Sentences with phrase «of liberals religion»

On a different note, Carson Holloway says the HHS mandate reveals the logic of liberalism as a creeping and creepy secularism: ``... for an older generation of liberals religion had to be kept private in the sense that it could not try to control the government for its own distinctively religious purposes.

He held a hearing in December that described the science around warming as a kind of liberal religion.

Not exact matches

and they say the so called secular liberals are tolerant.I see allot of secular Jews here are very intolerant of people wanting to practice their religion the way they practiced the last 3000 years

As Owen argues, the ascendant form of philosophical liberalism, with its tenuous claims to be a space without any religious commitments, is «not well equipped to confront a world of resurgent religion, particularly religion that is uneasy with or rejects liberal democratic principles.»

The Liberal Leagues attempted to give legal effect to their heterodox vision of religion under the slogan «separation of church and state,» and in 1876 they proposed their own constitutional amendment.

In fact, the Blaine Amendments are among the clearest examples in the nation's history of a state establishment of religion — and the only reason they have not been recognized as such is that they establish a theologically liberal vision of religion.

I understand you prefer the brain washing of the liberal media rather than some hateful religion but, you are really no different.

In their view, the American political experiment is liberal to its rotten core, and Baxter in particular thinks the very core of the core is the First Amendment that pretends the state is «neutral» to religion when in fact it is an insidious instrument for taking Christianity captive to provide «legitimation» for a capitalist, consumerist, warmongering society.

Normally I take conservative rants about the liberal press hating religion with a grain of salt but I have to wonder here.

We liberals are plenty quick to point out the inconsistencies and hypocrasy in our own religion but reticent when it appears in the religion of others.

An interesting and suggestive aspect of his gender - based analysis is the near - total absence of religion as a cause of violence, unlike standard liberal narratives that attribute the progress of Western society to the taming of religious passions through secularization.

Robert Wuthnow of Princeton is among the students of American religion who have incisively analyzed the ways in which all the churches are split along a left - right, liberal - conservative divide, mirroring the divides within our general culture.

Keep the freaken religion out of it you typical liberal hypocrite.

The day the Evangelicals started supporting the Liberal Romney and his satanic religion of Mormonism they ceased to be Christians.

Limbaugh saying that Liberals site Jesus, Please, liberals don't believe in the mix of religion anLiberals site Jesus, Please, liberals don't believe in the mix of religion anliberals don't believe in the mix of religion and state.

However, the more insecure the future of a liberal, secular society appears to be, the more confident I feel about the future of religion — not a future in relation to emancipation and economic and / or political liberation.

Religions = primitive form of government, some are based on democratic values, or some are communist type, some are liberal, or some are conservative.

The relativism and tolerance of a liberal world view now demand a kind of respect for non-Christian religions which precludes overt attempts to evangelize among them.

The irony here is that this bill would have actually increased attacks upon religion, as many gays and lesbians, as well as their supporters and those who are not biased towards them, are actually also members of churches, albeit more liberal ones.

What a reasonable and liberal religion we could have if Jesus had limited his remarks concerning the love of God to his lovely rain analogy.

What «Effective Christian Education» shows most effectively, however, is the fraudulence of what is presented as the «scientific» study of religion — and the credulity of church leaders who can not distinguish between Christian faith and liberal sentimentalities.

The latter in particular appears to have been designed not to explicate ancient texts but to force the Jewish religion into line with his own entirely philosophical preference for a liberal order supportive of individual freedom.

This seems to have entailed a more liberal attitude toward some of the strictures of Jewish law but an appreciation for the sentiments of conservative religion nonetheless.

Most mainline, liberal religion — of the sort preached from my limestone pulpit — has had as its goal adjustment to and satisfaction with the present order rather than speculation or concern about the future.

Whether one voted for the Liberal Party of not, Canadians were thrilled to see a cabinet that reflected a fuller picture of who we are — First Nations, immigrants and born - and - raised Canadians, men and women, regional representation, gay and straight, Christian and Sikh and atheist and Muslim among other religions, differently abled, different socio - economic stories, and so on.

