Christians...and the White Horses they think they ride in on

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:57 pm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9937614/site/newsweek/

first it was tinky winky, now it's the american girl company. what's next, christian conservatives denouncing pat roberts as homosexual?

*edit...my favorite quote. "Girls Inc.," one mother warned, "is pro-abortion and pro-contraception and pro all the other lies the secular world wants our girls to believe."

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:01 pm

just a dumb move by the company. don't involve politics with your company because you are going to have customers of all viewpoints

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:17 pm

Zuruck wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9937614/site/newsweek/

first it was tinky winky, now it's the american girl company. what's next, christian conservatives denouncing pat roberts as homosexual?

*edit...my favorite quote. "Girls Inc.," one mother warned, "is pro-abortion and pro-contraception and pro all the other lies the secular world wants our girls to believe."

heh way to go Zurich, they didnt like the stance someone took on something so they posted it on the web critcizing it. hey kinda like you just did!! did they leave thier horse double parked so you could ride off on it?

agreed 100% Birds dumb move on the companies part

Iceman · Post by **Iceman** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:32 pm

Hate to say it Z but Cuda has a good point. You are not really any different then they are.

And yes, it was a stupid move by the company.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:25 pm

Extremely dumb move... especially when you know that your primary target audience is sensitive about certain issues. If your target audience has a lot of Muslims, don't put an Israeli flag on your website. If your target audience has a lot of conservative Christians, don't make positive statements about abortion and homosexuality on your website. If your target audience has a lot of Democrats, don't endorse Bush on your website. And so on. It's just not the right way to keep customers.

Now, if you see your primary purpose as political or religious, and you're willing to lose money for it, then go for it and don't get mad when those who disagree with your politics stop spending their money on your products.

This is nothing new... it's exactly what you expect when any company makes a statement about any controversial issue. This is why smart companies don't make statements about those issues.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:14 pm

CUDA wrote: .....heh way to go Zurich, they didnt like the stance someone took on something so they posted it on the web critcizing it. hey kinda like you just did!! did they leave thier horse double parked so you could ride off on it?.....

ouch!

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 11:00 pm

I had no idea that Pat Robertson was gay.

Oh, Roberts .........

roid · Post by **roid** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:48 am

The Article wrote:A few weeks ago Tracie read on the company's Web site that it was donating $50,000 and proceeds from its I CAN bracelet to Girls Inc., which sounded like the kind of nice thing American Girl would do. But when she clicked on www.girlsinc.org, Tracie was crushed to find an endorsement of Roe v. Wade and language supportive of homosexuals. It struck her that politics had invaded playtime.

her playtime involves following links on the internet?

this is a person who visited a NON-"American Girl" website and read something there she didn't like.

Goto the Girls-Inc website and you'll see it's a human rights organisation. What did she expect, Anti-gay predudice?

She should probably avoid human rights organisations if she's gonna be offended by everyone who doesn't share her hate.

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:15 am

Ummm...I didn't know boycotting and causing a ruckus in front of the store was what I did but ok. And my post isnt' really about the website, it's about the hypocritical piece of trash christians that seem to find a problem with anything now.

Spongebob Squarepants = Gay
Tinky Winky = Gay
American Girl = Promotes killing babies and all those other secular lies.

Tolerance huh? I hope when all you Christians die and you think you're going to see your maker, you don't and realize what a fruitless life you just lead.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:34 am

roid wrote:who doesn't share her hate.

just a little bit of stereo typing arent we, maybe you and Zurch should re-read your posts before you accuse someone of hate

Christians... and the White Horses they think they ride on.

