I Need Help.... Dating a Christian Conservative

Don't ask why, because I don't know and it just happened, so leave it at that please. No, I'm not going to be indoctrinated or blinded by faith, I just need some talking points to make.

Okay, I thought I would take a jab and ask how Jesus Christ would be taken by today's Christian Conservatives, since he was a liberal and socialist. Then I got myself into a debate with how Social Security was a liberal ideal, but she says it is a conservative ideal. In short, everything bad is turned around and blamed on the 'Liberal Democrats' and everything good is credited to the Conservatives, even though it is obvious everything that is wrong is really a result of the Conservatives. Then I ended up trying to convince her that liberals do not want to abolish religion, even though she claims that it is being abolished in schools, yada yada yada... Which moved on to the alleged fact that this country was set up for Christians by our founding fathers, and they were all of deep faith.

So can any of you give me some quick points to make my case that everything she is being told is nowhere close to the truth?

(kidding)

her.

In my view right wingers worship Ayn Rand and her teachings. These right wingers get so twisted they attempt to say that Jesus did not want government to run social programs.

Right wingers do not follow the teachings of Christ. Torquemada perhaps but not Christ.

The relationship will not survive if you differ on politics and debate it heatedly.

If you can keep from discussing politics you may have a remote chance. As I see it right wingers appear far from a model of compassionate people. They may lie to make themselves look compassionate, but just like the two James T Kirks, the energy required to keep up the facade wears off and the fake James T Kirk surfaces.

Trust me, this relationship won't go far. Either you'll find yourself getting sucked into Fundyland and bolt, or she'll discover you're not going to get sucked into Fundyland and she'll bolt.

She is being propagandized from the pulpit, and since it's religion and religion is not to be questioned, she buys the whole load of horse shit.

You are not going to change her, in other words. If you can deal with the fact that she's just a big fat sucker for political propaganda parading as religion and she can come to terms with the fact that you're not, it will be an achievement of monumental proportions.

Just don't expect it to happen. It usually doesn't.

(of course, you could always go to her church with a mini recorder and catch the preacher red handed and fink him out to the IRS)

I wish the OP luck. I really do. But I think you are right.

for one.

For two, I don't think your relationship is going to go anywhere if you disagree about fundemental things, like politics and religion. While some people might think these are superficial differences, they really aren't. They are deeply held beliefs that people have a right to hold.

Now, the talking point to bring up to your sweetie is the Jefferson Bible. Or the fact that the majority of the Fathers were Masons.

storyteller might have advice for you.

Remember she is a Virgin though so that could be fun. Oh and make sure you rent the DVD "saved" and watch it together and let the hilarity begin.

will end up loathing this person. So have fun, but no long-term relationship involving fiduciary intermingling is advised. I have lifetime best friend that I have always tolerated because I grew up with these people and they almost to a 'man' have mental problems and deprived backgrounds, so I always felt sorry for them and overlooked their idiotic comments until they took over the world, and their little pinheaded ministers give them talking points like: "If all the aborted fetuses were alive and working, think how much tax revenue we would have to support social projects." As if an aborted (unwanted) life would turn out well. If you don't want to have a baby, I do not want you to bring a life into this world. It is a tragedy all around.

build roads, etc. And, how much we would be spendnig on prisons to imprison the increased number of criminals, etc.

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"

Among other places, wikipedia has an article, (of course whose "neutrality" is in question)

While it reveals the mindset of some of the Founders, coming just a decade or so after the Constitution was ratified, the Treaty of Tripoli is hardly authoritative on the question of just how "Christian" the country was. The complete answer is found in the debates at the Constitutional Convention, which hardly touch on religion at all. When you look at the positive evidence of what goes into a sound, stable, and strong government, according to Madison's notes, you'll see that Christianity wasn't even under discussion during the framing of our present government.

in other words -

run like hell.

Whatever evidence you give is going to be refuted on the basis of "faith" and "belief".

So, in the immortal words of Dan Savage - DTMFA, because you'll lose. Sorry.

You owe me a new keyboard.

I'm embarassed to say how much longer.

Get Out now...

I know I know...

I'm telling you GET OUT NOW! While you can.

...and don't tell me how good the sex is.

Get out...trust me on his one.

It's where people go who are seriously deluded.

brainwashed so maybe get her into a good deprogramming Program?

And good luck!

You are the way you are. She is the way she is. It's not going to change.

My only suggestion is to expose her to "new" ideas (and historical facts vs. truthiness) with out judgment, introduce her to liberal/progressive folk that do not fit her stereotype ... Don't try to change her ... bring new ideas and new experiences to her ... let her change herself ... and if she doesn't decide whether you can live with her the way she is

She came over and I told her how interesting Florida butterflies are because between some ice ages "eons" ago South Florida was underwater except for the Lake Wales Ridge down the middle of the state. And whaddya know! Several Southeastern butterfly species EVOLVED into separate Florida species as any island life forms do when isolated from a mainland. Evolved. She just sat there mulling that one with a dark face, like a chimpanzee looking at a can opener.