I assume you are referring to the last, most liberal definition of «religion»?

The idea of Secular Nationalism and Secular State were the creation of cooperation between Gandhi's reformed religion and Nehru's liberal humanist secularism and they succeeded to establish itself in India against the idea of Hindu and Muslim communalism.

On the one hand, we have deleted the somber aspects of God, thereby ignoring the tart warning by that relentless opponent of liberal theology, J. Gresham Machen, that «religion can not be made joyful simply by looking on the bright side of God.»

It was also the most helpful for one concerned with nature, science, philosophy, liberal religion, and good writing — all of which my wife had learned to appreciate before I met her.

The Parliament of World Religions in Chicago in 1896 was a turning point in liberal thought.

Voices on all sides of the religious and political spectrum have begun to recognize — not least because of the increased presence of Islam in Western societies — that a purely secular, liberal approach to public discourse is not sustainable in a world increasingly shaped by religions.

I'm a Kingdom of God focused woman, postmodern, liberal to the conservative and conservative to the liberal in matters of both religion and politics (not an easy task, I assure you), a social justice wanna - be trying to do some good, and a nondenominational charismatic recovering know - it - all who has unexpectedly fallen back in love with the Church.

I know lots of Muslims, lots of Jews, lots of Christians, tons of Hindus, and some are kind, some are mean, some like animals, some like sports, some are liberals, some are conservatives, some like to swim, but it has nothing to do with what religion they are.

Unitarian Universalism, as a liberal religion, sits in a dynamic tension between our historical roots and traditions, and the freshness and innovation of ongoing revelation.

But it is surprising how many of the above mentioned bad aspects of religion are present even in the apparently most liberal believers.

(Liberal religion refers to open and ongoing revelation, interconnected relationship grounded in love and never coercion, an understanding of our responsibility to assist the arc of the moral universe in bending toward justice, and our understanding that there are resources both human and divine that make it possible for us to do so.

A more ambitious set of liberals then came to claim that religion had to be private in the sense that religious believers should not bring their moral convictions to the political and legislative process.

As to curriculum, Dupré points out that many Catholic schools have reduced the ideal of a Catholic liberal education to «a few courses on religion, ethics, and a smattering of philosophy in an otherwise wholly pragmatically oriented curriculum.»

Two generations back, Unitarians and Universalists spoke of «humanism vs. theism»; in the 19th century it was «free religion» and «liberal Christianity,» and before that it was «rational liberalism» vs. «transcendentalism.»

Third, there are liberal constitutional arguments for requiring, not just permitting, the study of religion in public schools.

Here, too, Legutko improves upon his predecessor by pinpointing the deep source of liberal hostility to orthodox religion in particular: Salvation is a good that is unequally distributed and thus amounts to the ultimate illegitimate privilege.

Yeah, except all of the liberal communists are in love with Islam and will never allow us to do the right thing and ban that toxic religion!!!!

Over several decades, the partisanship of the liberal oldline churches brought the public role of religion into deep discredit.

Since, however, free riders make little contribution to what people are looking for in religion — in terms of inspiration, fellowship, strong conviction, and communal security — liberal groups tend to spawn apathy and a lack of direction, which is a sure formula for institutional decline.

Responding to this «religion is for private life only» position, Greenawalt argues that in some circumstances citizens of a liberal / modernist state may rely upon their personal religious values in casting votes or framing arguments.

And it belies a sort of liberal bias which treats all religions as mere shades of the same color.

There are good liberal, secular reasons for incorporating the serious study of religion into the curriculum of public schools.

All I see from Santorum is condemnation for his neighbor, Santorum bears false witness of his neighbor (anyone who differs in religion), and lies... Even when videotaped Santorum accuses the «liberal media» of spinning his words.

Leading French Catholics thus began to claim that the Revolution's fundamental commitment to democracy was incompatible with the liberal freedom of religion it had earlier upheld.

Funny to me how all the liberals who want the church to leave the government alone are the very same ones who say that churches should not discriminate in the hiring of their clergy on basis of religion and are saying that churches who do not support contraceptives are required to pay for it.