now there's a statment full of love if I ever saw one. this thread could easily evolve into an abortion thread when its really about fair market. we all have the right at least here in the US ( maybe its different where you live ) for free speach regardless of what others think about it. this person obviously is pro-life and chose to boycott and get others to boycott a comapny that is pro-choice. boycotts and protests happen all the time and for various reasons. I just read an article recently about a stay in school program at a N.J. area school where they brought in a current Pro football player and his organization to speak to the kids. it turns out that the Organization was a Chrisitian group. BUT!!! not once during thier presentation did they make any mention of God or religion in any way shape or form, but a few parent found out about this groups root and sued the school district over it. no hate there either huh. just because a person takes a stand because of thier beliefs doesnt neccesarily make it a hate thing. and to lump all religious ppl as haters is stereo typing. just as it would be for me if I called you and Zurch anti religious bigots. so to leave you with a little Envoque,

Clear your mind and the rest will follow, be color blind dont be so shallow.
same goes for some peoples view on Christians

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:39 am

Zuruck wrote:Ummm...I didn't know boycotting and causing a ruckus in front of the store was what I did but ok. And my post isnt' really about the website, it's about the hypocritical piece of trash christians that seem to find a problem with anything now.

Spongebob Squarepants = Gay
Tinky Winky = Gay
American Girl = Promotes killing babies and all those other secular lies.

Tolerance huh? I hope when all you Christians die and you think you're going to see your maker, you don't and realize what a fruitless life you just lead.

WOW talk about hate. your ahowing real Tolerence with that attitude Zurich. its truly an honor to have a role model as you to show us the way. I hope more of us dont show the compassion and love that you displayed with your last 2 posts

P.S. and I hope you DONT wait untill you die to realize what a fruitless life you just lead

roid · Post by **roid** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:58 am

CUDA wrote:
roid wrote:who doesn't share her hate.
just a little bit of stereo typing arent we, maybe you and Zurch should re-read your posts before you accuse someone of hate

while pointing out the slight stupidity of taking offense at something written on a website beyond the control of the primary party, i suppose i was stereotyping that the human race on the whole is NON-hateful.

We are talking about taking offense at a human rights organisation because they do not share a religious predudice. And then extending that offense to any company that dares sponsor their human rights projects.

To me it's a matter of "i hate you, because you refuse to hate what i hate".

as i said: What did she expect, anti-gay predudice from a human rights organisation? i'm personally glad she was disappointed in that regard.

CUDA wrote:
Christians... and the White Horses they think they ride on.
now there's a statment full of love if I ever saw one. this thread could easily evolve into an abortion thread when its really about fair market. we all have the right at least here in the US ( maybe its different where you live ) for free speach regardless of what others think about it. this person obviously is pro-life and chose to boycott and get others to boycott a comapny that is pro-choice. boycotts and protests happen all the time and for various reasons. I just read an article recently about a stay in school program at a N.J. area school where they brought in a current Pro football player and his organization to speak to the kids. it turns out that the Organization was a Chrisitian group. BUT!!! not once during thier presentation did they make any mention of God or religion in any way shape or form, but a few parent found out about this groups root and sued the school district over it. no hate there either huh. just because a person takes a stand because of thier beliefs doesnt neccesarily make it a hate thing. and to lump all religious ppl as haters is stereo typing. just as it would be for me if I called you and Zurch anti religious bigots. so to leave you with a little Envoque,

Clear your mind and the rest will follow, be color blind dont be so shallow.
same goes for some peoples view on Christians

(bolding by me)
you're mixing Zurick and me up.
Your former quote was from me. The latter was solely from Zurick, but it seems you are correlating it to me.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:06 am

I would have to agree with your first point, there is way to much of that sort of attitude, the Extremists on both sides hate for the sake of hate.

My appoligies. I was stereo typing, as the tread originonator did. I was trying to make a point but did it poorly

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:19 am

You people are just now figuring out that I have no tolerance for religion? I'm sure Lothar has known that for sometime. I'll save everyone the sake of "that" topic again but my point is still clear.

