Dear Steve, in regards to this message to David Duvall.

 > DD> Is it because a lot of these bands seem like they are copying secular

 >  Huh?


Huh what?.

 > Since when is "that which is copied" is secular"?


That is a good question.

 > Look at Creed!


What about them?.

 > They are Godsmack with a Christian bent...which came first?,


Godsmack i think.

 > And they are BOTH A.I.C. clones mixed with a bit of Soundgarden and...


And they should both be copying themselves.

 > Point is, what religious bands should they copy?


As i said before they should be copying themselves and evolving from there,
besides. Creed no longer exsist.

 > DD> but just putting in Christian lyrics (or "watered
down" lyrics to

 >  The more successful Christian bands ARE changers with the times...


Aha, what are "The more successful Christian bands", and how have
they changed?.

 > like ALL other bands!


Ahh but you dont think "Christian" bands have certain unfair
advantages that other bands dont have?.

 > Methinks your arguments is silly.


How so?.

 > For what you are saying is that "Christian bands" can't
adapt to current     > trends,


And some can not, making his argument maybe slightly generalist but i dont
know about "silly".

 > or to their own more modern wants,


Except that i dont know if there wants are "modern" in a lot of cases.

 > without being called followers of "trends"...but I don't
see you             > complaining about EVERYONE else that
"evolves" within the music scene.


No he probably does not, because in a lot of cases they do it as well if
not better then the "Christian" band, without preaching, and with
out the institutional advantages that the "Christian" bands's do
have.

 > AGAIN,


Yes?.

 > it's a moot point,


How so?.

 > IMO.


Explain your opinion, please.

 > Christians can do whatever everyone else does without MY judging them!


Indeed they can, it is a pity it is not the other way around.

--- FLAME v2.0/b