... introduce "new" ideas w/out judgment or confrontation.

Obviously, she considered evolution. Had you confronted about "evolution" you wouldn't have made a dent.

of the truth of reality and life.

But I am still inclined toward the "Run Like Hell" advice.

One must also remember to never present a new concept in a manner that would cause the fundy to become defensive--fundy won't listen if she has to defend her belief from attacks--real or imagined. Also, as often as possible, use the phrase: "It is impossible to honor God with lies/half-truths/spin." And then very gentlely present the necessafy facts to dilute whatever KoolAid that she has been drinking at the moment.

that is NOT a "Christian". I would drop her real quick regardless. She sounds lame or her lameness will eventually come through to the point that you can't stomach being around her.

edit: typo

I have a couple of conservative friends like that, and we occasionally get into heated arguments.

The problem is that if you use sources to back you up, they counter saying its the liberal media and use Fox News to back them up. Remember the truth has a liberal bias.

Also, you aren't going to win people over putting on the defensive, try subtle conversion tactics.

Actually some of my conservative buddies are really nice people, and are open minded about many things like gays. I just think they are hopelessly clueless about the world around them. It's frustrating as hell.

and back it up with sources.

Good luck with that.

(On edit - heh, I see it's the same point everyone else is making, just different than what you asked for.)

As much as I disagree with her views, probably from top to bottom, my point is this.

It's patronizing and offensive for your attitude to be that everything she knows and thinks is inferior to everything you know and think (superior), and you're gonna fix that in her.

It's a fine pursuit in general, but not for a woman you are dating - presumably as an equal.

I married a guy with different religious beliefs than my own, and the reason we are still together is that we had enough respect for each others' values that we can accept each other's views without trying to change them.

You're in a relationship with woman. Do you respect her values?

Nor do I feel I am superior. I do however am extremely opposed to those who have used religion to re-write history, instead of letting the facts fall where they may. She has also stated to me that an atheist is not an equal to a Christian, because they do not have any moral values. Understand why I am trying to convince her that other views and beliefs are not like what she thinks?

I respect her beliefs and values, and yes I am a Christian also, but just do not announce it to the world.

www.infidels.org

But, I'd run like hell. You don't know what you're getting yourself into.

(see "Implausibility of Satan" graphic)

I have the mark of the demon lord!!! Oh, noooooo...!

if they did, they would follow everything the bible says (slavery, killing ppl who work on Sunday, etc). They have used reason to figure out which parts of the bible to follow and which to ignore.

All you can do is "live by example" and maybe she'll see that people who are different from her are not monsters.

Of course, most people don't see that.

I'm not going to say run, I admire you for trying to bridge the great divide. I've tried over the years, and failed. I know we need to keep trying but I'm unable to anymore. All I can do is hope that one/some of them see that I live a moral life and am not worthy of the scorn they hear heaped upon me in church.

When it ends, and I assume it will, try to end it on good terms. Remember, you want her to see you as an example of "the other side" and you don't want to give her an excuse to hate you. Voice of experience here.

I'm also involved with a Christian conservative at the moment. I'm the first liberal and/ or agnostic he's ever known personally (he's from rural Georgia) and I think he's surprised to discover that I don't have horns OR a tail! We have a lot in common, but or differences are enough that I doubt if he'll be around forever...still,I'm just hoping that knowing me changes his preconceptions about liberals and non Christians for the better. He already mentions my "good heart" and "good soul" fairly frequently, and he now listens without a knee jerk reaction to my occasional political rants (initially he wouldn't) so I think I've presented a decent representation of "the other side" thus far. Often people are locked in a political ideology only because they've never been exposed to anything else. When that happens the right introduction to different ideas CAN actually have an effect on changing a learned political viewpoint.

<She has also stated to me that an atheist is not an equal to a Christian, because they do not have any moral values.>

That's enough for me. Your lady friend is a piece of work. Good luck with all that.

I am trying to convince her that other views and beliefs are not like what she thinks

why? Why not let her think what she chooses to think and accept her for that person instead of trying to change her/fix her---by convincing her--to think differently? She already knows what you are trying to get her to think and she's not going to let you do it.

I am a Christian also, but just do not announce it to the world

Her type of christianity is to shout it out to the world and believe what her pastor and other rw-neocons tell her to believe. Yours isn't. There is no reason why you should need to save her from her beliefs anymore than she should try to save you from your beliefs. She will find out how wrong she is on the day she dies.

If you're opposed to those who use their religion to re-write history, then why are you pursuing someone who has no problem with doing just that? She can't be the only woman available.

although the conclusion may be the same - 'get out'.