Cuda, do you spend your free time surfing around websites that you like making sure there is nothing on there secular? Nothing that would put your faith in doubt? I sincerely hope not and I really don't think you do. As for a fruitless life, maybe, but the only thing that bears no weight with me now is the 14 years of baptist church I was forced into as a young kid.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:41 am

well first off at my age it would take alot more than a website to shake my faith.

do you spend your free time surfing around websites that you like making sure there is nothing on there secular

did you not do the same thing?? you searched around web sites till you found something you didnt like and proceeded to trash those people. from my reading they went to the web site THEN noticed what the company supported, its obvious that they didnt know beforehand since by their acitons after the fact they would have never bought thier children those particular toys. I see no problem with someone that stands up for thier convictions, I might not always agree with them but I can respect them for it.same goes with your hatred of Christians, do you feel the same about Jews, or Muslims, or Budists?

but the only thing that bears no weight with me now is the 14 years of baptist church I was forced into as a young kid.

you CLEARLY have other issues that you need to resolve that dont involve religion. you cannot blame all of your or the worlds problems on Christians

hypocritical piece of trash christians

Nice, sounds kinda of Nazi-ish

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:55 am

Pretty much all religion Cuda with the exception of Buddhism, as they are non-violent in both actions and protests, unless you consider burning yourself non-violent. To me other than buddhism, it serves no purpose but misery. Look at what it has done over the ages and tell me otherwise.

As for how I found it, I was reading the daily news at MSNBC.com and it was one of the headlines, so I read it. And yes, I did indeed waste 14 years of Sunday mornings...I could have been playing soccer or something but no, I had to go read a stupid book about things that never happened.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 11:23 am

Zuruck,

if you went to a company website and they had an endorsement of Bush on their front page, wouldn't you be engaging in the exact same behavior?

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 11:59 am

Ummm....no. If I like a product from a certain company, I will use it. I can't think of anything that I have bought recently that was endorsed by him though, except for my weekly fill-up of gas. I don't like President Bush, but unlike the zealots, I don't mind if his face is attached to it. It means nothing to me, it's not going to ruin my values or ideas on anything. It's not going to change my mind about secular lies. It seems as if the Christians that act this crap out live in an active state of fear. If you belive in a god that's fine, do it and feel better about yourself..but get past the idea that everything out there is immoral and lies.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 12:27 pm

Zuruck wrote:Ummm....no. If I like a product from a certain company, I will use it.

I'm officially surprised.

Now, if someone else you knew decided to stop shopping somewhere because the company endorsed Bush (and such people DO exist), would you be as mad at them as you are at this particular Christian group? Would you be calling those people "zealots" because of the strength of their anti-Bushness? Or do you reserve your ire for people whose behavior is religiously motivated?

It seems as if the Christians that act this crap out live in an active state of fear.

Some of them do. So do a lot of the people who refuse to buy anything from a company that endorses Bush. So do those who want it to be illegal to have a piggy bank. So, if you're a company selling a product, be aware that endorsing a particular religious or political viewpoint will lose you customers, and don't get pissed when it happens.

get past the idea that everything out there is immoral and lies.

like George Bush, Karl Rove, the Republican party, and their oil war? Yeah, somebody needs to get past the idea that everything out there is immoral and lies

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:37 pm

Zuruck wrote: It's not going to change my mind about secular lies.

but get past the idea that everything out there is immoral and lies

so what your saying is that the secular community lies and that we in the "Christian community" should just accept the Secular lies and not consider lying to be wrong or immoral

zealÂ·ot ( P ) Pronunciation Key (zlt)
n.

One who is zealous, especially excessively so.
A fanatically committed person.

/me hands Zurich a mirror. your unabashed hatred of the Christians has put you smak into the catagory that you dispise so much

It seems as if the Christians that act this crap out live in an active state of fear

yet you do the EXACT same thing. why are you living in a state of fear Zurich. you have become the antithisis of what you hate. if you took the time to get to know the people you hate so much then maybe you wouldnt fear them so much. Christianity is not hatefull or a bad thing, are there bad Christians? yes. just like anyother part of society. if you would do some research you would find when ever there is a crisis that needs addressed in this country, it is usually the christian organizations that are there first to provide aid, funny that doesnt seem hatefull to me

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:38 pm

I'll wait to be corrected about Bush, Rove, and yes the oil war. So far nothing else has panned out about the war. Nothing, I repeat, nothing they told us worked out to be true.

