I overheard a conversation the other day that was somewhat disturbing. Two "boomers" nearing retirement age were talking about the similarities between Islamo fascist fanatics and Christian fundamentalists. The two agreed that both groups were essentially identical. Both had their fanatics but the Christian fundamentalists were trying to take over our government and force their ideals upon the country. This went on for several minutes and included vague references to specific leftist websites. I considered jumping into the fray to debunk their black helicopter doom and gloom theories of impending theocracy. Unfortunately I was pressed for time and still had to battle 45 miles of rush hour traffic to get back to the warehouse.
I considered what they "feared". Christian fundamentalists. The fanatics of any religion, group or cause can and should be feared for good reason. Extreme viewpoints, right OR left, are not necessarily based on truth but on fear and ignorance. These two seemingly rational gentlemen were conversing about an irrational fear as if they were about to be handcuffed and forcibly taken to a church.
"Dem Christians is gonna take over the gubment and make us obey them 10 Commandments." (my sarcastic interpretation of their conversation)
Currently the government (local and federal authorities) actually enforces some tenets of those commandments. There's that murder thingy, uh...the stealing whatchamacallit and the uh....oh, the lying stuff, like under oath, just to name a few. There are consequences for disobeying those laws that the local and federal governments have deemed necessary to maintain order in our society. If you look at those commandments from a secular viewpoint, what really is there to disagree with? I suppose you could disagree with the commandment that says you should not covet your neighbors wife and his possessions. However it does seem to be a healthier practice not to engage in coveting. It seemingly could alleviate all sorts of friction between folks if we were just happy with our own "stuff" and respected the other folks and their "stuff".
Seems to me that the two gents and their conversation could easily have been excerpted from something you read in an opinion piece in Time or Newsweek or a 60 Minutes special report. Any MSM outlet would be proud to "uncover" the fact that someone's faith guides their decision making process. Headlines that question whether politics and religion should mix or even be allowed are common. Articles that mock individuals of faith are not printed on the opinion pages where they should be. This article is a good example of a journalistic hit piece. The entire story is laid out in a fashion that encourages the reader to think that the person being defamed is a nut job. This particular article by the Palm Beach Post Political Editor, Brian E. Crowley, shows an immediate bias (in my opinion) even from the headline.
It's no wonder the agnostic sheeple, who only expose themselves to the alphabet soup networks and liberal newspapers, are cowering in fear of religious fanatics. They have no clue what it means to be (according to them) "religious" or "spiritual". Those terms are tossed around in a self-aggrandizing manner. Being spiritual has almost become a secular term for someone who is in touch with their inner self.
"I feel I am a very spiritual person".
As for being "religious", that becomes a negative term. One does not want to be associated with religious zealots, do they? Therefore, one should avoid being pigeonholed as a Catholic or Protestant or Jew. One should be above all that nonsense and just be spiritual.
"I'm not a very religious person. I feel that I am more of a spiritual being than a religious one."
This way one does not have to answer any questions about what one believes or why. One can be assured that people will understand that one does not necessarily believe in anything other than oneself.
Two things you don't talk about with friends and family, politics and religion. If I was successful in my posting I will have ostracised both of those groups. I will then have dinner conversations all to myself and I.