Almost every other poster up to this point is knee-jerk sure that everything she says and believes IS inferior, and none, except perhaps for the one line 'Thomas Jefferson was a deist' and the other one about some treaty, are offering any facts to back themselves up. Thank goodness we aren't, closeminded or anything, like she is.

is not a sign of a closed mind either.
Plus, you agreed with her that religion is being (or has been) abolished in schools. You just disagree with her about whether that is a good thing or a bad thing.

"Nope, taking issue with that statement would clearly be an example of anti-Christian bigotry."

It's not about 'taking issue'. It's about being unwilling to discuss things and immediately concluding - "she's a hate-filled lunatic who will never change her mind". Well, how can anybody avoid changing their mind when faced with a fact-filled and reasoned argument like that?

"Abolished" implies that public schools are the natural and rightful haunting grounds of organized religious Christian Worship--- what with the serious, drastic church shortage we have in this country.

I'm not saying he shouldn't discuss things with her.. That's lwfern's argument. Your point upthread, presumably, is that "we" are as "closeminded"(sic) as we apparently accuse the person referenced in the OP of being, because we take issue with the statements she has made.

Well, you're damn right I take issue with those statements. I think, as a non-Christian, someone saying "This Country was MADE for Christians" sounds just as fucking bigoted as someone saying "This Country was MADE for White People" would sound to someone who isn't white.

You'll excuse me if I don't twist myself into crazy contortions trying to display my "tolerance and understanding" for that line of reasoning.

Here's a question:

If the OP was female, and the gooney-eyed Jesus S.O. was male, would you make this exact same argument based on these exact same facts?

and feel it's your place to try to convert the person you're in a relationship with - not just on a minor issue or two two, but feeling the need to change their entire world view because everything they've ever been taught is a lie, then you aren't treating the other person as an equal.

When we had our mandatory marriage counseling with the partner's pastor, the pastor did a great job laying out that if either of us went into the marriage secretly thinking we were gonna convert the other person, we needed to get over ourselvs in a hurry cause it wasn't gonna happen. That ran both ways.

If the genders were reversed, the one thing that would be different is that it wouldn't fall into a traditional socialized gendered scenario of the man assuming the role of the dominant one, assuming the woman is subordinate in some way, even to the degree that he feels he should be able to get the woman to eventually submit to his world view. "If I think these thoughts, so should she."

So, then, your answer is "No".



edit: I agree about not basing a relationship on the idea that you can "change" someone else's beliefs or worldview. Mutual respect -intellectual, philosophical, etc.- is obviously a necessary foundation for any kind of successful marriage or long-term commitment.

But my point above is that you are predicating your assumptions about the dynamics of this relationship and this exchange on the fact that the OP has a Y Chromosome and the person who is spouting idiotic religious right nonsense ("This Country Was Made For Christians") does not.

The edit, I agree on.

The second point you made, about assumptions, relates to how we are socialized within this culture - for men to be dominant, women to be submissive.

I'm not saying he HAS fallen into that gender dynamic. I'm suggesting that he should recognize he is dangerously close to it, and saying that as a socialized pattern, it's often automatic for those of us who haven't examined our own roles in perpetuating those dynamics, and suggesting that the pattern itself is destructive and should be avoided. Consider it a cautionary tale, rather than an assumption about his existing relationship.

I'm not sure if I just wasn't clear on that, or there's a part of it you disagree with.

1) In our culture, we are socialized to accept men as dominant, women as submissive
2) This is harmful to women
3) We should avoid behaving in stereotypical ways that harm women

But it's okay for you to try to re-educate HIM.

this: it's okay for you to try to re-educate HIM.

from this: I married a guy with different religious beliefs than my own, and the reason we are still together is that we had enough respect for each others' values that we can accept each other's views without trying to change them.

?

"I'm suggesting that he should recognize he is dangerously close to it, and saying that as a socialized pattern, it's often automatic for those of us who haven't examined our own roles in perpetuating those dynamics, and suggesting that the pattern itself is destructive and should be avoided."

and

1) In our culture, we are socialized to accept men as dominant, women as submissive
2) This is harmful to women
3) We should avoid behaving in stereotypical ways that harm women

See, in my opinion, the individual referenced in the OP is preaching the gospel according to Bob Jones University, whereas you are preaching the gospel according to the Smith College Womens Studies Department. That's all well and good, and certainly your prerogative-- however, one should not expect to pass pieces of opinion or dogma, like "religion is being abolished from our schools" or "you are dangerously close to a destructive Gender Dynamic" off as statements about objective reality, and then demand some kind of immunity from rebuttal or critique of those statements.

that you disagree with, I'd be happy to debate those statements.

I'm not, however, interested in your views on the Smith College Womens Studies Department.

Yeah, I know someone who spent a year at that place. Took her 2&1/2 years of deprogramming at UC Santa Cruz before she even started to speak understandable English again.