As for the first part of your post, the answer is yes. But I tend to another question, do you know of any groups that actively do what the Christians are doing? I don't hear of Democrats banning Oberweis dairy products here in Chicago because their founder is Republican or refusing to use medication because of the pharmaceutical lobby in Washington. Find me another group as pro-active in hate as Christians and I'll be hogswoggled.

Stryker · Post by **Stryker** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 2:01 pm

Let's see....

Muslims destroy WTC towers...
Muslims revolt in France, burning cars, refusing to acknowledge French authority, etc.
Barbara Boxer boycotting all oil companies that drill in Alaska and encouraging others to do the same.

Need I go on?

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 2:55 pm

Please do Stryker, show me anything relevant and I'll look at it. But saying 2 billion Muslims were responsible for 9/11 is stupid. What's wrong wiht the boycott? Given what we've seen from the oil companies this year and the fact that even they say that oil won't reach the markets for 20 years...you disagree with her?

I haven't looked up much aobut the riots..so I can't really say anything about them. I'll let you know.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:36 pm

But saying 2 billion Muslims were responsible for 9/11 is stupid

but yet its ok to say ALL Christians are Zealots and hatefull

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:01 pm

Well, Cuda you took that sentence from a different context. I was not comparing Christianity to another religion equally as violent as itself.

Cuda, Lothar, would you buy products from the American Girl Co, if you have girls that want them, or would you ban them now? Do you care what a company stands for as long as you like the product? If you say yes, then you should all be walking to work and so forth. String that thought along and visualize this, how much money does America actually contribute to terrorism? We all know that Saudi Arabia funds more terrorism than anybody, and whilst our govt would love to sit and say the money does not reach their hands, it does. It's a little further down the line, I'll give you that, but it's the same guise.

Right wingers like Stryker, woodchip, and Will, would love to liquify the middle east, but refuse to realize the truth behind it all. American money funds that which we like, and that which we hate. I'm reminded of the commercial "If you drive an SUV, you fund terrorists"...maybe not the far off.

jakee308 · Post by **jakee308** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:07 pm

never minde

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:22 pm

your talkin Apples and Oranges, on 1 hand you have your neccesities fuel and food that you need for survival and you might have no option where to buy them, on the other hand you have your wants, toys what KIND of car you drive, where your clothes are manufactured, those things you have a choice on. yes I have chosen things by a companies stance on things, its the same as your right to vote, except your voting with your $$$. I'll be honest there have been times when I voted not knowing much about the candidates. so I looked at who supported them to help make my decision and if the Anti Christian Liberties Union supported them then I voted against them. thats what being an American is about, using your vote to voice your opinion, be it in the political arena or the free market arena. just because a particular group choses to boycott or protest a company doesnt make it wrong and just because you dont agree with sed groups political or religious viewpoints doesnt make it wrong either, you talked about Tolerance earlier, thats what Tolerence is, not necissarily agreeing with someones viewpoint on something, but agreeing with their right to voice it. you are not allowing them to voice thier opinion

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:03 pm

Zuruck wrote:do you know of any groups that actively do what the Christians are doing?

http://www.buyblue.org/history

Surprised you didn't hear about this... I thought it was brought up here more than once, but can't find it in the archives. Maybe I was ragging on it on some other board.

I don't hear of Democrats banning

I don't see anything being banned here... only boycotted and protested. Same with buyblue. I think both are kinda dumb, but hey, people are like that sometimes. Smart companies generally do their best to keep controversial issues out of the spotlight, like American Girl appears to do now (there aren't any hints of this controversy on americangirl.com, nor is there an easily found link to girls inc.)

would you buy products from the American Girl Co

I already have.

whilst our govt would love to sit and say the money does not reach their hands, it does. It's a little further down the line, I'll give you that...

If I walked to work, but spent my money on beef, well, eventually the cattle rancher is going to go buy gas, so the money will filter down to the Saudis anyway, right? Maybe not as much of it, but some of it.

