Voice Post

VoicePost200K0:59







(no transcription available)

One of those rare public entry thingies

I know this should go without saying for anyone who knows me, but here goes:I have zero respect for people who act like self-righteous know-it-alls. I'm talking about those who think they are better than everyone else because they are all involved in their religion and have done this & that and are so well-read on it, and will tell you so. Who won't hesitate to preach to you about their beliefs and how they are so close to God and you're not because they know more than you do. Or furthermore, people who claim to be all holy & spiritual, but in reality they are complete asses.Hey. Guess what?It doesn't make you a better person. In fact, it's people like that who are driving people away from God, not closer. If they are so much of a spritual person, then they need to follow what their religion teaches and love their fellow human beings. Don't berate them just because they may not know as much - or better yet, because their beliefs may not line up with yours. Not that knowledge isn't important to spiritual growth. But IMO, it's only a small part of it. In the end, it's what's in the heart that matters. And only God can determine one's spiritual condition.BTW, this doesn't just apply to Christians. It applies to those of any belief system. I don't care if you are Christian, Jewish, Wiccan, Buddhist, whatever. Don't act like a holier-than-thou jackass. Because regardless of your religion, that kind of attitude? Is very unholy. And it will turn around to bite you eventually.Thank you.

Religious Tolerance (X-posted to my Myspace)

(Yeah I know I said I was taking a break from updating, but I have to rant, LOL)Alright, if you don't agree with a particular religion, fine. State your reasons why you have a problem with them and be done with it. But don't whine and bitch about people being intolerant of your religious beliefs (or lack thereof), and then show the same amount of intolerance by either mocking or excluding their religious beliefs. Don't accuse people of being religious hypocrites when you are one yourself. It's called "the pot calling the kettle black", and when you lower yourself to their level, you are really no better than they are.This was partly brought on by something that happened at a forum I admin at, where the person was more or less mocking and disrespecting Christianity, and I called them on it and axed the thread. And this person actually became upset about it and felt they were perfectly in the right to post what they did, and I was in the wrong! (although they did apologize later on). Now, I'll admit to having a few issues myself with the attitudes of some "Christians", but overall I try my best to respect their beliefs. So I can't stand it when other people feel the need to trash another religion and use the "well they started it!" mentality to justify it. It ain't cool.Also, today I was doing a search for Myspace groups. I came across a Christian Universalism group, which seemed pretty cool at 1st. But yet on down the page, in big bold letters, it reads "No Pagans, Unitarians, or Unitarian Universalists allowed!" Well gee, so much for tolerance. I would hope that especially the more liberal Christians would be more open and accepting of other beliefs. IMO this kinda goes their teachings - which states that all souls will eventually be reconciled to God. You'd think they'd want people of all faiths to join in and hear their message, not just those who believe like they do.I realise that there are good/bad Christians, Jews, Wiccans, Atheists, etc... No belief system is perfect as far as their followers go. I dunno, I guess I'm just really fed-up with the idea that a person has to disrespect a certain religion just because they don't happen to agree with it./rant

I ...

I resent the fact that just because I am against illegal immigration and don't feel they should "just be granted citizenship" for breaking the law, that somehow makes me an uncaring, unsupportive person.At least, this is what Cactus Jack from ILJ seems to think. He speaks of those who disagee with him of being judgemental, and that he is "talking to brick walls". And yet somehow, is he not also being judgemental by criticizing us? Are we not talking to a brick wall by trying to beat it into his head that we DO NOT think that illegal immigrants are bad people?

