SodaHead Celebrates Green Week

Question US

Do many who may appear to be on the right side of moral issues have a spirit of intolerance that is potentially more dangerous than the moral issues they so vehemently oppose?

jamielt October 31, 2008 16:15:12

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Comment
  • +18 raves Yukkione "In Science We Trust" October 31, 2008 16:19:23
    Yukkione

    Yes

    Absolutely... The best example is how the Republican party has sold out to the religious right. How single issue voters have let them throw all principles of decency out the window and have allowed them to run roughshod over principles that have historically been Republican standards.
    View thread
Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Comments
  • Ex-Angel {Fallen From Grace... December 16, 2008 02:17:24
    Ex-Angel {Fallen From Grace} ~Patron Saint of Sinners~

    Yes

    the world is full of hypocrites and people who are their own worst enemies
  • Kack December 01, 2008 06:01:11 (edited)
    Kack

    Uncertain

    A few, maybe, but certainly not all. The same could be said about the left.
  • +3 raves
    American Rhetoric Review November 02, 2008 17:24:38
    American Rhetoric Review

    Yes

    That's why they feel justified in preaching their hate.... They believe they have a "right" or "obligation" to promote hate and belittle those who disagree with their dogma.
  • +3 raves
    meKrystle November 01, 2008 23:03:53
    meKrystle

    Yes

    For sure! No one can accept the "live and let live" philosophy. Your moral qualms are your own personal issues...not something to be forced onto others. Worry about your own damn life and family and stop telling others what to do with theirs.
  • +3 raves
    hdsporty November 01, 2008 20:32:23
    hdsporty

    Undecided

    I believe there are extremists from both sides of that fence. I don't believe the people asked about in this poll are many, more like the few. I see intolerance in them for sure, but I find intolerance directed at me nearly every time I say I'm a Christian or that I believe in God. It's like that church that protests at soldier's funerals...They are a very small group and I think they are even one family (?) but they create such a disturbance and their actions are deplorable. I don't think any of us here on SH agrees with them, left or right.
  • +2 raves
    hdsporty hdsporty November 01, 2008 20:50:59
    hdsporty
    Boy, after I answered I went on to read the answers others gave. It seems that the majority of answers lump every conservative Christian as "dangerous". Do you realize how you sound? Pick a word....how about INTOLERANT?!
  • +1 raves
    Jim hdsporty November 02, 2008 04:16:37
    Jim
    There are increasing numbers of non Christian people who believe that all Christians are dangerous. Many of them think Christians want to harm them physically which is simply not true. True Christians do not harm anyone physically as most of us know, however the non Christian does not have the restraint that Christians have and this can lead to a pre-emptive form of voilence.

    Because some imagine harm is intended, they will commit harm, as a means of preventing harm to themselves, where no harm was even imagined. Crazy huh?
  • Suzanni Jim November 03, 2008 01:53:56
    Suzanni
    "Because some imagine harm is intended, they will commit harm, as a means of preventing harm to themselves, where no harm was even imagined. Crazy huh?"

    Yeah, crazy, i.e. Iraq.

    ) ;
  • +1 raves
    Jim Suzanni November 04, 2008 01:59:54
    Jim
    No, not Iraq. You know there are just as many reports that say the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) were trucked to Iran before the US entered Iraq, as there are reports saying there were no WMD's.

    We were not there, we do not know for sure, I know I don't. Regardless, people were being tortured, gassed, raped and generally shot in the head under Hussein and we are there now. I say finish the job and get out. If we had finished it in 1991 we peobably would not be there today.

    Things are not always so simple as many would have us believe. My post was talking about Christians and non Christians one on one.
  • Suzanni Jim November 04, 2008 02:48:20
    Suzanni
    k, thanks for your thoughtful reply.
  • Jim Suzanni November 04, 2008 03:40:33
    Jim
    You are welcome.
  • roadrat Jim November 04, 2008 19:24:48
    roadrat
    Jim, just because I don't subscribe to your brand of Christianity doesn't make me non-Christian. I happen to be liberal, and am under the impression that you and I recognize the same higher power; since you claim yourself as Christian, and I believe I recognize the same God; wouldn't I also be considered to be Christian? The fact that I don't quote the Bible to strangers, or proselytize does not in any way lessen my spirituality. Forget it, I'm trying to apply logic to religion; doesn't work, does it?
  • Jim roadrat November 05, 2008 17:20:28
    Jim
    There is only ONE "brand" of Christianity Roadrat, and it is found in the Bible. Jesus made it pretty plain that we forsake the world, ourselves, and all that we are in order to follow Him. In other words, you cannot hang on to what your church or pastor teaches if it does not totally line up with Bible teaching. You cannot hang on to yourself, what you think, or like, and be a disciple of Christ.

    The Bible teaches that many will cast out devils in the name of Jesus, will do missionary work and many fine and noble things, but still He does not accept them as being a Christian.

    "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me , ye that work iniquity." Matthew 7:22 (emphasis added).

    There are no shortcuts, no alternatives, and no bypasses on the road to Heaven. ALL Christians have the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:16) seeing the world and all of life as Christ does. Christians are of like minds, even of one mind the Bible teaches (Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 13:11; Philippians 1:27; Philippians 2:2; 1 Peter 3:8).

    This is not my "interpretation," it is the Word of God, but many conjure up excuses to ...






    There is only ONE "brand" of Christianity Roadrat, and it is found in the Bible. Jesus made it pretty plain that we forsake the world, ourselves, and all that we are in order to follow Him. In other words, you cannot hang on to what your church or pastor teaches if it does not totally line up with Bible teaching. You cannot hang on to yourself, what you think, or like, and be a disciple of Christ.

    The Bible teaches that many will cast out devils in the name of Jesus, will do missionary work and many fine and noble things, but still He does not accept them as being a Christian.

    "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." Matthew 7:22 (emphasis added).

    There are no shortcuts, no alternatives, and no bypasses on the road to Heaven. ALL Christians have the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:16) seeing the world and all of life as Christ does. Christians are of like minds, even of one mind the Bible teaches (Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 13:11; Philippians 1:27; Philippians 2:2; 1 Peter 3:8).

    This is not my "interpretation," it is the Word of God, but many conjure up excuses to dismiss the facts, but it does not relieve them of the responsibility before God.
    The Bible leaves no room for "liberal Christians." It is an oxymoron. The two words are incompatible. If you don't believe me study the Bible and see for yourself. Those who think they are "liberal" Christians are following another "Jesus" than the one found in the Bible. This other "Jesus" and his doctrine are the result of the doctrines of devils (1 Corinthians 11:3-4).

    Those who say they are liberal Christians want the reward without paying the dues so to speak. They don't want to be known as "different" or as a "Bible thumper" or any of the other taspects they see as "negative" and that the world attaches to the true and devout Christian. They are Christian in name only, and their faith does them no good what so ever. There are no liberal Christians, only those who are trying to get into Heaven on their own terms. It is folly my friend. Pure folly.

    "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 10:33

    "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6
    (more)
  • roadrat Jim November 06, 2008 23:03:08
    roadrat
    Liberal is a political designation. Christian is a religious designation. To my knowledge, and to the Constitutions' framers, politics and religion were separate!
    Oh, and Jim, your arguments merely serve to prove out the assertion made in this question originally!
  • Jim roadrat November 07, 2008 02:53:42
    Jim
    I don't know your point about liberal and Christian. You are a liberal, period. I am a Christian whether you are talking about religion, politics, or ever day life. It colors my life just as liberal colors yours.

    If you really believe that "to the Constitutions' framers, politics and religion were separate!" then you really don't know much about History or our founding fathers. Unless you know it and just simply choose to ignore it, in which case you would be truly foolish (as thought you weren't already).

    Roadrat wrote:
    "Oh, and Jim, your arguments merely serve to prove out the assertion made in this question originally!"

    Excuse me, but is that supposed to mean something to me? Am I supposed to care? I merely consider the source Roadrat and dismiss. That easy, that fast. I find you to be an amazingly ignorant (I think willfully so) and immature person to be the age you state in your profile. I just hope folks know SOME of us in that age range use some common sense.
  • roadrat Jim November 07, 2008 09:48:30
    roadrat
    Please explain Amendment I to us then. Feel free to quote as many of the Constitutional Congress as you like, but please be aware thay they were pretty straightforward when they explained, in framing the Constitution that it was "in no essence founded on the christian doctrine."
    And you still show a "spirit of intolerance." Just because one does not strictly adhere to the teachings of your bible, and it's many contradictions does not make one either ignorant, or immature.
  • Jim roadrat November 07, 2008 16:31:37
    Jim
    Roadrat, I have done my homework, have spent my time in research and I have come to know those of your mindset are just that...mindset. I have no intention of entering into a debate with you or anyone else about the origins of our country, Constitution, or the intent of our founding fathers. If one reads the documents WITHOUT preconceived ideas or points to prove then the founding fathers intent is clear. The same thing applies to the Bible by the way. Many refuse to take it at face value but filter it through what they want it to say. Both come up short of the truth.

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

    Roadrat, you wrote: "And you still show a "spirit of intolerance."" Well thank you, I'm glad it shows because I certainly would not want anyone to think that I accept any and everything that comes down the pipe, because I don't. Neither did/does Jesus or any wise person.

    Roadrat you wrtoe: "Just because one does not strictly adhere to the teachings of your bible, and it's many contradictions does not make one either ignorant, or immature."

    You a...
    Roadrat, I have done my homework, have spent my time in research and I have come to know those of your mindset are just that...mindset. I have no intention of entering into a debate with you or anyone else about the origins of our country, Constitution, or the intent of our founding fathers. If one reads the documents WITHOUT preconceived ideas or points to prove then the founding fathers intent is clear. The same thing applies to the Bible by the way. Many refuse to take it at face value but filter it through what they want it to say. Both come up short of the truth.

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

    Roadrat, you wrote: "And you still show a "spirit of intolerance."" Well thank you, I'm glad it shows because I certainly would not want anyone to think that I accept any and everything that comes down the pipe, because I don't. Neither did/does Jesus or any wise person.

    Roadrat you wrtoe: "Just because one does not strictly adhere to the teachings of your bible, and it's many contradictions does not make one either ignorant, or immature."

    You are so correct. It is what they don't know that makes them ignorant, and how they behave when confronted with their lack of knowledge that determines maturity.
    (more)
  • roadrat Jim November 07, 2008 22:45:37 (edited)
    roadrat
    Ignorant may be the wrong term here, I think narrow-minded is better! Narrow-minded as in unwilling to conceive that anyone could have a legitmate thought that differs from your own.
    I see you've quoted Amendment I verbatim, but not explained it. Each of us is able to read the words; but each of us will apply our own filters to it,no?
    And, you, my friend, have filtered the bible through your own senses to arrive at the conclusions you have; yet decry anyone whose filters have arrived at a different conclusion.
    I'm not willing to debate my maturity here, but I could probably put you in touch with an ex, or two, who would agree wholeheartedly with you!
  • Jim roadrat November 08, 2008 03:53:18
    Jim
    Lots of people have perfectly legitimate thoughts that differ from mine Roadrat, and some of them I have been known to learn from, but of course they were not idiots.
    I had no intention of "explaining" Amendment 1 as it does a fine job of that on it's own. You would only dispute anything I said and I told you I have no intention of going into a senseless debate on the subject.

    Roadrat, I have repeatedly stated that I do not filter the Bible through anything, but that everything is filtered through the Bible. You insist on calling me a liar saying I "have filtered the bible through your own senses to arrive at the conclusions you have..." Which is blatantly untrue and goes against everything I am or represent. How would you know anyway? You have shown your understanding of Spiritual matters is ZERO. That leaves you in the dark and no points to argue on, (but that hasn't slowed you down). Anyone who is filtering the Bible through their own senses or opinions is violating the Word of God and not worthy to handle His Word.

