So many have been predicting that this would start to happen...I just didn't think it would happen so soon.
A Baptist Church in North Carolina, kicked out all of it's members that were admitted Democrats.

And so it begins....


Link

These threads could get funny...

"SUPPORT PRESIDENT BUSH OR GET OUT OF THE COUNTRY!!"

That is what most of the strong Bush supporters say. They don't just want liberals out of the church, they want you out of the country.

I think you're taking what is often said completely out of context. What is usually said is "If you don't like him you can leave". Taken in that context, they are saying if he bothers you that much, you have the choice to leave the country, which is absolutely correct. I've never heard someone say it in the context you have written it.

I think 'American Taliban' and what Jaime said are a little extreme, this is obviously a single isolated case, not representative of the population, and what the pastor is doing is hardly comparable to the Taliban, however wrong it may be.

It's perhaps extreme in the sense that most Americans certainly don't behave in this way but it certainly happens more than we think. My girlfriend who is American has shown me many examples of diehard Bush supporters saying this. This kind of thing really does happen in some places in the US.

Also during the build-up to the election her family's "Kerry" banner which was fixed to the garden was stolen and some cars along her road were vandalised. There were messages for them to get out.

You should see some of the stuff written on Republican boards. It is pretty disgusting and nasty.

I was in America during the build-up to the election and Bush banners were stolen too. Both sides were experiencing the same thing.

I don't disagree but my point is fanaticism is definitely well and truly alive, especially on the Republican side.

It's definitely not 50-50 either. You barely, if ever, hear liberals telling Bush supporters to leave the country or accuse them of being unpatriotic and I have yet to hear cases of a church throwing Republican voters out.

Had Republicans been treated this way, it would be plastered all over Fox News for days.

There are fanatics in each party and each can get way too extreme. Such general stereotyping of a political party or a faith is no better than the actions this pastor is taking. Yes, Republicans tend to characterize Democrats and unpatriotic. However, Democrats tend to characterize Republicans and greedy, corrupted people with no compassion for their fellow man. It is just another generalization that does not represent the truth in either case.

While I am a registered independent, it is annoying to see people sling mud rather than face the issues head on.

Certainly, the actions of this "Pastor" are not in line with the Bible he is supposed to be teaching from. The Bibile clearly states that Christ came to save everyone, not just republicans. While I don't doubt this man's faith, certainly he is not placing is obligations as a pastor and teacher before his own political views.

And yes, I am a Christian and I would never support a pastor in such a decision. I too, would leave any church that turned away a person wanting to get to know God better. His actions are entirely wrong.

The next Civil War is brewing


And watching a liberal show like The Daily Show demonize the First Lady by airing a segment about her having phone sex isn't "disgusting and nasty"? Obviously the jokes she made about her husband that they air every day wasn't enough.

Hmm. Someone on my board is cyberdating someone in the UK, and this person thinks by fleeing America to the UK he will escape the problems in America. I don't mean to slight anyone, but I think these problems are pretty universal. After all, the UK is our No.1 ally for a reason, and it's not because the parliament constantly disagrees with the American government.

I agree, there is a bit of division here in America. I see two kinds of people, real Americans who would be free, and fascists who would dictate the terms of your lives to you (while not following the rules themselves). Look at any issue and you will see this division. Abortion: those who believe in choice, and those who want to make a universal choice for everyone. Guns: Those who believe people who want them should have them, and those who believe no one should have them. Homosexuality: Those who say "to each his own, what you do in the bedroom is your business" and those who say it's a sin.

I understand, and to a degree respect the morality Republicans are trying to push, but I think they go way too far. Firstly, we're not all Christians -- holding a Jew, a Muslim, a Wiccan, a Pagan, or an Atheist to specifically Christian values is flat out wrong. Second, those in charge clearly cannot follow their own rules? How many Popes take the same vow of poverty that is expected of the "lower" clergy? None, look at that fine silk they wear. Not to mention all the jewels. Or Bush. Supposedly a Christian, but how many Commandments has he broken? Murder, False Witness, Covet, Steal... I bet he works on the Sabbath... I don't know all ten, but the only one that he obeys that comes to mind is "Honor thy mother and thy father" -- I see no problem there.

The problem with these fascist "rules" these people want to impose is firstly that they won't adhere to them themeselves -- they're class specific. The working class will be held to the rules, while the idle wealthy class breaks them unchecked. Second, a lot of the choices they want to make for us all are personal. We have to live with our decisions, not them, so it should be on us to determine our own course of action.

IMHO government should be limited to enforcing the laws to keep the peace and helping those who need it. (All these corporations and wealthy people begging for government assistance really need to STFU and sit back and enjoy their wealth... Leave the government tit for those who actually need it to survive.)


No one should get out of the country because they don't like the current government. In fact, the Second Amendment is very clear on how to deal with fascists and tyrants. It was written to allow ordinary citizens to protect themselves from invading British, but now that the US and UK are buddies, that's not an issue anymore. But I figure it applies to local government as well. If Bush or the people who put him where he is try to force a "Nazi America" on us, I would hope that enough people would rise up and destroy them. Sadly, history has shown us that tyrants must often be dealt with this way.


I've taken to calling Republicans Republinazis because of some of their members' beliefs and policies. Though on the other side of the coin, not all of them are bad, and IMHO Bush isn't as bad as most liberals say. I don't believe the American President has that much influence. He's not God. There are checks and balances to ensure a balance of power. Granted, Bush is attacking them, but I doubt he will be successful. Too many Americans would be free.

I would disagree with that. Divisions in Britain are nowhere near the intensity of divisions in the US. I don't know anyone who would attack someone over their beliefs, and religion and politics rarely mix here.

No, CTerry, what I meant was that the kinds of things going on in America probably go on over there. Not just the party division -- you guys have so many more choices -- but just the state of things in general. That is, it's a rich man's world on either side of the Atlantic. Like for example if an American were to criticize Bush for taking us to war... Well, Blair took you guys to war as well.

<offtopic> Right now it says your post was made "A minute ago." They must have improved the time references for 2.1... I really like that! </offtopic>

Yes, and there are still people saying us 'colored' folk should leave the country and think their gene pool makes them superior and that has been going on for centuries, so what's your point?

As true as that is the war has been the ruin of Blair's career as a politician. It has turned him from Labour's greatest asset into Labour's greatest liability, it seems to be me that while Labour still managed to win the election Blair is facing the consequences for his decision to go to war, whereas Bush is not.

That they need to get a freaking life?

Is he? I don't have a very clear understanding of UK politics (I don't even know all the parties... Labour, something Democrat... umm... What are Tories?) but I know he got re-elected, same as Bush. Both seem harshly criticized. And both have their share of supporters. But I've heard Bush called a lot worse things than Blair. (Or are they actually going to punish Blair or something?)

I dunno... I know little about what goes on over there; I just see the American government going to hell being a sign of bad times for the UK and vice versa. And I don't think anyone who hates how Bush is running America is going to be happier over there. Oh, I'd love to visit the UK, rent a car and drive on the wrong side of the road from the wrong side of the car (I wouldn't mind having a car with right side steering for use here, actually). But I doubt it's free of problems there.

@mamosley - Anyone who says that is a f#$%ing idiot. There are some genetic, physical differences between the races, but none is 'better' than the other. We all have blood on our hands. It's the same with people who judge homosexuals. I'm not gay or 'colored' but I disagree with prejudices on the basis of superficial and inborn traits. Might as well hate someone for wearing red or blue, or having brown or red hair. In the modern world, we see people for who they are, not for what they were born. It's a shame so many people are living in the past.

The only reason Blair won the election is because the opposition to Labour is pathetic. He's facing calls from within his own party to stand down (and he may be forced to at the Labour conference in September) and his majority was slashed by 100 seats. He's facing his fair share of critisism, even though those who agreed with the war believe he was at least economical with the truth in the lead-up to it.

First of all, you're talking about religious Republicans, so don't generalize the whole side by this group. Secondly, the 'job', so to say, of their chosen religion is to spread their beliefs onto others, thus values are 'forced' onto others. Think their actions are "flat out wrong"? Too bad, it's just your opinion, just like theirs.


Agreed.


Let me know when you can point out specific points that show that he's a) murdered someone, b) been a false witness, c) desire someone else's, and d) steal?


Money ruins people. This idea shows through on all spectrums, not just the group you've chosen to talk about.


It's not the government's job to fill the needs of the public, which is why we're a capitalist society (obviously you don't know what that means so I'll let you look it up on your own). I believe in Darwin's theories and enjoy living in a capitalist society.



Where exactly did you get nazi from? You want people to destroy Bush? That sounds like a bit of a Nazi belief myself.

The pastor resigned FWIW.

Also, today the main Wisconsin newspaper came out with their investigation on felons and dead people voting in their state. They were able to review 1/3 of the 2.8 Million votes in that state, they found 200 dead votes, 100 voted twice, and 200+ felons voted. 80% of that was Democrat votes.

So neither side can point fingers, nor can they claim they have perfect people in their party. Also, neither can claim the other party has a higher share of nut jobs and cheaters. I came from a family of ALL eastern Kentucky democrats and giving out free liquor for votes was part of what my family did as poll board workers back in the 80's. I'm not sure either side can "preach" about the other side.

Now on the issue with this pastor, I think he can say what he wants because its a free country, but he should lose tax exempt status if he wants to preach politics. The two are seperate per the way the laws are written.

I find it funny that lines are being drawn in the sand to say one side is better than the other, I see hypocrisy abound.

ahh, religion and politics... the root of all eveil

george bush will go to hell becase he kill people

And Jesus told you Bush is going to hell? Because he's the only one who decides that.

Maybe he doesn't believe in Jesus. Is he going to hell as well?

What in the hell is going on?

No idea - haven't been there yet.

Driving the topic straight into the ground - the classic ips way.

The main leaders of the Republican party have been, for whatever reason, transforming the Republican party over the last decade from the party of small government, low taxes to the party of big government, low taxes with an arrogance of moral superiority. Their policies against stem cell research, against gay rights, against abortion rights, pro in-your-face religion, and of an overall hostility towards progressivism are for the most part unpopular, even deeply so, but there is a very vocal and powerful minority driving this agenda. I don't think there is an "American Taliban" emerging in the sense that these people are somehow taking over and driving the American socieity. The fact that a few people in Congress and in some parish have these extreme beliefs doesn't mean that they are in anyway indicative of the mainstream American society.

I think what a lot of people fail to see, especially those outside of the US, is that Bush has been suffering post-election do to Iraq, the crappy economy, and his failed agenda. Bush won more because of the fact the people simply didn't trust Kerry and not so much because they agreed with his agenda. His Social Security plan has horrible support and is dragging down Republicans, the Terry Shiavo case was a disaster, the support for the war in Iraq has been steadily falling, and people are becoming more and more disapproving of the way he is running the economy. Bush still has a solid base of support but he in no way has political capital stored up and has been suffering right along with Blair.

Maybe the people who search for reasons to whine/argue/piss/moan about things need to get a life.



(This post is not arguing w/ anything that is said, merely offering a different perspective) :-"

I heard a theory that the Democrats purposefully put up a crappy candidate for the last election, because they felt whoever had to deal with this terms problems was going to crash and burn, therefore it was much preferable to allow Bush to take the damage and then come in with an uber-candidate in 2008. Whether this is just democrats making an excuse for a crappy choice of candidate I don't know.

I sooo wish America was ready for a minority president whether the person was a woman or an ethnic minority. The good 'ol boy power base needs to be broken up and Americans in general really need another option because there isnt that much difference to a democratic or republican candidate. I think Kerry would have been able to get U.S. troops out of Iraq sooner than Bush will, but not as quick as everyone thinks and I dont think anything else would be much different except maybe some of Bush's tax cuts would have gotten rolled back. Most of the democrat and republican power base live too rosy a life to really understand the needs of most Americans and don't really know how make us stronger as a country. They both beleive that a strong millitary that can win wars in months instead of years and their own personal wealth is all that is needed to make us a strong nation.

I didn't realise women were a minority...

In America if they have to legislate some type or protection or antidiscrimination law, you are considered a minority, and since women didn't have the same rights as men when the constitution was writting and their rights had to be 'legistlated' they are considered a 'minority'.

That would explain Kerry...


Have you forgotten that they've amended the constitution before?

And it was amended through legislation. The only point I was trying to make was that women are considered a minority because they were not innitially given the same rights as white american men were given.

I doubt that there will ever be an equivalent to the Taliban in America. Simply because theocracy is bad for business and big business owns the US of A heart, mind and soul.

GEORGE BUSH IS A MORON MURDERER


Edit : Thanks Danny

Add another ER on the end. MURDERER... the other one is just a noun. Unless George Bush is murder itself.

I agree with Phil.

Well Kerry did do surprisingly well in the primaries which is really what led to his nomination. The problem was that he basicly ran on the idea that he was the only electable Democrat which was fine in the primary but killed him in the election. The Democrats ended up standing for nothing other than not being Bush which really wasn't much of a campagin message. The Democrats failed to turn the problems of health care, education, welfare, and what not into effective campaign points while the Republicans effectively made terrorism/safety into the leading issue while painting Kerry as an overly liberal, flip-flopping politician from the scary state of Massachusetts. And from there it was all downhill.

Yep, let's forget what has changed in the past 300 years and go on with what we decided in a couple days. I love your logic.

It's not "his" logic. It's the way it is.

Ask any government official if women are considered a minority. Caucasian males are the only non-minority group in the US.

yadda yadda yadda who gives a faeces

Nearly everyone who posted here does.

Her name will be Condi Rice, she'll meet both parts you laid out. And, I'm ready for her.

ugh, remember the last time America had a thocracy , the SAlem witch Trials ? AH