As for the numbered statements. They're so ridiculously generalized, It's tough for me to find a "there" to disagree with. Sort of like saying "dogs are great" or "sports are fun"... Well, those things may be true in some cases, from a certain perspective.

1) In our culture, we are socialized to accept men as dominant, women as submissive
"We"? Define "dominant". Define "submissive". Define "socialized". And where is "our culture"? Can you point to it on a map?

2) This is harmful to women
What is? How?

3) We should avoid behaving in stereotypical ways that harm women
This statement is as near to a meaningless, generalized, feel-good blob of a sentence as I've ever seen. Perhaps you can make a list of these "stereotypical ways of behaving" coupled with the ways that these living stereotypes harm women, so "We" can figure out what, precisely, you're talking about, here.

But what I really "Disagree" with isn't so much the numbered nonsense outlined above, as it is a worldview in which one is seemingly completely incapable of observing ANY male-female interaction, no matter the individuals involved, details, or the context, without viewing it through the lens of "stereotypical patriarchal male oppression". That's why I asked if reversing the genders would make a difference, to hopefully provoke some thought on this. If you didn't know the genders involved, and only knew the details provided, there's no way you would have projected onto it this additional drama of the "stereotypical", harmful, controlling male partner trying to jimmy with the head of his programmed-by-the-patriarchy-to-be-submissive girlfriend.

The only person wedded to their stereotypes here is you. It's ridiculous, pure and simple.

is the OP not your SO.

Maybe ID thinks you are planning a long-term relationship with the OP? I, for one, am already jealous.

I thought it was clear, but in the future I should try to be more specific.

Run away! Run away! Run Away!!1111 (OK, have sex first if you must, but don't think it'll go anywhere or that she will change.)

. . . guilt can be a powerful aphrodisiac.

some of the most interesting ladies that I have ever
dated were conservatives.

she isn't from pluto, she is just confused.

FIX HER.

I mean, 600,000 rapes a year is wrong, and those are not all conservatives. I would talk less about history than about current policies. Bush has clearly lied about his tax cuts. Does she approve of that - being lied to? Is it okay, because 'they all lie'? What about the deficit?

Truthfully, I am not sure where to begin, but I think a perspective of 'she's all wrong and you are all right' is not the best way to approach a dialogue. But, then again, I was raised in 'the faith' and have been watching the Coral Ridge Ministry hour too.

She is convinced that Social Security and all other liberal safety nets (socialism) and laws that benefit Americans, are Conservative Ideals only. That is what I referred to her being wrong about and me being right.

and I think Michael Harrington has done so, that FDR's programs were conservative. Harrington called them 'Fordism' and a way to avoid socialism, but I am not clear on how either of you are defining 'laws that benefit Americans'. Everyone has different ideas on what those are. Republicans have certainly not worked to expand or strengthen our social safety nets over the last 30 years.

I knew a conservative christian girl once who took offense when I told her Jesus was a liberal. I mean she was REALLY offended. I don't think she could have been more offended if I had told her that He was a homosexual mass murderer who coveted his neighbors wife. Good luck with this, you're gonna need it.

Look who His spokesmen were--Moses, a murderer; David an adulterer/murderer; Paul a serial killer. He was a feminist, God condemned David for adultery--not Bathsheba, in fact that particular passage seems to imply that Bathsheba was the innocent victim of sexual harassment. Jesus was gentle with women, he spoke with the woman at the well and he allowed the unnamed woman with the perfume to show her affection and gratitude in a manner that was clearly unheard of in His day-in both cases he broke the taboos that kept women as second class citizen, but that also applied to Mary Magdalene, Mary (Martha's sister) the woman caught in adultery and the woman who had female problems for 20 years (she wasn't even supposed to show herself in mixed company.) Jesus advocated feeding the poor, and in fact, did so in a rather spectacular way by feeding 5000 at one time (that might also be construed as believing in magical thinking). He believed in socialized medicine--he healed all those who asked it of him. And he drove the establishment crazy--that is why they conspired to kill him. And if none of the above convinces you that Jesus is a liberal--the very fact that he was assassinated should tell you--think JFK, RFK, MLK, and Paul Wellstone (maybe)

the whole neighborhood would have been obliterated.

Mind her, blind her, sneak up behind her, act like a dummy until you finally unwind her...


Whatever...the guy sounds like a loser...

Let's see what the founding fathers thought about the separation of Church and state...

John Adams:

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"--John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson

"But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, has been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed.--John Adams in a letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_, John A. Haught

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole carloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity." --John Adams

Benjamin Franklin

"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758

"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it." -- Benjamin Franklin, _Articles_Of_Belief_and_Acts_of_Religion_, Nov.20, 1728

"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works ... I mean real good works ... not holy day keeping, sermon-hearing ... or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity." -- Benjamin Franklin, _Works_ Vol.VII, p.75

"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects of Christianity, we shall find few that have not in turns been persecutors and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution on the Roman church, but practiced it on the Puritans. They found it wrong in Bishops, but fell into the practice both here (England) and in New England"--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758

"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." -- Benjamin Franklin, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_ by James A. Haught


"Religion I found to be without any tendency to inspire, promote, or confirm morality, serves principally to divide us and make us unfriendly to one another."--Benjamin Franklin

Thomas Jefferson

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servile crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God, because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blind faith." -- Thomas Jefferson

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."--Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association on Jan. 1, 1802, _The_Writings_of_Thomas_Jefferson_Memorial_Edition_, edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 1903-04, 16:281

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."--Thomas Jefferson, _Notes_on_Virginia_, _Jefferson_the_President:_First_Term_1801-1805_, Dumas Malon, Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1970, p. 191

"...no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise.. affect their civil capacities."--Thomas Jefferson, _Statute_for_Religious_Freedom_, 1779, _The_Papers_of_Thomas_Jefferson_, edited by Julron P. Boyd, 1950, 2:546

James Madison

"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other sects?" -- James Madison, _A_Memorial_ and_Remonstrance, addressed to the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of VA, 1795

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." -- James Madison,_A_Memorial_ and_Remonstrance, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_ by James A. Haught

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and all of which facilitates the execution of mischievous projects. Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded project."--James Madison, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_ by James A. Haught

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."--James Madison in a letter to Edward Livingston in 1822

"It may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to usurpation on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will best be guarded against by an entire abstinence of the Government from interference in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect against trespasses on its legal rights by others."--James Madison, "James Madison on Religious Liberty", edited by Robert S. Alley, ISBN pp 237-238

"The Civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the TOTAL SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH FROM THE STATE."--James Madison

Thomas Paine

"I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the Bible)." -- Thomas Paine

"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." -- Thomas Paine, _The_Age_of_Reason_

"Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."--Thomas Paine

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, not by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church."--Thomas Paine, _Excerpts_from_The_Age_of_Reason:_Selected_Writings_of_Thomas_ Paine_, edited by Richard Emery Robers, NY Everybody's Vacation Publishing Co, 1945, p.342

"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."--Thomas Paine, _The_Age_of_Reason

"The adulterous connection between church and state."--Thomas Paine, from _The_Age_of_Reason_

"Persecution is not an original feature in any religion; but it is always the strongly marked feature of all law-religions, or religions established by law."--Thomas Paine, _The_Rights_of_Man_, 1791, ed P.S. Foner, 1945

"Here it is that the religion of Deism is superior to the Christian Religion. It is free from all those invented and torturing articles that shock our reason or injure our humanity, and with which the Christian religion abounds. Its creed is pure, and sublimely simple. It believes in God, and there it rests."--Thomas Paine, _Of_The_Religion_of_Deism_Compared_With_the_Christian_Religion_

"As priest craft was always the enemy of knowledge, because priest craft supports itself by keeping people in delusion and ignorance, it was consistent with its policy to make the acquisition of knowledge a real sin."--Thomas Paine, _Of_The_Religion_of_Deism_Compared_With_the_Christian_Religion_

"The age of ignorance commenced with the Christian system."--Thomas Paine, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_, James A. Haught

misc.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."--First Amendment to the U.S.A. Constitution

"One of the embarrassing problems for the early nineteenth-century champions of the Christian faith was that not one of the first six Presidents of the United States was an orthodox Christian."--The Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1968, p. 420

and wasn't it Franklin who suggested prayer at the Constitutional Convention? Further, I remember a quote from his autobiography where he stated that he considered churches to be a good thing and that he always contributed to their founding, and that he never doubted the basic tenets of religion.

Interesting too that James Madison was arguing against a state religion for Virginia in 1795. The Constitution was ratified in 1787. At that time Virginia had a state religion and it was only later that they disestablished it.

I just saw on TV yesterday somebody claim that only about 20 of the 270+ members of the Constitutional convention were not Christians. Also they mentioned that after the nation's capitol was burned down by the British that President Madison called for a national day of prayer and also a national day of prayer and fasting. He seems to have believe in the church but also believed that it would be corrupted by political power.
Your facts there are cherry-picked.

If you want to argue the merits of religion, what not do so in the religion forum?

The OP asked for opinions and suggestions about HIS situation, not yours.

I am arguing the proposition "the founding fathers were Christians". Fundies can make a strong case that they were. I do not think that case is disproven by cherry picking quotes even if that may support what the OP believes.

did not respect my views (I sincerely tried to respect his) and got nastier and nastier about politics over time. He was less religious than my cats, so that wasn't a problem, but the blind acceptance of everything Rush said really bothered me.

My only regret is that I WASTED all that time with him. He tried to pass himself off as a moderate Republican in the beginning, to woo me, but he couldn't keep up the act after a while.............

Good luck. I can't imagine your situation being anything but frustrating and heartbreaking in the end.

5 1/2 years that a compassionate, well-informed person went without your companionship (assuming you could find someone like that in your situation).

As for me, I'd rather be alone.

Don't mean to sound judgmental about your choices, just wanted to put some relative context into the picture.

judgement with that particular relationship............

I guess it's different working with someone rather than being in a relationship? However, the conversation was very strained, small talk = weather.

Thanks, I needed a giggle too.

This isn't advice, just an observation. One of my close friends is a fundie, but she's able to laugh at stuff. I've often said to he that if Pat Robertson is heaven bound, and Gandhi is headed for hell, I'll go with Gandhi, and she cracks up because she knows that people like robertson are full of it- even though she does believe that robertson will go to heaven and Gandhi to hell. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is if you can laugh at some of your beliefs, you may have a chance.

I understand that attraction doesn't take these things into account. I fell for her.

All I can tell you is that it ended very very badly and you should run away as fast as you can.

Unless perhaps you would like to join him in harassing people going into abortion clinics, cheering on nutjobs that shoot doctors, and on and on and on.

the key thing here is to listen to hers and attempt to understand it and put yourself into her shoes and try to it see it from her point of view.

Many people see themselves as victims of something or other. And in this case it is pretty much the same.

People grew up in a America where you could pray in school, have christmas breaks and plays, play dodge ball, smoke in the teachers' lounge, have a manger scene out in front of the city hall, etc. They also remember a time when crime was not as bad, people seemed more content, yada yada yada - at least from THEIR perspective.

Today's America is fucked up in some ways. And her world (or the ones her parents grew up in) has not only changed but been attacked relentlessly as bigoted, evil, wrong, the cause of all ills in the world, etc and so on.

People tend to get defensive when their group is attacked and instead of giving into the attacks and trying to understand them, they lash out as a group and defend - even if the attack is logical and well founded in some ways. If you argue it, you may be considered a hater or a bigot.

The thing to do is not get overly invested in discussing the past - just say, 'yeah there were good and bad people on all sides of things (and there were)' but what happened to make things like X today'?

Show her how Jesus felt about the poor and downtrodden, and how liberals today are looking out for those same folks and rw'ers are trying to thwart helping them - discuss how in the end times the bible itself says many will fall away from the true faith and embrace the false faith (whore of babylon and such) - then you get her to thinking, perhaps, that today's christians are not the ones she remembers from earlier days and how the ones that stayed decent shifted to the liberal party to keep the good works alive - and the misled christians have sided with the money changers in the temple.

Jesus and his followers were a minority, and his true followers still are.

I would only add that you might both want to read two books by Phillip Yancey.....The Jesus I Never Knew and What's so Amazing About Grace.

hotness covers a multitude of sins.

We dated for several years and it fell apart because we were too far apart on the issue of... religion.

Good luck though.

conservative whipping boy and they all but branded him a communist for the New Deal programs including SS. Your girl friend needs to learn some history.

Aso remind her that the prayer in schools decision was made by the Warren Court. Warren was appointed by a Republican president. As for the founders, most were deists if they were anything at all. It is doubtful if any of them were "Christians" of the literalist evangelical form that passes for Christianity today. Thomas Jefferson made his own New Testament by cutting out the parts he disagreed with.

Find other people to debate with.

If she brings it up -- present her with the right information, lots of ideas in this thread. Keep your expectations real.

--IMM

I could never date someone who is Evil. I could never date someone who doesn't have my values. To me, this is no different than if you had posted...."how can I date someone in the Klan?" No difference...not even a little tiny wee bit different.

Lee

Christian conservatives read, write, vote, and protest. The KKK burns crosses, engages in arson, violence, murder, etc. You don't see a huge difference there? A grassroots Christian conservative is neither Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, George Will or Rush Limbaugh. Nor are they likely to be Timothy McVeigh or Dennis BTK Rader.

He didn't say "Christian moderate". He said "Christian Conservative". I see no difference between them and the Klan. If you think there is one, go to Ann Coulter's forum and read the lunatics.

I stand by what I said. If he had said "Christian Moderate" my response MIGHT have been different.
Lee

would hang out at a Coulter forum. Then again, the local Republican ladies seem to think she is cool. They donated a copy of "Treason" to the local library and had "How to talk to a liberal" in their county headquarters. I still find that puzzling.

I have been friends with a few CCs in the past, and they struck me as very decent people. This was, however, well before Bush and Coulter and Limbaugh. You cannot expect to get to know a person on-line, especially if they are in a circle-jerk echo chamber. So I take a forum like that with a grain of salt.

How about that I live in Texas and I'm surrounded by the assholes.

How about that I'm a lesbian and an atheist and so I have no love lost for these little nazis?

How about that I am a second generation atheist and my family was tormented by "good" Christians, LITERALLY because my father was outspoken?

How about that I think ALL the bad in the world is caused by one flavor fundie or another?

