From: ap290@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ruth M. Hanschka)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.xcult-l
Subject: Re: before birth...
Date: 18 Dec 1992 06:11:56 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: xcult-l@psuvm.psu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, AKARP@GONZAGA.BITNET () says:

>Ruth:
>
>You lacerate my argument with claims that I am referring to all conservative
>Christians when I attack the Religious right.  Perhaps I can clarify
>exactly which group of Christians I mean.
>
Please do - but a lot of times, people do precisely that; they dump us all
in the same garbage can.  I've been tossed in that one myself quite a few
times.  Plus - precisely what is this "Religious RIght"?   I know a lot of
very conservative people, almost reactionary, but the caricature in your
first post fits none of them....  

>Specifically: The Oregon Citizens' Alliance and familiar Christian subversive

THIS BUNCH?!  AGAIN?!  Yeesh!  That's comparing Amish and Congregationalists!
But subversive?  That's a nasty and dangerous word - I think you'd better
tell me what you mean by that....
>movements by similar Council or Alliance titles and Pat Robertson's Christian
>Coalition.  These groups are, I state vociferously, full of hate and
>intolerance.  If you are not so closed-minded and short-sighted as such

Are they?  Because they call something like they see it?  Because they have
a code of morality that includes some absolutes?  Or because of how they choose
to express those views?  I subscribe to some of them myself, to be frank about
it, but don't agree with their political practices.  

>organizations, then it is clear that your are not CONSERVATIVE in the
>self-title you bestow; rather, you are a far cry from the REACTIONARY
>rhetoric of the Religious Right; perhaps you're a moderate conservative.

Am I?  I'm strongly anti-abortion [I think it's murder on the part of the
abortionist.  period.  end of spiel] and think that the so-called gay 
lifestyle is, to put it bluntly, sinful.  Where does that put me?:-)
You're trying to categorize people in accordance to categories you 
are creating, and that just plain doesn't work.  My political views are
all over the spectrum, as are those of a lot of people.  I don't object
to people disagreeing with me, but I do hate being categorized, and will
do my darndest to kick, scream, argue, and play devil's advocate if that's
what it takes to get out of someone else's box.

>I think it's impossible for you to discredit my comments and the rest of
>the liberal left.  I speak facts.  Please don't depreciate the discussion
>by piddling in ignorant counterattacks; prove to me otherwise, please...
>
Ignorant?  Hmmmm - that's a great way of dismissing anything I say, about
*anything*.  It's a way of not listening.  I speak facts and personal
experience too, please do me the same courtesy you ask for yourself.
I lot of the things I say come from convictions that have been tested
under fire.  Someone once accused me of being a pastor's parrot; it wasn't
true then and it isn't true now.  This is one of those arguments that can
keep going in circles forever, and will if we let it.  I'm not trying to 
discredit anyone, but I *am* likely to disagree with you.  A lot of it may 
sound like a recital of things memorized in Sunday School, but it isn't.  

I'd like nothing better than to table this thing, really, but backing off
or backing down would send a message to some that I admit defeat.  I can't
do that.

-- 
		###	Ruth Hanschka, the Nethead    ###
			- ap290@cleveland.freenet.edu
	      Where anything can happen, and it usually does
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU