Talk:Evangelical agenda

	This Christianity related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Rename to Evangelical Agenda?

While I like this article it does remind me a little of that old CP chestnut "Atheist Agenda". While the evangelical agenda may very well be a real thing is there some way we can make this look a little less.....speculative? Perhaps rename to Evangelical Agenda? Aceⁱ⁹ 06:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

That's actually the "inspiration" I had to start with. I was going to do a critique-ish thing of their article, but I figured I would do something that was maybe a bit more original. Renaming to Evangelical Agenda is the correct thing to do -- indeed it does seem that this article would be unfair to more moderate Christians who do not hold to many/any of these points.JFisher (talk) 06:09, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Defining the "Christian agenda" is a difficult task, given the large variety of beliefs among Christians throughout the world.

and yet it then goes on to equate "Christians" and "Evangelicals" in an undifferentiated way and to make a whole bunch of strong claims that do nothing to engage with the important liberal traditions in both Evangelical and other branches of Christianity. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 06:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Moral Majority vs. Christian Coalition

Is it necessary for a citation to say that the Christian Coalition and the Moral Majority are founded upon largely the same principles? Or should I just link to a description of both?JFisher (talk) 06:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

America-centric?

I don't think evangelicals "are arguably the most politically powerful block of Christians" in most countries. The RCs are without a doubt the most powerful in most "Latin" countries and Evangelicals have almost zero political power in most of the rest of the (nominally) Christian world. ^{I am eating} _& honey^chat 07:16, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I added a header to try to make it easier for more information for other non-US areas. JFisher (talk) 22:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Great article

This is a great article and I love it.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 23:20, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Gee, this isn't at all hypocritical.

The pot is certainly not calling the kettle black. ^{—signed by Lilfut} 22:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Uh. What? Mei (talk) 22:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Are you seriously saying that there is a homosexual agenda? Time harmonic Hoover! 22:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

No. For God's sake, read the title. "The _________ agenda" is inherently an overgeneralization. And my point flies about 50 feet over your head. ^{— Unsigned, by: Lilfut / talk / contribs}

It would sensible to explain the point us who are obviously struggling to grasp this new and powerful insight. ^{Ask me about your mother} 00:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

There is no homosexual agenda. There is no evangelical agenda. If my point still isn't understood, I'mma have to bring in the Picard Facepalm. ^{—signed by Lilfut} 14:40, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Don't be a moron. Of course there's a "homosexual agenda"--assuring that people are assured the same social rights regardless of sexual orientation is an intensely political project. It's just not the "agenda" that most people have in mind when they deploy the term. And there is an evangelical agenda, and I would argue it's pretty much what we describe here, minus the snark; create a society based around a particular reading of Scriptural values with a particular eschatalogical worldview. Now run along...TheoryOfPractice (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Presumably evangelical Christians would like to persuade others of the truth of their beliefs. Indeed, I think the word comes from "good message" or something of that nature. Religions in general wish to persuade others to share their beliefs, and in that sense almost every religion has an agenda - a desire to persuade people to follow their ideas. I accept that there could be some exceptions like Judaism.

I don't think that homosexuals are generally trying to persuade others to become homosexuals. They would probably like other people to become more accepting of their sexual orientation but they (again in general) are not trying to persuade people to become homosexual in the same way that evangelicals are trying to persuade others to become evangelicals.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 15:18, 27 March 2010 (UTC)