Is that hands on enough?

I could NEVER be with someone who had values so opposed to my own.
Lee

and we argued all the time, my fundy friends and I.
But that was Minnesota, so perhaps fundies raised in a liberal environment.

Yet even in Texas, I cannot believe there are not variations in fundies.

I was under the impression that "fundamentalism" means belief in the literal interpretation of that nasty little book of theirs.

My father was not in college, thus my entire family being tormented and tortured by nasty little christians and we didn't just live in Texas...Navy family...(yes, there are atheists in foxholes) and fundies everywhere...(we were stationed everywhere)...are just alike, (the meanest most murderous bastards on the planet)...by the definition of the word I am using...

I'm 52 and fully actualized as far as what I think, just btw...in case you're tired of pissing in the wind because you will not change my view about those people. I KNOW what they did to my family. I see what fundamentalists of every stripe do to this planet, every single frakking day.
Lee

plus they call themselves the Christian Knights of the KKK. If you polled them at the scene of a lynching, they would tell you that they believe themselves to be God-fearing, going to heaven, grass-roots, salt of the earth Christians. One group is certainly not mutually exclusive from the other.

Nobody needs to deal with that shit.

Faith and emotion aren't changed by being rational, for the most part.

REPEAT 10 times

Repeat 10 times

FDR starting Social Security and Republicans bitterly opposed for decades.

I'm sorry but I agree with the other posters that this person sounds like someone either not very intelligent or willfully ignorant. Either way, not promising.

If you stick with her, get used to frustration.

It's a relationship not a debate. And just where do you think it is going to go. If it is to go anywhere beyond superficiality then you are either going to change to her point of view, she is going to change to yours, or you are both going to be miserable with each other. I can't see anyone with liberal values dumping them to be with a woman. What brings you to this board is what makes you you. And if you meet women with the expectation that you can change them into something that is perfect then you are new at the dating game. She is what she is and it doesn't matter how good looking she is she is still what she is and you are what you are. If it was me, I couldn't respect the intelligence of a woman who makes the claims that you say she does.

no good can come of this, why does everyone have to make the mistake of dating a fundy for themselves?

it is no use offering good "talking points" because these people are crazy, they are not susceptible to reason, they are mentally defective which is why they are so easily brainwashed by bullshit in the first place

in the end, things go better in life if you pair up with someone who has a brain

if it's just casual sex, don't talk, just do the friends w. benefits, if this is leading somewhere get out while you still can

it doesn't really matter what she thinks when it is proven that she is incapable of thinking

Just accept her and let her have her own opinions if you want to keep the relationship. Don't be anyone but yourself though. Sounds like it will be a difficult relationship. Right now I'm interested someone who is middle of the road, voted for Kerry, and just doesn't pay attention to politics. I'm OK with that as long as he isn't against my beliefs.

"The worse thing a woman can do is take the wrong man and try to make him right."

This goes for both of you. Trying to change each other is only going to lead to misery down the road.
Be nice, be polite, but be gone. Pronto.

I don't think it is sound practice to TRY and change anybody.

Particularly when it comes to religion and even more so if that person is your partner, GF, wife...

For any real insight to stick, his GF will need to come to the conclusion that her views are misguided - that she has been brainwashed or indoctrinated NOT of her own choosing. But that is a process that she must walk on her own when or if/ever she chooses.

Modern Day pharasaism: http://www.hostdiva.com/liberalchristians/index.php?opt...

The religious right vs. the spiritual left: http://www.hostdiva.com/liberalchristians/index.php?opt...

Editing to add: I am married to a religious and political conservative so I know the difficulty you are in.

temporarily.

Well, unless they are a TV preacher or something.

but I have a point to make. Are you guys having sex or planning to have sex? Is your significant other a virgin or planning to be one until you are married?

If you are engaging in behavior that ultimately risks having a child produced, what are you planning to do?

Abortion? Contraception? Well, you are just violating the conservative precept of abstinence.

What will you do if the contraception fails? You know... that uh-oh moment.

Put the kid up for adoption? Well... whose going to pay for those social services? The taxpayer? There is a period of time the kid is a ward of the state. There's no hue and cry to ensure adequate funding for social services by conservatives. So you're going to make a mistake and have the taxpayers pay for it.

If the kid is handicapped or a minority, good luck seeing that the kid is adopted at all. So who's going to pay for a lifetime in the system? I dont hear about any conservatives pressuring these parents to take care of their own.

Get married? Good luck with the shotgun marriage. And if the marriage doesnt work out, like most of these dont, I hope child support is not an issue.

The personal is political.

I am being a bit hard on you, I know. So please forgive me. I just wanted to make a point.

jus' kidding!

Does she give decent BJs?

Could SHE change your core beliefs? 'nuff said

The parable of the Good Samaritan.

You have to understand that to Jews of the Christ's time Samaritans were so evil that a devout Jew such as a priest or a Levite would go a very long way out of his way to avoid passing through Samaria.