    Actually, you don't seem to care too much about facts, you just want to bash Jim it looks like to me. I got my helmet on so go ahead.
  • roadrat Jim November 08, 2008 10:28:35
    roadrat
    If the bible is that straightforward, how is it that 2 different people, reading the same passage can come up with 2 different interpretations? Answer: because they filter it through their preconceived notions to fit their agenda. I submit to you that man is inherently unable to do anything but filter anything he encounters through previous experience. Anything I say to you, by your own admission will be filtered by you to see whether or not it fits in with the teachings of the bible. Correct? Let's say I favor gay marriage. You automatically filter that through 'what does the bible say about homosexuality?' and arrive at a viewpoint. Myself, aware of the bibles' teachings on homosexuality, also consider how I might feel if I were homosexual & in love; and in this case I might arrive at a different conclusion (in this case I think I'd be applying the "love thy neighbor" & "judge not lest ye be judged" portions of the bible; if one sticks strictly to the new testament, I'm not sure which passage one would apply here, help me out, would ya? thanks)!
    Don't worry about a helmet, Jim, my higher power doesn't condone violence.
  • Jim roadrat November 08, 2008 18:27:17
    Jim
    Two different people come up with two different interpretations because they do exactly as you suggest. The same can happen with ten people, or any number one chooses, there is the potential to get as many interpretations as there are people, because everyone is different in looks and in thinking and how we process information.

    The difference is the Holy Spirit of God. First of all we need to make clear that all who say they are a Christian are not. According to what Jesus tells us MOST are not truly Christian when examined in light of the Bible definition. If one is not a Christian they do not have the Holy Spirit of God dwelling in them, teaching them, and guiding them. They are in essence like any other non-believer in this respect except that they wear a facade of Christianity.

    Those who are truly a Christian have the in dwelling of the Holy Spirit of Christ living in them. This is the "ghost" that Jesus sent back to His followers after He was crucified. he promised that this Holy Spirit would guide us into the truth with understanding and power to live a life pleasing to God separate from the things the rest of the world accepts and indulges in.

    Two born again, Spirit filled Christians recognize the truth when presented to them and they are in agreement. Sometimes one is ...























    Two different people come up with two different interpretations because they do exactly as you suggest. The same can happen with ten people, or any number one chooses, there is the potential to get as many interpretations as there are people, because everyone is different in looks and in thinking and how we process information.

    The difference is the Holy Spirit of God. First of all we need to make clear that all who say they are a Christian are not. According to what Jesus tells us MOST are not truly Christian when examined in light of the Bible definition. If one is not a Christian they do not have the Holy Spirit of God dwelling in them, teaching them, and guiding them. They are in essence like any other non-believer in this respect except that they wear a facade of Christianity.

    Those who are truly a Christian have the in dwelling of the Holy Spirit of Christ living in them. This is the "ghost" that Jesus sent back to His followers after He was crucified. he promised that this Holy Spirit would guide us into the truth with understanding and power to live a life pleasing to God separate from the things the rest of the world accepts and indulges in.

    Two born again, Spirit filled Christians recognize the truth when presented to them and they are in agreement. Sometimes one is more mature in their faith, their walk than another and one may not understand all of something, but they know that basically it is right or wrong. With time and prayer they move into full agreement as to what God is saying in His Word the Bible.

    You are absolutely correct when you say "man is inherently unable to do anything but filter anything he encounters through previous experience"

    To that statement I would add "the NATURAL man." However your statement does not apply to the born again, Holy Spirit filled, man or woman.

    Roadrat you wrote: "Anything I say to you, by your own admission will be filtered by you to see whether or not it fits in with the teachings of the bible. Correct?"

    Not exactly correct, no. It is filtered by the Bible, not me. I use the Bible, but I don't use my opinion or my experience to determine the truth of what the Bible teaches.

    Roadrat you wrote: "I might arrive at a different conclusion (in this case I think I'd be applying the "love thy neighbor" & "judge not lest ye be judged" portions of the bible; if one sticks strictly to the new testament, I'm not sure which passage one would apply here, help me out, would ya? thanks)!"

    Not to mock you or anything, but to illustrate what I am saying about the teaching of the Holy Spirit. Your choice of verses is an example of "the natural man" trying to use Gods Word to justify what they want to be justified or allowed.

    The natural man does not understand Gods definition of love, nor can they until they are born again. It is not elitism, or smugness or anything other than a simple and real fact. I know, I have been there. In short, "love they neighbor" is not appropriate for defending gay marriage. To love thy neighbor is to do good to them as the good Samaritan did in Luke 10. To love thy neighbor as thyself is to protect them when appropriate, to feed, clothe, and shelter them when needed. To speak truth to them, to not cheat or lie, to not gossip, or spread rumors, to make no distinction in race, or social standing, but to be a neighbor to them regardless of these things no matter whether they live close by or far away. They are a human being made in the image of God and as such they are neighbors. This is Christian love of neighbor as self the best way I know to describe it in a relatively few words.

    Loving thy neighbor does not mean to step aside while they do as they please, or allow them to go against what God has decreed. It is not love to allow someone to endanger their life or their soul.

    As for your selection of the "judge not lest ye be judged" verse in Matthew chapter seven verse one, that also does not apply and has no bearing here. One needs to read at least the first six verses to get the context and understand the meaning of "judge not." It is NOT telling Christians to refrain from judging, it is talking about hypocritical judging. Clean up your own life, get the sin out and get the Word in, and THEN you can see to help your brother by judging righteously, using the Word of God, not your own whims or prejudices.

    There are no verses to defend gay marriage. The Bible defines marriage as a holy union between a man and a woman. It defines sexual relationships between members of the same sex as perversion of what God created and intended. He considers it an abomination (extreme disgust and hatred). Many have desires and feelings they did not ask for, but the Bible promises power and ability to abstain from fulfilling the desires of the flesh. Some people crave sex with the opposite sex, some with the same sex, some people crave gambling, some crave food. All of these cravings and others are a perversion of what is normal and if we are to be pleasing to the Lord we will abstain and ask His help as a follower of His.

    There is no higher power but God.
    "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."
    Romans 13:1
    (more)
  • Jim Jim November 08, 2008 18:32:37
    Jim
    Jim wrote: "You are absolutely correct when you say "man is inherently unable to do anything but filter anything he encounters through previous experience"

    To that statement I would add "the NATURAL man.""

    I want to amend this statement somewhat. The Bible teaches that the devil greatly influences what the unsaved person thinks and believes. Even though one thinks their thoughts are their own, this is SELDOM true.
  • roadrat Jim November 20, 2008 01:07:36 (edited)
    roadrat
    Jim, I've been kind of busy, but tell me, so I don't misinterpret it: What does the Bible say about slavery?
    Just another eerie thought I've had; perhaps I misunderstood you, if so, please set me straight. If I sat down 2 'born again Christians' (I hope that's the right term, I don't mean to offend) in separate rooms, simultaneously, and asked them to tell me what a particular Biblical verse meant: they'd each come up with exactly the same answer?
  • +1 raves
    kahless November 01, 2008 17:22:11
    kahless

    No

    Negative.....The best example is how the Democratic Party has sold out to the Atheists left. How single issue voters have let them throw all principals of deceny out the window and have allowed the left to run roughshod over principals that have been the democratic disregard for life in a world who if Hussein has his way will kill more babies than die of starvation in Ethiopia......The Acorn bunch who are thugs of barrys, trying to steal and election. The democrats who have bought and paid for the drive by news medias. The corruption of the democratic patries of PILOSI, FRANKS,DODD, REID..who without their involvment we would not have the housing crises we are now having...It dont take alot to show me that godless people run with godless people...aint that right VISHNU....
  • +2 raves
    meKrystle kahless November 01, 2008 22:58:38
    meKrystle
    No single democrat could make it into office without the support of christians. 11% of atheist population versus 75-80% christian population in the nation...

    If every christian was republican, they would win every time. It doesn't work like that.
  • roadrat kahless November 06, 2008 23:04:39
    roadrat
    I resent that as a Democrat; your 1st sentence has evidently killed my God!
  • +2 raves
    Kid Charlemagne November 01, 2008 17:18:50
    Kid Charlemagne

    Yes

    That's the understatement of the century. If you've never seen the documentary "Jesus Camp", I highly encourage you to do so. It will really open your eyes to the profound level of ignorance and diluted belief system that Christian extremists so blindly embrace, and how they openly proclaim their powerful ability to determine Presidential elections because of their incredible financial prowess and political influence. These are the same people that also believe Rapture is coming in our lifetime and are therefore unconcerned about things like engaging in nuclear war. I'm not making this up folks. I lived in Missouri and witnessed this supremely frightening attitude first hand.

    Here's a couple of seriously disturbing clips from the film:


  • +1 raves
    Haku November 01, 2008 15:53:22
    Haku

    Undecided

    There is good and bad in people. They can be defending something, but not notice when they do something that could be considered potentially dangerous. Noone could possibly look from the outside in so it's a human flaw we can't fix.
  • +3 raves
    Moncherie November 01, 2008 15:36:30
    Moncherie

    Yes

    There are extremist views on all sides of all issues and as previously noted does not represent the majority of people - just gets more press.
  • Truth November 01, 2008 15:28:28
    Truth

    Yes

    In the immortal words of Jerry Falwell ..."blow them all away in the name of the Lord."
  • +1 raves
    jones cynique November 01, 2008 14:47:37
    jones cynique

    Yes

    Fear, ignorance and self-righteousness are the enemies of freedom and peace.
  • +2 raves
    Lanikai November 01, 2008 14:32:09
    Lanikai

    Yes

    We call them zealots. They do not represent majorities of people, but they are quite damaging on their own. Osama's pastor was a zealot-read up on black liberation theology, David Duke was a zealot, some homophobes are zealots.

    True christians understand that while the sin is bad the sinner is ultimately redeemable and should be loved no matter what.

    My dad is a baptist zealot and his wife is worse and both of them are angry, hateful and mean. It makes me sad that they cannot grasp the truth of scripture and the actual love of Christ.
  • +1 raves
    hdsporty Lanikai November 01, 2008 20:25:05
    hdsporty
    That's a pretty good explanation of the differences between extremists and Christians. Not everyone who professes to know God is a Christian. There sure are some kooks out there, but from both sides.
  • Waldy1 November 01, 2008 13:41:15
    Waldy1

    Yes

    Its intolerance of the worst kind! I can disagree without the name calling,invoking Jesus's name,etc.
  • +1 raves
    Sissy November 01, 2008 12:44:13 (edited)
    Sissy

    Yes

    What has made those self-subscribe "to the right side of moral issues", to have more often than not, been bitten in the butt by their own hypocrisy. The list is too long and numerous to name all, but do the names of Tom DeLay, Newt Gingrich, Randy Cunningham, Larry Craig, Cong. Vetter, to name just a very few, come to mind?
  • +3 raves
    oldcavpilot November 01, 2008 12:36:10
    oldcavpilot

    Yes

    The GOP and Evangelicals. When they start their rant, ask them what Christ would do in the same situation. When I went to Sunday school, they told me he was about 'Forgivness', Love Thy Neighbor', and 'Turn the Other Cheek'.

    If John McCain of 2000 was running, he might have had a shot at my vote. He's a total sellout. It was just over a year ago when his position on offshore drilling was 'over my dead body'.

    That wasn't a flip-flop, it was, as the WSJ says, "A sex change operation".
  • hdsporty oldcavp... November 01, 2008 20:35:49
    hdsporty
    You were in the Cav? Did you know they officially retired the Cav, at least in Iowa, about 2-3 years ago? It was a sad day...my hubby still has his Cav hat though.
  • +1 raves
    oldcavp... hdsporty November 01, 2008 21:36:40
    oldcavpilot
    Because of your hubby and a few other good men, the Cav will live forever. Truly, the Tip of The Spear. Remember, "If you ain't Cav, you ain't s***". I've still got my hat and scarf.
  • hdsporty oldcavp... November 01, 2008 21:41:51
    hdsporty
    What did you fly?
  • oldcavp... hdsporty November 01, 2008 21:49:17
    oldcavpilot
    I was a LOH (Loach) pilot. Scouts. I flew OH-6A's with the 3/5th redesignated 3/17th Cav in the Mekong from late 70 to early 72, then went north to the 2/17th Cav with the 101st, and was one of "The 400" that brought the 101st out of 'Nam in March of 72. We went back to Ft Campbell, KY.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 16 Next » Last »
or
Cancel