Title: "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech
Not really, unless Santorum is a Charismatic Catholic. Most of the standard Catholic folks don't recognize them as being Catholic. Gingrich may be the victim of those who determine how Catholic one is by the length of time in the Church. To be REALLY Catholic, you almost have to be born into it. Johnny come lately Catholics have to earn acceptance.

David

"Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz

 


On 4/16/2012 11:50 PM, [email protected] wrote:
 
What continues to amaze me is how Santorum lost the Catholic vote to Romney
and how Gingrich, a Catholic himself  ( for several years now ) got approximately
0 % of the Catholic vote.
 
Anyone have an explanation ?
 
Billy
 
=============================================
 
 
4/16/2012 9:43:52 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
Last time I checked, most Catholics weren't part of the Religious Right and voted for Obama. I agree with Billy that Obama is off of the Christian reservation far more than he is on it. A white Christian Reverend praising a white Farrakhan type preacher would be tossed from their church. 

The Catholics appear to be some of the most ticked off at the moment.

David

"Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz

 


On 4/16/2012 3:33 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Ernie :
As much of a comparative religionist as I am, plus pro-evolution and non-blue nose
about heterosexuality, about the Bible there is this "fundamentalist" streak in me
that is here to stay.
 
You said :
" liberal Christianity that is accepting of homosexuals and abortion..."
 
Is this genuine Christianity or is it another religion which simply makes use of
traditional Christian language to mask its un-Christian character ?
Anyway, Barton's point was that BHO is anti-Biblical.
About that I don't see where there is much wiggle room
for disagreement.
 
So it boils down to the worth / value / authority of the Bible when read carefully
for original intent and for here-and-now spiritual guidance.
 
Billy
 
 
=================================
 
 
4/16/2012 1:20:58 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
Hi Billy,

On Apr 15, 2012, at 8:44 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Don't take my word. Read the numerous examples since 2008
of Obama's anti-Jewish, anti-Christian,  and pro-Muslim statements.
My count is that there are 49 major examples, each one documented
in the reputable media. 

I dunno, there's a lot of connecting dots here to put the most negative slant possible. The facts are correct, but the interpretation isn't exactly ironclad.

You can certainly make the case that Obama is a blueblood secularist liberal.  He adheres pretty consistently to liberal rationalist dogma, and ignores religious view that conflict with that agenda; while of course patronizing "minority" religions that are the darling of the Left.

That's not the same as direct hostility to Christianity, though; I don't think he has any opposition to a liberal Christianity that is accepting of homosexuals and abortion and downplays the value of evangelism. 

Then again, Obama's apathy/contempt towards religious rights (especially of the Religious Right :-/) is probably more damaging than outright hatred would be, so the larger point holds.

-- Ernie P.

--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
 
 
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to