I defend people's right to boycott products from companies they don't like (whether it's a company that supports abortion, a company displaying an Israeli flag, or a company that sells piggy banks.) That doesn't mean I think the boycotting people are doing the right thing or even have good reasons, just that they have the right to do it. Personally, I'll buy whatever product best meets my needs, unless the company makes an issue out of where their profits go.

De Rigueur · Post by **De Rigueur** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:04 pm

Zuruck wrote: [Religion] serves no purpose but misery. Look at what it has done over the ages and tell me otherwise.

OK, I'll try. I'd say that if you add up all the crusades, inquisitions, witch trials, etc., the total misery would seem negligible compared to the misery attributable to the secular totalitarian governments and dictators of the last 100 years. People often cite religious wars as being especially horrific, but consider a couple of secular wars (WWI & WWII). In those, casualties ran into the tens of millions. If humans insist on having wars, then would to God that all wars were of the comparatively benign religious variety.

IMO, as long as there are humans, they will always find an excuse to go to war and otherwise inflict misery. Religion is not a crucial factor. If you think religion serves the purpose of producing misery, then it appears that secular pursuits are far more proficient.

But I think your antipathy toward religion really stems from something else, namely from hypocrisy. And here I can't argue with you -- the world is indeed full of hypocrits. Sorry.

Drakona · Post by **Drakona** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:05 pm

Zuruck wrote:Pretty much all religion Cuda with the exception of Buddhism . . . . it serves no purpose but misery. Look at what it has done over the ages and tell me otherwise.

You know, I've always wanted to do a careful study on this. My historical gut instinct tells me that many of the greatest moral teachers in history are--at the very least--religious, if not Christian. I have had this impression for a while and wondered if it was just prejudice or if there was something to the thought. Having collected no data on the topic, and relying only on a fuzzy and often errant awareness of history, I couldn't tell. Still, I thought... Mother Theresa, Catholic; Martin Luther King, Southern Baptist Preacher; and of course there's Jesus. I come up with a lot of Christian names. Shoot, the idea of religious tolerence that everyone agrees is such a moral Good Thing arose in Catholic/Protestant infused Europe and Deeply Christian Young America.

Can anyone name a great atheist moral leader--I mean, I think famous atheist and I think... Carl Sagan? Douglas Adams? Okay, so atheism brings us skeptecism and satire... dig a little deeper and I get names like Voltaire and a few philosophers, but... moral leaders? People who are historically remembered for bringing good to mankind? I got nothing.

I was curious to see if this held up, so I hit google looking for a list of historical figures correlated with religions, and I found one. It's a list of the 100 most influential people of the last millenium (apparently determined by massive poll), with religious beliefs listed next to it. Check it out.

Now do a global search for atheism on that page. Apparently, the great gifts of atheism to the world are communism and dictatorship. Bwahaha.

(This mostly tongue-in-cheek, of course. The idea bears more study. In a religious age, it's hardly surprising that the good guys *and* bad guys are religious. Still, of the six atheists listed there, three are Mao, Lenin, and Stalin, and a fourth is Marx. That has got to be worth at least a little ribbing...

)

-Drak

roid · Post by **roid** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:27 pm

on the issue of secular wars, i'm not entirely convinced nationalism ISN'T a religion. The more i look into these things the harder and harder i'm finding it to define a line in the sand between beliefs, ideologys and religions.
Nationalism, Humanism, Atheism - they would shudder to think of themselves as defined "religions" (perhaps in the same way that christians shudder to define homosexual marriage as "marriage"). But when you cut out the language barriers, the fruits are the same, perhaps they are therefore more similar than some of us would like to believe - simply because we spent our lives defining ourselves as "different to them", instead of standing as islands.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:44 pm

Anything can be a religion. Few religions are spiritually beneficial.

roid · Post by **roid** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:51 pm

Duper wrote:Anything can be a religion. Few religions are spiritually beneficial.

can you elaborate on that latter sentance? for i could label religious-experience-like benefits in all the ideologys i mentioned above (if this is what you mean by "spiritually benefitial").