An email I received from SaveDarfur.org

Well, this looks to be promising:On Friday, President Bush told reporters that he is committed to taking the actions necessary to end the genocide in Darfur. The President's words are a welcome acknowledgement that the U.S. government has heard the call from Americans to protect those who can't protect themselves in Darfur. This is a extremely important step, one which all Darfur advocates have been urging for nearly two years.The President said that up until now his Administration's plan had been "to encourage African Union troops to try to bring some sense of security to these poor people that are being herded out of their villages and just terribly mistreated." While "the [African Union's] effort was noble," he continued, "it didn't achieve the objective. We need more troops." The African Union (AU) ceasefire monitoring force is currently the only line of defense, yet it is insufficient to protect millions of Darfuri men, women, and children. The AU forces' lack of the necessary resources and capacity to for this mission is acknowledged in the Administration's acceptance of the need for a stronger international peacekeeping force to protect civilians. Real peace and security in Darfur is going to require both an UN peacekeeping force in the long term, and increased NATO aid (a "bridging force") to support the African Union in the near term. With preliminary planning now underway at the UN, and a Security Council resolution authorizing a peacekeeping force with a strong mandate expected soon, there is reason to hope that a robust force could be protecting civilians by fall. Because international support will be necessary for approval of both the UN mandate and NATO assistance, the Darfur advocacy community will be required to continue its work.The President took another important step last week by submitting to Congress an emergency supplemental funding request of $514 million for peacekeeping and humanitarian aid programs in Sudan. Also last week, Senators Biden and Brownback introduced a resolution calling for NATO help for the AU mission and for implementation of a no-fly zone in Darfur. These combined actions represent a major shift in momentum toward providing the people of Darfur with the security and protection they so desperately need. It is imperative to remember, however, that beyond these important steps on the path, many more will be required before security is achieved for innocent Darfurians. Let's all just pray that he remains true to his word on this.

I can't believe this is still going on!

http://www.millionvoicesfordarfur.org/index.php?page=darfurThese stories are simply heartbreaking, and I am outraged that Bush is not doing more to stop it. No, let's go start a fight with Iraq over oil and invisible WMDs. Nevermind all the suffering these people are going through right now. This is horrible.

So I've been re-reading some of the old Christian books I had bought back when I became baptized.Looking at it now - through different eyes - some of what I have read seems distubring, and even nonsensical.Take for instance, this passage from "The Complete Book of Bible Answers" by Ron Rhodes, where he addresses the issue of those who have not heard the gospel message:"Because all human beings can see the revelation of God in creation - all people - regardless of whether they've heard about Christ or have read the bible - are held accountable before God. All are without excuse. Their rightful condemnation as objects of God's wrath, is justified because of their choice to ignore the revelation of God in creation is indefensible (see Psalm 19:1-6, Romans 1:20) I find this explanation absurd at best. So what this guy is saying is that - even if a person has never heard the gospel of Christ, they will still be sent to hell? And it's their fault?? Well pardon me for my blasphemy, but I really fail to see how a person in some farout country deserves punishment because they cannot see the revelation of God in nature. Furthermore, even if they did, and they ultimately choose to worship the "wrong" God because their search did not lead to hearing the gospel, they are still deserving of eternal damnation. And this is considered justifiable? No, I'm sorry, to me it's not. I refuse to believe that a person can be sent to hell for not accepting a God they don't even know exists.The passages the author gives IMO do not support this argument. Psalms 19:1-6 explains that the heavens declare the glory of God, and they pour out knowledge upon the earth. But again, just because someone sees God's work in nature, doesn't necessarily mean they will choose the "right" God, or will even be aware that it is of God. What about the atheists? They see nature as a result millions of years of scientific evolution. Nothing more. What about the early pagans? They were one of the 1st people to "see" God displayed in creation, but the God they worshipped was/is not the biblical concept of God. Looking at Romans 1:20 in context, it is clear that the people in question were already aware of God but chose to be disobediant. They are punished because of their disobediance, not for their lack of awareness of the gospel message.In light of of all this, it certainly does not seem "right" or "justifiable" to hold a person responsible for having never heard the gospel, or for believing in God but just not the "correct" one.*Please, if you disagree with me and feel the need to give me a lecture about why I'm wrong, just don't. Because you are likely not going to change my mind, and I'm not interested in any kind of debate or alternative viewpoints at the moment. Not trying to be rude, I just needed a place to vent. That's all. Thanks. :)