Christian Fundamentalists and the Rise of the Radical Right
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 22:02
VIEWED: 9272
PAGE 14 of 15
Magons, that's just what the article is about: Opening people's eyes so Quote:
Their growth in power currently is on the rise; if enough of the population realized where it's going, the danger can be minimized. By dismissing what the author (and I) perceive as a very real threat, we essentially enable them to gain further power.
you can prevent their growth in power so that they are little more than mad voices in a crowd of reasonable ones
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mike, I think more is needed than ridicule. Currently some of the candidates have latched onto the (very useful) concept that any time they're ridiculed, they say it's because we fear them. That makes them feel more powerful. I think denying them the political power to enforce their ideology is needed; anyone can believe anything they choose, but (as Frem would say, or did he already?) something along the lines of "your right to believe what you want ends at my nose". The article is trying to educate people on how these kinds of extremists believe and the dangers of dismissing them or allowing them to gain power over others.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Riona, was that "explanation" a sly attempt to avoid the question? I get the feeling it was. So I'll ask it again; if, as you say, you're a creationist, do you really believe man existed at the same time as dinosaurs, that God created man and woman out of clay, and that the world is only a few thousand years old? None of the reasonable people here will think less of you if you do, or at least most of the civil people here won't hold it against you. I'd really like to know.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I do indeed. Though a few thousand is an understatement. Seven, eight, ten, twelve, I think there's some wiggle room there, I'm not going to pick an exact date. I don't rightly care what people think of me either way, I don't need reassurance. You can believe the way you do and I can believe the way I do. It is our right in the world.
Has anyone figured out the wing question yet?
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, like this is anything we need to ever worry about. How very dare anyone complain about the Radical Christian Right....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Yeah, like this is anything we need to ever worry about. How very dare anyone complain about the Radical Christian Right....
Looks like Rappy gets his "news" from the same sources as Billo the Clown does...
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/07/oreilly-no-one-believing-in-
jesus-commits-mass-murder/
Hey, you can't really PROVE that any of those alleged Muslim terrorists were really Muslim, can you? I mean, obviously you can't go by the things they said or wrote, or what they claim.
Right?
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
You can believe in God and science at the same time. I'm skeptical of both ;) But I take the point.
A man that is skeptical of faith, does not have it.
A man that is skeptical of science, is called a scientist.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
^ Nice
LAST week's bloodbath in Norway is a wake-up call for Australia's counterterrorist agencies to confront the threat from right-wing extremists.
The Norwegian attacks have sparked debate among security analysts over whether the focus on Islamist terrorism has overshadowed risks from racist Christian fundamentalists.
The attacks could trigger a rethink by bodies such as ASIO, which received a massive boost in funds to counter terrorism after the September 11 attacks in 2001.
ASIO head David Irvine has acknowledged Australia faces a potential threat from ''lone wolf'' terrorists such as Anders Behring Breivik, who carried out the July 22 bombing and mass shooting in Norway.
''What happened in Norway should remind our community that threats to our security may come not from one or two sources, but many,'' he said in a speech last week.
Mr Irvine warned: ''We must recognise that intelligence agencies cannot cover absolutely all latent threats, and are required to make careful judgments and choices on priorities.''
According to some sources, police and intelligence bodies have given right-wing extremists a low priority. As a result they could have underestimated the threat.
The Norwegian attack, and the potential for similar acts by white supremacists, appeared to catch Australian agencies off guard, according to the sources, who have with links to the intelligence community.
''It amazes me that they are seeing as new issues things that had obviously been issues for years,'' said one source, who asked not to be named.
Another source said agencies had been reluctant to confront the diversity of terrorist threats. ''It has become a mindset,'' the source said, referring to the focus on Islamists.
Attorney-General Robert McClelland insists government agencies are aware the threat could come from many sources.
''The reality is terrorist activity motivated by beliefs other than the jihadist cause has affected Australia in the past and could well occur again,'' he said. ''The fact that Norway is a modern progressive country not dissimilar to Australia does serve as a reminder of the need for constant vigilance in countering terrorist threats - whatever the motivation.''
Australian agencies had recognised the risk of lone-wolf attacks before the Norway massacre.
The 2010 counterterrorist white paper warned of potential attacks by independent terrorists inspired by al-Qaeda.
But it made no mention of racist extremists, referring only to the potential risk from ''the disaffected and disempowered''.
A statement on ASIO's website on the ''threat environment'' focuses on Islamists, but also refers to the ''potential for violent protest, nationalist/racist extremism and communal violence''.
Ramon Spaaij, a researcher at La Trobe University and an expert on lone-wolf terrorism, said Australian agencies had focused on radical Islamists for good reason. But he said: ''There is the danger of losing sight of the threat of right-wing extremism. This is a good time to ask the question: 'what is the threat in Australia?' ''
The answer could not be divorced from the political and social setting, Dr Spaaij said. The emergence of the anti-Muslim right in Europe came amid intense debate over multiculturalism, immigration and national identity. Similar debates, not as intense, happened here, he said.
''It wouldn't surprise me if there's a degree of social polarisation happening here as well over issues of multiculturalism and Muslim migrants. Looking forward, it is something that has to be closely monitored.''
Paul Monk, a consultant and former intelligence analyst, sees no evidence Australian agencies have turned a blind eye to right-wing extremists. The focus had rightly been on Islamists - ''the guys who have repeatedly enacted large-scale terrorism''.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
You can believe in God and science at the same time. I'm skeptical of both ;) But I take the point.
A man that is skeptical of faith, does not have it.
A man that is skeptical of science, is called a scientist.
Skepticism and disbelief do not mean the same thing. A more accurate statement would be 'A man who is skeptical of faith, is called Agnostic.'
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Happy, I'm glad I"m not the reason you're turned off, and I think you understand what the article is about. What you're missing, I believe, is that the generalizations which some are finding offensive is aimed at a particular set of extremists, and for someone not OF that set to feel offended is kind of counter-intuitive, isn't it? Like the mention of the afterlife; a similar situation would be if someone wrote "Some Americans are loud and rude" (which they are, as tourists) and I were to say it's being applied to me because I'm an American, tho' I was never loud or rude as a tourist. I hope you see what I'm trying to say--because he writes about some who are extremist fundamentalists, he's not REFERRING to Christians or other fundamentalists, so for a Christian or fundamentalist to take offense (actually, a Christian, because he WASN'T clear enough that he was talking about extremists) because they share SOMETHING with those of whom he is speaking isn't logical. That's so convoluted Im' not sure I"m making sense, but I hope you can unravel it to understand what I MEAN.
And yes, the quote makes more sense the way you wrote it.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME