On 11/09/2004 04:29 PM, Collins Richey wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 18:23:38 -0600, Alma J Wetzker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't know where you formed you opinion of the man. The caricature you are
describing does not match John Ashcroft. John Ashcroft's only visible failing
that I can see is that he is a conservative.
Now you've reached the point of the issue. A conservative = a Christian = a zealot = never acceptable to leftists. The man could have the moral convictions and demonstrated care for humanity of a Sister Theresa, but he is still a conservative and therefore not acceptable in polite societry.
I don't care what anyone's religious beliefs are. Its their own business. I don't force mine on anyone, and all agents of government in the united states are legally prohibited from doing the same. Ashcroft somehow decided that law doesn't apply to him.
Just so I understand, How do you define religious beliefs? Is covering the naked breasts of statues a religious belief? Is opposing abortion a religious belief? Is being honest a religious belief? Is determining whom to tax to alleviate suffering and help the poor a religious belief? I have the dangerous ability to justify anything by connecting it to something else in ways others may miss. I can see how almost any political issue can be defined as a religious belief for one side or the other. John Kerry certainly had a firm faith that rolling back tax cuts and imposing additional taxes would help. Kerry had absolutely no qualms about imposing those beliefs on America should he be elected. How are the results of religious beliefs worse when they enter the secular world?
-- Alma _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsub/Pause/Etc -> http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
