You agree with Bush pushing his faith .....

[prettyredhead]

Onto the people of Iraq, and other Americans. He went to war now on Conviction and belief. Goddammit. The religion of one is not the religion of all.
I think we should never have a religious man in the White House if he cannot tolerate other peoples beliefs.

[macnpat]

Originally posted by prettyredhead, Onto the people of Iraq, and other Americans. He went to war now on Conviction and belief. Goddammit. The religion of one is not the religion of all. I think we should never have a religious man in the White House if he cannot tolerate other peoples beliefs.

Ya lost me. Where has Bush said he cannot tolerate other people's beliefs?

[Pooeypants]

Originally posted by macnpat,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (macnpat,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-prettyredhead, Onto the people of Iraq, and other Americans. He went to war now on Conviction and belief. Goddammit. The religion of one is not the religion of all. I think we should never have a religious man in the White House if he cannot tolerate other peoples beliefs.

Ya lost me. Where has Bush said he cannot tolerate other people's beliefs?[/b][/quote]
I think she meant that the actions of GWB conveys the message of this kind.

Possibly.

[Compugasm]

There is nowhere to go with this post, except bomb throwing. It sounds to me, you were watching some TV program and worked yourself into a frenzy again, and came here to vent.

[Suburbanite]

butterface

[Gorgo]

Bush's ideas for superstition-based programs are way out of line. Unconstitutional, unscientific and unbelievable.

[Section 8]

No sources, no debate, nothing. This will only start a flame war.

[Vee]

i admit there is nothing to debate here
but there is potential for discussion and butterface would seem to harsh to me
personally i think general would've sufficed.

[Section 8]

General isn't really for political related discussion, there are really no "levels" to the butterface.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Vee, i admit there is nothing to debate here but there is potential for discussion and butterface would seem to harsh to me personally i think general would've sufficed.

I think we need to clarify something here, and that is just what the Butterface is for.
For one thing, people have been referring to it as a some smack on the wrist or a badge of shame where naughty little threads go when they're bad! :) It is not entirely that. Sure, the flame wars which pop up from time to time go here, as well as the baseless rants so devoid of substance they need to go SOMEWHERE, as long as it isn't where they started.

But it's also for the threads that would hover at the fringes of any other category, and the ones which, although possibly good fuel for debate, are too emotionally charged for the other areas. This includes Gen. Discussion.

In fact, what I'd like to see is people thinking about where their new thread may go and what it's all about even before they start it. It MIGHT be perfect to start right here! If you want to say it but think it might get too hot, put it in Butterface to begin with.

Personally, I have found that, from time to time, some of the more interesting threads have been put HERE, and I look in here every day just to see what's up.

[Technosoul]

Okay, during the last debate between Bush and Kerry the reporter thought it was imporant to ask Bush about his religious attitudes, especially in light of what he has said and what he has attempted to do.

When he first started to let us know he intended to attack Iraq he used the word "crusade" (a Christian word of a religious war agenda). He talked about the axes of evil. "Evil" is a religious word suggesting demons and what not.

In the last debate he said that he had this vision to spread freedom and decomarcy to all the countires of the world, and he added "this is what God wants". Based on his record we can guess he would reach that gobal goal by premptive wars based on his belief that "free nations do not harbor terrorists".

In addition he is running for office by outlining religious policies about gay marrages, abortion, stem cell research (which is anit- the belief systems of science) and he no doubt would support prayers in schools and creationism be instructed in a science class on evolution.

He might favor only those in the Islamic faith who stay in their place and do not tell their people what to believe or to do. It is clear he must deal with a number of Islamic peoples due to the oil busness and so he mostly is not in favor of those who a thron in the side of Halliburton.

So I do not think this topic is totally out of place, Bush made religion a "political topic" because he is running on that kind of ticket to gain voting support from stern Christians.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Technosoul, So I do not think this topic is totally out of place, Bush made religion a "political topic" because he is running on that kind of ticket to gain voting support from stern Christians.

I didn't move this topic so I can't say exactly what the specific reason was. I suppose it could be a problemm of WHERE to put it, in that it could be religion, politics Or Gen. Discussion. It seems to have enough to be in either one.
However, it is here, but remember what I said. It's not dead and I think it is a good enough subject to keep it going. The Butterface is not the trash can.

So...

I believe this is another area no president has any business going into. You can be religious, sure, but be religious on your own time. Bush is a fool to be so arrogant as to think he even comes close to having the right to impose his own religion's standards on the millions of people who do not share his particular faith.
I agree with what Kerry said when he stated he didn't have the right to impose his own beliefs on the nation. John Kennedy said the same thing when the opposition was smearing him by saying he would take orders from Rome.

I wish there was a Muslim running for president this year. Not so he would be elected, but to expose the hypocricy of Bush supporters when they slammed the Muslim guy for wanting to push his belifs on the American people, and they surely would be accusing the candidate of taking orders from Allah.

[Technosoul]

At least the message title still appears in the politcal section only just noted it was moved. I think the perception about Butterface (what would that name suggest?) is for dum messages is because somewhere it states "topics only mother would like" - well, a mother thinks their kid is a superstar even if they far below grade. So this is a place for topics that only the poster's mother would think are worthy of attention, because her kid wrote it?

But I think if Bush is trying to be a poster child for religious agendas then that is of concern for voters on both sides of the fense (secular and religious). We know Kerry would be a fool to attack Bush for being religious but we got this blurring of the lines between church and state under the Bush policy to become a role model for his interpretation of rightiousness.

Now I would not advocate flaming Bush like a witch at the stake for talking to God and getting questionable information in returned conversation. I don't know, perhaps the Department of God has a problem communicating correct information to Bush just like the FBI and CIA had that problem? Perhaps he needs an "attitude hearing examination"?

But if elected we the people, in the name of America, will be stepping foreward on an international policy to liberate nations from Islamic fundamentalism and/or "godless" dictators who do not allow people to vote for USA approved canidates. All because "that is how God would want it". Now the Pope did not even agree with his war in Iraq, not sure about the Mormon leadership who also get revelations - but is that anyway to run a government? The bible belt surely would say yes, but what if Kerry said his plans were "the way the Pope would want it" - man! would he be in deep political mud.

Now if he wants freedom for everyone on the planet so they can all vote in a democratic way, why he should start off by talking to his own brother to make sure Fla is a democratic state and not partisan when it comes to black voters.

He should also allow the U.N. to vote on international policy and permit that democratic process to operate - what kind of freedom is he talking about? Is he promoting freedom only via religious salvation according to his personal belief system, or freedom based on people of every faith being involved in normal voting procedures. Who annointed Bush as our next Paul?

If the "Passion of Bush" is too sensitive of a topic for the political debate then where can voters become informed about his problem in White House policy making? At some religious web forum? Why would voters go there to get informed about the current political policy to make up their minds? And who would come to Butterface to find worthy articles about this "now" political aspect of the Bush agenda?

Technosoul.