Drakona · Post by **Drakona** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 11:07 pm

It depends on how you define the terms. If you say a "religion" is something that drives people, gives them meaning, has fanatics, and so forth, then yeah, a lot of things are religions. If you define it fuzzily enough, you can include anything, especially if you're one of the sorts of people that use 'religion' as a cuss word.

Here are some distinctions you can use:

A religion is a set of beliefs that makes statements about the supernatural or spiritual. Religions make statements about, for example, life after death, deities and supernatural powers, creation, and ultimate meaning. Religions generally have an associated piety and ritual, as well as institution.

Things like Christianity and Islam meet all my criteria. Tribal religions are missing piety, but they still count. Some things are right on the edge of it: Wiccans have some general beliefs, but not much in the way of specificity, and are lacking in piety and organization. Atheism makes some positive statements about the supernatural (namely that it doesn't exist), but has no associated piety, ritual, or institution.

An ideal is a driving idea or purpose which many people serve in common. Things like freedom, democracy, free birth control, protection of the environment, and the advance of Christianity are all ideals.

An ideology is a set of ideals and beliefs which together motivate and drive people, give them a sense of purpose, and color how they see the world. Most ideologies come with a historical narrative (Actually, they almost always go like this: "You are the rebellious force of light fighting against the evil forces of darkness...") and often found social, economic, or political systems.

Nationalism, Conservativism, Objectivism, Liberalism, and Nihilism all come to mind as ideologies.

As with most definitions, some things fit all the way, some are mostly there, and some share certain characteristics. Some things are both religions and ideologies. Some ideals are important enough to some people to be ideologies in their own right. It's hard to "define a line between beliefs, ideologys and religions" because the world is complicated and simple definitions don't do. That doesn't mean they're the same.

Most atheists would indeed shudder if you define atheism as a religion, but because they reject some of the characteristics of religion which atheism doesn't share: piety, ritual, orthodoxy, belief in the supernatural. Most wouldn't mind if you included them in a definition of religion broad enough that it simply meant "any idea that ever motivated anyone" or "any statement about the supernatural, positive or negative."

Some fruits of ideals, ideologies, religions, and beliefs are the same: they motivate people, they create fanatics. Then again, religions create priests--especially hermits and monks, devoted to following the divine in solitude. None of the others do that. Ideologies found political systems. Beliefs generate research. Reality is complicated, but that's not a reason to fuzz all lines and ignore all distinctions and pretend everything's all the same.

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:18 am

i never did much like lines

Behemoth · Post by **Behemoth** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:54 am

Some day you people will learn... until then your sadness and burdens will continue.

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:11 am

hehe. Anyone want to do some research into what beliefs Behemoth follows? i havn't a clue.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:46 am

Following your logic Roidy, I guess we can say being a Green Bay Packer fan is a form of religion.

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:03 am

woody, if you wanna, then i respect your decision

<3

De Rigueur · Post by **De Rigueur** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:56 am

roid wrote:on the issue of secular wars, i'm not entirely convinced nationalism ISN'T a religion. The more i look into these things the harder and harder i'm finding it to define a line in the sand between beliefs, ideologys and religions.

I think you're on to something. There was a theologian named Paul Tillich who used the term "ultimate concern" as a broader, more generalized replacement for the term "religion". Everyone has a belief system, or worldview, that includes some kind of ultimate -- whether it be God, humanity, nature, etc. The kind of ultimate you believe in influences your values and other fundamental beliefs.

Using this concept alters the character of the debate between the "religious" and "non-religious" because it changes the question from "Do you believe in (a) religion/God, or not?" to "What is the nature of the ultimate that you believe in?" It puts everyone on equal footing.

Christians...and the White Horses they think they ride in on

Christians...and the White Horses they think they ride in on

Re: Christians...and the White Horses they think they ride i

Re: Christians...and the White Horses they think they ride i