.

But, let us take a step back. We see that in the absence of democracy, a majority can certainly be oppressed by a minority. That fact is plainly expressed in the discarded systems of feudalism and monarchy, wherein a few lords and kings rule over serfs and peasants. What insight does this offer into the question at hand? Merely to illustrate a historical precedent for the oppression of a majority by a minority. Where it applies in our modern society is what I propose to examine next.

So, in a democracy, to oppress the majority, you must simply find away around democracy. You must, in short, resort to some less than democratic means to achieve your goals. I contend that such means are exactly those employed against Christians. The methods are much the same as they were in the days of feudalism.

First, if you want to set an elite minority above the majority, then seek for yourself special protections and special status under the law, using whatever pretense you can find. Because most people are not inclined to raise the black flag and start slitting throats at the first sign of tyranny, they are likely to accept injustice so long as it's official, legal injustice.

Second, manipulate cultural expression to make yourself seem better than the majority. Portray the majority as destructive buffoons in fiction, and slant news coverage of them the same way. It's all the more effective if you can create sympathy on the part of the majority, or in other words get the very people you're trying to suppress on board with your propaganda against them.

Finally, it's rather hard to get any legislation against a majority, even using the above methods, so focus on the least accountable authority to secure the legal clout you need. In the case of the USA, that's the judicial branch. It's much easier to pack the courts with your shills and idealogical cronies than to pack the legislature with the same, at least for any length of time.

The above comprises the recipe of various anti-Christian organizations for doing an end-run around democracy, and forcing the world view of a minority upon the majority. They may not always command the government, but they don't need to -- commanding education and the media (which they do in spades) is a surer bet in the long run. After all, the philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next. They are smart enough to know that if they can control what people see and hear and learn, then the political battle is secondary, and will be won in due time anyway.

Steltek, what you are suggesting is conspiracy theory of the highest order, ranking up there with loose change, liberal media, the evolution conglomerate, illuminati, or OLPEC.

What you suggest is that anti-Christianism has managed to controll television, news, print, public opinion, language, the Internet and even our private and personal thoughts in order to create a mindset of "Christians are bad" in such a way that now they controll all forms of legislation and law. What is this?

Besides which, even if it were true, wouldn't the effect be a little more devastating? So far as I can see, Chrisitianity is still holding a lot of sway both socially and politically. The 'whining' comes from a push to have more being met with opposition.

I refer you again to Dennis Prager's remarks on Keith Ellison's swearing-in. This is the 'persuction' that Christians face. This is the great horrible wound that RHJ wishes to use as his battle cry. Chrisitans are simply losing ground as power of the majority, at worst, or are being forced to back down from where we never should have been. That's it. And its not unreasonable. In fact, the only thing unreasonable is the outrcry of 'persucution' when government endorses Chrisitianity a little bit less, or when a forced endorsement thereof is shot down.

Incidentally, I do not blame the anti-Christians for this state of affairs -- I blame Christians. The elites and their followers mistakenly believe we want to play the victim -- they complain about that because as far as they are concerned that's their little schtick, and it's no fair of us to steal it. This is part of why we will win -- because the other side does not even begin to understand us. We don't want to be victims, because unlike them we don't buy this silly aristocracy of failure, weakness, and mediocrity where victimhood is some kind of twisted nobility. We want to cultivate a culture of victors, not a culture of victims.

Oh, yeah, sure, its not human nature to desire victimhood. The psychology of victimhood isn't something that analysts like Zur (2006), Santy (2006), Dineen (1996), Zilbergeld (1983), Greene (2002), Zimbardo (2002), Slater (2003) and others have studied, or have found to be largely universal particularly in American Culture. Sure, there isn't a reason why anyone would ever want to believe they aren't in the majority, aren't besically given all the benefits of their idealogies, aren't they whose bloodline is littered with the persucuters of old. There isn't any possible reason Hayes, you, Mazanec, et. al., could want to believe you are victims when you aren't.

And, while you're rewriting psychology, sociology, and a large part of history in order to make youself the winning triumphant force, o great new Arthur, why don't you prewrite yourself winning the war you've delcared yourself?

I hope Christians "wake up". However, when we do, I hope we do not prove that, in a democracy, it is possible for a majority to unfairly persecute a minority. It may be a tough balancing act.

'Waking up' seems to be a recurring theme. Persecution is being used as the reasoning for the call to awaken. Of course, its absolutely ridiculous to suggest that one wants to be persecuted in order to justify ralllying together in order to strengthen and further Chrisitianist politics. Oh what folly.

The truth of the matter is that, conspiracies and conscious miswordings aside, this is simply an excuse to go to war for people who really like war. This is not 'waking up,' no matter how much it would make the movement look better, but battle. This is a return to very old values. The Chrisitian state. This is a war on science in every form, a war on secularism, a war on the politicians who don't believe they speak for God, a war on the policies which don't support a very narrow-minded view of God and the Bible, a war on dissent, a war on all things which take away from the power some find in invoking the name of God.

These are people who don't want to make the world better objectively. These are pople who want to make the world the best place for everyone to worship Christ, and, of course, all the other things they want to further.

Now quit your whining, your chest-beating, and your otherwise ridiculous bullshit, Melenkai.