When the leadership of a church strays to far from reality then people quit going, move to another church, or in set communities, fire them.

Any church changes over time. The church is like a living body, ever changing, ever growing. Unlike a human body, a church doesn't die from old age, it dies when leaves it's congregation behind.

The society we live in today is much different from the one we lived in just 20 or 30 years ago. A church must change with the times. 30 years ago we weren't exposed to same-sex marriages and the arguments that surround that issue. 30 years ago I didn't know any gay couples, or lesbians.

If you had asked me what I thought about same-sex marriage 30 years ago I would have looked at you like you were from another planet. The concept didn't exist in my world, it wasn't even on my horizon or in my vocabulary. How could I have responded?

Would I really stop and consider all of the ramifications of my answer? If you gave me time to think about my answer, I *probably* would have told you that homosexuals have the same rights as other Americans, but I'd be damned before I had a gay couple move in next door to my family --no way! They would just have to keep it secret or move somewhere else.

In the years that followed, I was exposed to different lifestyles and philosophies. I saw how other cultures treated homosexuals while living overseas.

Today, I think they deserve the same chance at life as anyone else, in marriage, children, careers, whatever. I am still a christian, but I parted company with what's known as the "right" a long time ago.

It's the same for most of the issues people attribute to "the religious right". What you hear from Robertson and others is quite different from what you'll hear from many people who attend their church. Maybe that's why they're more popular on TV than in person. In person, you have be intimately involved in the community, and all of the people who live there.

I'm catholic, and whatever the Vatican says, things aren't necessarily that way in my parish. The people who attend my church are not automatons following precisely the strict policies of Rome. Our priests are some of the best diplomats I've ever known. It's so funny to watch their facial expressions when they deliver an answer to certain questions. They have learned to explain God's plan for us using words that don't contradict Rome, but rather allow a diverse flock to see God in a way that fits their lives.

Since you mentioned the environment, let me add something else many liberals probably don't realize. Sportsmen (Hunters & Fishers) are their greatest ally when it comes to protecting wild lands and endangered species, and controlling development.

I was given my first gun at 8. My grandfather & father carried me on their shoulders through the woods when the brush was too thick, the water too deep, or my legs were too tired to go any further.

In our family, we have what some would call an "arsenal." It blows our minds that people from urban areas characterize us as "gun toting rednecks" and depict us with rebel flags, confuse us with christian militia's and white supremecists, etc. That couldn't be farther from reality.

It makes a funny stereotype in a movie or a joke, and that is why we consider ourselves under attack. The people who live thousands of miles away, have never been hunting with their dad's, trying to pass laws that would take away our traditions forever --that really sets us off.

The truth is, hunters provide more money to protect wildlife and preserve wild lands than all of the "environmental" groups combined, many times over. We don't just talk about it, we put our money into conservancy's that protect land from future development. The sale of hunting & fishing licenses is what pays the bills in most states.

When I heard Rush Limbaugh talking about how there were more trees now than there were two-hundred years ago I almost flipped! How can anyone equate rows of planted pine trees with a natural old growth forest? Deer don't eat pine needles they eat acorns. Squirrels don't nest in pine trees. Bears don't eat pinecones. Our forests are being cut down and replaced with pulp wood trees by the paper companys. Oh geeze don't even get me started. Look what I've done once again, an epistle . . .

shiningpath,

Thank you for this. It is long, but it covers a lot of important ground. I can't begin to comment on all of it now. Besides, I don't know if I can really add anything. I would just be saying "I agree with that point..." "You make a good point here..." and the like.

It is a great description of how our tendency to lump people together under labels misses the rich detail beneath.

You also illustrate wonderfully how all this lumping and simple-minded stereotyping lead people to feel contemptuous of other people - and that contempt is a terrible poison in our system.

I am a liberal and I didn't feel offended by any of this. So thank you for making some very good points without adding to that climate of contempt.

I agree with shiningpath...very well said!

I am probably a conservative...I have never labeled myself and never taken the time to figure out what the labels actually mean. I only mean that I do try to stick to what's in the Bible regarding every day life and the treatment of others and the world around us. I am not religious per se since I don't feel that organized religion was the whole point of Jesus's time on earth. I am in a fabulous church that encourages protecting the environment, especially within the community where we do clean-up, painting, planting, etc.

Regarding same sex marriage and other "rights". I feel we are all entitle to the same rights, but not to infringe our desires and demands upon each other. I also have homosexual friends...married ones too! I don't think I see their (according to the Bible) sin any different from a heterosexual's on any given day. :) My only little gripe with my friends is the fact that I feel they are trying to lay down the law in schools (well heck, the whole country) that affect all our children when in essence they only make up 2% of the population and I still feel that the majority vote should rule. But that's just my humble opinion.

Like shiningpath, when I grew up any mention was hush hush, and heaven forbid someone say something in public. We knew who the "gay people" were, and they were regarded as something of a novelty because they were entertainers. That was in a tiny country like Belize. Many others have since "come out" but there they are still not widely accepted. More like tolerated I think.

I know that we are all stewards of the earth, and of each other, and are definitely responsible to love and protect each other...take part in the earth's upkeep and longevity, as much as it is within our power.

I feel that whoever established stereotypes in the first place were trying to label others who didn't agree with them. I've never fit into a stereotype...I like to argue both sides for the overall outcome that will benefit everyone. I'm all about compromise, but with a reality check.

Thanks for all your thoughts. I just want to say that there is a difference between going to war, and starting a war. Bush II, and the bulk of his administration, have lots of experience with the latter, but none with the former. I'd also like to call attention to an important new book, just hot off the presses, which covers these issues beautifully and fully. It is: "The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism At The Heart Of American Power" by Jeff Shalet (2008). The fact that some religious folks are beginning to admit our responsibility to the planet is great and welcome. There is a long tradition of socially and environmentally conscious theists, and the Liberation Theologians, Catholic Workers, etc. actually walk the walk. They remain the minority, however.

I heard Bill McKibben (liberal) on the radio recently noting that the only powerful organizations in the world that are solely motivated by values and morals are the churches. Corporations and governments are driven by other things. Churches (by which I mean institutions of any religion) can be very powerful and important forces for good. Of course much evil has has also come from organized religion and from people acting in the name of religion.

I think that as long as religion is a guide for personal introspection and growth it is a good force. When it is used to judge others and to create an 'us' and a 'them' is when it gets dangerous.

Hi JackonFire - Thanks. I'd be careful of the word 'admit' there - this suggests that you were right and 'they' are coming around to your side. Which is not a very inviting or charitable way to put it. Anyway, you then go on to point out that 'religious folks' have long been socially and environmentally conscious. But yes, it is my impression too that a certain conservative segment has recently shifted dramatically on some of these issues.

I'll look up the book.

Hi Brian... My use of the word "admit" is perhaps misplaced but what I'm driving at is the long tradition of "leaving it up to God's mysterious ways..." The idea that any god would be much more proud of us if we took some initiative instead of watching football until the End Times arrive is, like I said, welcome. I hear some are beginning to believe the earth orbits the sun, too. Glory, glory! When evidence contrary to one's belief system is overwhelming, I'm not sure it should be surprising when a segment of those sharing the traditional ideology "admits" that, A: either we ARE the stewards or, B: we could really up our congregation numbers if we recruited those tree-huggers. Thanks for responding. A book you might enjoy a bit more than "The Family" is called "Deer Hunting With Jesus" by Joe Bageant. It's a fantastic read and very informative.