As a preacher, a "born-again zealot" as you would call it, please keep your
personal opinions to yourself. This news group is about antennas, not
anti-religion rants.

Randy Ka4nma

Theplanters95 wrote in message
...
As a preacher, a "born-again zealot" as you would call it, please keep your
personal opinions to yourself. This news group is about antennas, not
anti-religion rants.

Randy Ka4nma

Hi Randy,

Religious fanaticism is anti liberty, and liberty
is the foundation of American values. To speak
out against this lunacy does not make one anti
religious, just anti fanatic... anti zealot - a
distinction that seems to have evaded you.

The Islamic Jihadist's and terrorists are religious
zealots (fanatics) that hate liberty loving folks
(liberals) every bit as much as you do. Zealots
are zealots, regardless of clothes they wear or
the deity they worship.

Jesus' sermon on the mound, was certainly NOT
about fanaticism... or political power, deception,
and spreading lies about opponents... just the
opposite, in fact!

That said, you should have noticed the topic
of my post was about political ramifications in
regards to ham radio. It was not anti-religious.

Chuck, WA7RAI

Chuck,

If you check American History, you will see a lot of colonies were founded for
religious freedom. As a Baptist, one of our unique features is an emphasis on
religious liberty. We can agree to disagree, but true Chrisitanity seeks
liberty. Also, many of our presidents were Christian or religious. Religious
expression is found in our guiding documents, such as the Dec. of Independence,
and the Constitution.

Islam is not the same as Christianity. Not all religions are the same or teach
the same. Just remember that "theology" can be different, but ethics, such as
the Golden Rule, can be the same.Look at the core beliefs and you will see
major differences. One of the differences is that Islam practices conversion
by the sword. Some misguided Christians in the past have also practiced it,
but as you point out the Sermon on the Mount does not support it.

I am a Christian "fanatic" as it is my job and my passion. It has changed my
life for the better. I vote my Christian beliefs, irregardless of the
political party. And the Bible tells us to pray for the kings over us. Since
we do not have a king, but we can see a principle to pray for our government
leaders - All of them.

It is not lunacy to accept and practice religious belief (and I am talking in
general terms of all the world religions and sects). What is lunacy is to
misapply religion and use for personal gain, to control people or put people
down because of differing beliefs (For more religious discrimination, check out
Islam and Hinduism, and the Eastern Orthodox churches).

As you said, the foundation of American Values is liberty and that includes the
free practice of religious beliefs.

BTW instead of WWJD, WRJU - What Radio would Jesus Use? With all of his
travels, I would guess an FT-817 portable radio. :-)

Randy

"Theplanters95" wrote in message
...
Chuck,

If you check American History, you will see a lot of colonies were founded
for
religious freedom. As a Baptist, one of our unique features is an
emphasis on
religious liberty. We can agree to disagree, but true Chrisitanity seeks
liberty. Also, many of our presidents were Christian or religious.
Religious
expression is found in our guiding documents, such as the Dec. of
Independence,
and the Constitution.


Yep, and that expression is one of hope that the government not be beholden
to any Official Christianity. For the past couple of millennia, Official
Christianity has been seeking the divine path and simultaneously
exterminating all those who would diverge from the Official Truth. Life has
gotten very troublesome when several competing versions of Official
Christian Truth have had to share the same time and space.

Christianity does not seek liberty, and in the historical record, has often
been liberty's greatest foe. Of the various flavors of Christianity
available today, broadly, to be a Christian, you have to either recognize a
religious hierarchy as superior to your individual liberty, or accept the
literal word of the Bible, which can only be done by Faith (which let's you
ignore a whole lot of problematic Biblical advice).

The trouble with being a True Believer is that there is no way to agree to
disagree. No matter how politely you disagree with my truth, that's heresy!
How can I let a heretic teach my kids in public school? I must struggle (in
the best jihad sense) to help the truth prevail. You must be persuaded,
re-educated, or.... eliminated.

BTW, I think that only Rhode Island & Providence Plantations was formed
mostly for religious freedom (fleeing the hobnailed boots of religious
intolerance then existing in....., uhhh, Massachusetts), all the other
American colonies were formed to turn a profit for an investment trust. And,
a hundred years later, those God-fearing folks were up to their eyebrows in
utilizing and turning a big profit from black slavery. Who woulda thunk it,
Brown Sugar?

Ed
wb6wsn

Theplanters95 wrote in message
...
Chuck,

If you check American History, you will see a lot of colonies were founded for
religious freedom. As a Baptist, one of our unique features is an emphasis on
religious liberty. We can agree to disagree, but true Chrisitanity seeks
liberty. Also, many of our presidents were Christian or religious. Religious
expression is found in our guiding documents, such as the Dec. of Independence,
and the Constitution.

Islam is not the same as Christianity. Not all religions are the same or teach
the same. Just remember that "theology" can be different, but ethics, such as
the Golden Rule, can be the same.Look at the core beliefs and you will see
major differences. One of the differences is that Islam practices conversion
by the sword. Some misguided Christians in the past have also practiced it,
but as you point out the Sermon on the Mount does not support it.

I am a Christian "fanatic" as it is my job and my passion. It has changed my
life for the better. I vote my Christian beliefs, irregardless of the
political party. And the Bible tells us to pray for the kings over us. Since
we do not have a king, but we can see a principle to pray for our government
leaders - All of them.

It is not lunacy to accept and practice religious belief (and I am talking in
general terms of all the world religions and sects). What is lunacy is to
misapply religion and use for personal gain, to control people or put people
down because of differing beliefs (For more religious discrimination, check out
Islam and Hinduism, and the Eastern Orthodox churches).

As you said, the foundation of American Values is liberty and that includes the
free practice of religious beliefs.

Indeed, which includess the liberty to not practice
a religion as well.

To consider Hinduism and Islam as similar, strongly
suggests a lack of understanding of either.

In regards to discrimination, one must understand
Hinduism believes in the law of Karma: "as ye sow
so shall ye reap". If one is born to a lowly state in
this life, it is a result of bad actions in a previous life,
thus one is deserving of their current state of
existence.

That said, I agree that true Christianity seeks liberty
(It is obvious that the Christ's teachings were liberal)
but the modern Christian Churches do not practice
true Christianity at all.

Allow me to elaborate:

Islam, Judaism, and modern Christianity all believe
in the god of Abraham. The Christ said he came to
"throw out the old law" - which can only be construed
as meaning the OT and the god of Abraham.

Christ's God is a God of love, compassion, brotherly
love, humility, judge not, and live and let live, etc...

In contrast, Abraham's god was violent, angry,
hateful, jealous, full of spite, and sought vengeance
by killing the unfaithful.

From this, it is easy to see why the world is so
violent and full of hate, given that the major religions
use such a horrific deity as an example for living
one's life.

Chuck, WA7RAI

Chuck,

Reread my post. I said that Islam and Hinduism both practice religious
discrimination. In fact Islam is monthiestic will Hindi's are polytheistic.

As you posted, religious liberty includes the right not to practice. But
religious liberty also includes my right to vote based on religious beliefs, to
work as a minister seeking to help mankind, and even evangelise and pass out
information in public forums.

Of the 13 colonies that were founded for religious freedom, I can think of
Mass., Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. 5 out of 13.
Several other colonies offered freedom from religious discrimination.

Randy

"Theplanters95" wrote in message
...
Chuck,

Reread my post. I said that Islam and Hinduism both practice religious
discrimination. In fact Islam is monthiestic will Hindi's are
polytheistic.

As you posted, religious liberty includes the right not to practice. But
religious liberty also includes my right to vote based on religious
beliefs, to
work as a minister seeking to help mankind, and even evangelise and pass
out
information in public forums.

Of the 13 colonies that were founded for religious freedom, I can think
of
Mass., Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. 5 out of 13.
Several other colonies offered freedom from religious discrimination.

Randy

Massachusetts was hardly "founded for religious freedom." It was founded by
true believers who had The Answer. Escaping persecution doesn't mean one
won't practice it when in power.

A strong case can be made that Hinduism is basically monotheistic -- as with
many/most religions (Rabbinical Judaism and Islam excepted) the popular
beliefs tend toward polytheism (e.g., Christian trinity, saints and he
semi-deification of Mary).

While "work as a minister seeking to help mankind" might not be technically
oxymoronic it is not more meaningful than "work as a garbage collector (or
even, gasp, an EE) to help mankind."

Paul

p.paulfriedman wrote:
"Theplanters95" wrote in message
...

Chuck,

Reread my post. I said that Islam and Hinduism both practice religious
discrimination. In fact Islam is monthiestic will Hindi's are
polytheistic.

As you posted, religious liberty includes the right not to practice. But
religious liberty also includes my right to vote based on religious
beliefs, to
work as a minister seeking to help mankind, and even evangelise and pass
out
information in public forums.

Of the 13 colonies that were founded for religious freedom, I can think
of
Mass., Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. 5 out of 13.
Several other colonies offered freedom from religious discrimination.

Randy


Massachusetts was hardly "founded for religious freedom." It was founded by
true believers who had The Answer. Escaping persecution doesn't mean one
won't practice it when in power.

A strong case can be made that Hinduism is basically monotheistic -- as with
many/most religions (Rabbinical Judaism and Islam excepted) the popular
beliefs tend toward polytheism (e.g., Christian trinity, saints and he
semi-deification of Mary).

While "work as a minister seeking to help mankind" might not be technically
oxymoronic it is not more meaningful than "work as a garbage collector (or
even, gasp, an EE) to help mankind."

Paul



Most of the hick preachers I've known have spent more time
helping themselves to their followers money than helping mankind.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Theplanters95 wrote in message
...
Chuck,

Reread my post. I said that Islam and Hinduism both practice religious
discrimination. In fact Islam is monthiestic will Hindi's are polytheistic.

Well, actually, the Hundu religion is
monotheistic as well: many sub-deities, but
only one God.

Modern Christianity has many sub-deities
as well, only they are called angels.

The Hundu God is a loving god, as that of
the Christ, not warlike like the god of
Abraham which faux-Christians worship
today.

In any case, I took issue with your notion
of discrimination... perhaps you should
re-read my post.


As you posted, religious liberty includes the right not to practice. But
religious liberty also includes my right to vote based on religious beliefs, to
work as a minister seeking to help mankind, and even evangelise and pass out
information in public forums.

Yes, you can vote any way you wish, but if
your church holds a non-profit status, then
passing out political fliers is illegal, since this
makes your church a political orginization,
subject to taxation.

You do not have a right to be a criminal,
nor is it ethical (or honest) to usurp the
intent or spirit of that law.

If you really want to help mankind, then
mind your own business (worry about
'saving' yourself, not others) since
historically, religion has been responsible
for most wars, oppression, and human
misery!


Of the 13 colonies that were founded for religious freedom, I can think of
Mass., Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. 5 out of 13.
Several other colonies offered freedom from religious discrimination.


Folks left Europe for the 'New World' mainly
to get away religious oppression - similar to
what we can expect from perverted cults like
your power hungry Pat Robertson's coalition.
You can Justify your actions by any number
of historical revisions, but the fact remains;
America was founded as a secular nation and
religion has no role to play in its government.

Now, if a bunch of crazy Mullah's were to take
your position - wishing to influence government
policy - your position would take a 180° turn in
NY minute... flip-flop!

Chuck, WA7RAI

Randy

On 28 Sep 2004 07:07:56 GMT, ospam
(Theplanters95) wrote:

Islam is not the same as Christianity.

Maybe, but you both pray to the same God and Islam recognises Jesus
as a prophet. Who's right?