Luke 10:
25On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

26"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"

27He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

28"You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

29But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

30In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. 35The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

36"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

37The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."


Good luck and check back with us and tell us how it all worked.

Good luck with that. Sincerely.

and have PRE-MARITAL sex? this is a fucking SIN (no pun intended)!!!! If you are going to talk the talk, walk the walk.

Yeah. Just not enough available churches in this country, and time in the week- organized religion MUST have the public schools and the daytime hours during the week in which to get in the requisite amount of God-Honoring?

In a good week, I can pretty much bankrupt an entire diocese, if the right kids are out sick.

But the snow days do have a way of slowing me down, and a few churches are still standing. But give me time. I'll get em all!

even though I'm not a prophet and cannot see the future, I can tell the odds of you changing her or of her changing you are not very good.

anal sex and then dump her.

If not, stop wasting your precious time, both yours and your girlfriend's. Just say, "We disagree fundamentally about certain basic matters politically, I don't want to bother changing your mind, and I'd appreciate you not trying to change mine when we're together." Make whatever it is you wish of the relationship, set a goal of enjoying one-another's company, and continue on with the rest of your life.

If you are in this long-term -- and, given the nature of hardline Christians, she probably thinks you are -- then you may as well make education a priority. First, since it's apparent that she doesn't know what a liberal is, you might want to help her with that.

Since you're looking for short explanations, I recommend going over the FAQs at this site:

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/tenets.htm

Pay particular attention to the materials regarding consequences of income inequality. A primary downfall of conservative political philosophy is that it reinforces these circumstances in a most un-Christian way. If you plan to make political inroads with her, do so through her Christianity rather than in spite of it. Make her aware of Christ's liberal ethics, as expressed in the beattitudes. Do "bible studies" from the sermon on the mount, instead of the letters of Paul. Etcetera.

Long-term intimate relationships between people with intense differences can work, but you will both be changed in the process -- of necessity, really, since it is the nature of intimacy to bring us closer to one-another, and those issues which intimacy cannot transcend become the barriers that eventually decouple otherwise-committed partners. An unwillingness to compromise at the right times will spell certain defeat. That might mean you don't argue with her dittohead dad at family get-togethers, for instance.

Above all, it is important to understand that we are only together on this planet for a short time. Consider carefully how much of that short time you really wish to share with this person. Let your efforts be proportional to your inclinations.

Don't discuss it at all or shut up and listen and if you don't agree then say it and stay away from that topic all together. If you really like her give it a chance just stay away from that topic of conversation for a bit.

She needs to be resocialized. hehe If you have read anything about attitudes; the conclusion is that we're unconsciously influenced by our surroundings. So how do you use that knowledge?

If she says something absurd, you look her in the eye: smile then laugh or or say something like 'darling don't be absurd'. And don't break eye contact. Let her break eye contact. Then tell her your opinion. Then you can discuss it with her and if she says something absurd repeat and rinse.

Letting her break eye contact is unconscious submissive behavior on her part, so it should unconsciously influence her into changing her attitudes. Smiling while maintaining eye contact is friendly and non threatening eye contact.

Have fun trying to figure out how to brainwash someone.

edit after reading the entire thread. Remember, all value systems have value.

Letting her break eye contact is unconscious submissive behavior on her part

If you have to resort to manipulating women into being submissive through alpha male bullshit, you have bigger personal problems than dating a conservative.

How many 'Bush is an idiot' arguements did you have even before he became President? How many 'invading Iraq is a dumb idea that's going to turn into Viet Nam2' arguements' did you have during the runup to the invasion of Iraq?

At some point you wonder 'what makes these people tick', 'why can't they see what I can plainly see' and 'how can I kick there ass in arguements'.

That's the question you need to ask her.

Is she a social conservative, who believes the government should be used to enforce moral values?
Is she a small government conservative, who believes the government should get out of people's lives?
Is she a "ownership society" conservative, who believes that rich people are largely responsible for their own success, and therefore deserve to have different standards applied to them?
Is she a trraditional anti-radical-change conservative, who believes changes to society should be applied slowly, and reversed if their promised benefits turn out to be a mirage?
Is she an isolationist conservative, who believes the U.S. should confine itself to its own business, we're not responsible for anything that goes on outside our borders, and that our chief foreign policy should be to keep foreigners (who seem to hate us), out of the U.S.?
Is she a neo-conservative, who believes that the U.S. government should be responsible for all the worlds problems, and that we have the right and responsibility to remake the world to our will, by force if necessary?

Asking questions will get her to think. Thinking is good.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

p.s. It is my experience that most young women who describe themselves as "Christian Conservative" are the anti-feminist kind. They desperately want children, but are also kind of afraid of it, and so are looking for a man to keep them in a submissive 50's housewife sort of role. Fun, if that's your thing.