“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ.” — Gandhi
(Westboro Baptist Church members)
picture: irulez. lol caption: SH313
-
-
Copy & paste this:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous You win this round, Blagojevich | Vatican carnival game Next »
» 1,387 comments
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
Nailin Palin on Take it to the Grave Geary on Keeping the Internet Hone… MrsQ of Philly on Helpful Sign is Helpful Geary on How Far We Haven’t … Nailin Palin - Belie… on Take it to the Grave Geary on Take it to the Grave Vikavid on How Far We Haven’t … neoritter on Keeping the Internet Hone… BlueElephant on Helpful Sign is Helpful truekvltbroslayer on THE FABRIC OF OUR LIVES 
Cheezburger Company BlogPrint on Demand
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? Home - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Meh block
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
Our favorite activity
Just Capshunz - All of the Internet. Captioned
It's Happening Again!!!
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
The Song of Our People
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Oh Peanut Butter, You Crazy
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
Reader Squees: Sleepy Netty at Three Months
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
BANJOVI
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
Apple Pie
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
Mayo You Make An Awesome Sandwich On This Day
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz
I Shouldn't Have Gone Back To Burma...
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Katy Perry Totally Looks Like Paula Deen
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Epicute: Chocolate Spoons
First
Come on, bring on those useful tidbits. I dare you…
Try putting the hard drive in the freezer for an hour or so. Then connect it up real quick and you could have ten to twenty minutes where the data will be recoverable.
Don’t forget to put it in a ziploc bag. You don’t want moisture in the connectors!
Technology is a cold mistress!
badum tshh
With very pointy nipples and blue lips…
And her breath is fresh! Fresh like a north pole breeze…
and Mentos!
This is no longer likely to work with modern hard drives. If the problem is loose or damaged electronics, it may work, but this has never been a common reason for hard drive failure. Head stack misalignment was another possible cause, but today’s drives have superior servo motors that usually negate this problem. If the problem is stiction, i.e. the heads sticking to the platter, this may work. However, modern hard drives have several mechanisms that make this problem unlikely. First, they no longer use the same lubricant. In older drives, the lubricant would break down and get sticky. Freezing it made it easier for the head to break free. Second, and more importantly, newer hard drives have a ramp on the landing zone that raises the head away from the platters when the drive powers down or goes idle.
Nowadays, the recommended home remedy is known as ‘percussive therapy.’ Yes, you get to play Fonzie and smack the thing to make it work.
I had a hard drive that died in a house fire. It wouldn’t turn, so we tried the freezing AND whacking method, but, alas, the disc still wouldn’t turn.
I think your only option in such a case is a seance. XD
If the metal got hot enough to let the magnetic domains wiggle around, there’s simply nothing you can do in a case like this. However, the electronics would be damaged far before that point, so the solution in that case is to find an identical drive, remove the circuit boards from both, and replace the burnt one with the good one. Then, if the data is still on the drive, you can get at it.
Well, the circuit board was ok. The computer could read its existence as a slave drive, but couldn’t actually access the disk. I think the seance is my only option.
I use the four-inch-drop technique. I had a drive last four years after I used that trick. I doubt everyone is that lucky.
ummmm……
From Martha Stewart’s website:
Cut, fresh oranges to slough dry skin off heels, knees, and elbows.
How will cutting oranges have any effect on my heels, knees and elbows?
LOL touche!
While this was a callous response, I loofah’d my ass off.
*facepalm*
Sorry, didn’t mean to be rough on the guy.
In which case, I’d say making another sloughing
pumice in poor form …
Please, please, stop the abrasive comments!
Why, are you not thick-skinned?
Too many oranges…
Do it too much and you get the whole ‘Hellraiser’ thing going on…
THATS WHAT SHE SAID!
By the way, everyone, these are not Christians in any way or form.
To be Christian is to be Christ-like. That is where the word comes from. Now if you look in the bible and see what Christ was like, he never condemned anyone, and he loved everyone.
These people are ignorant, extremist bigots who give a terrible name to Christians.
You can’t just call yourself a Christian and be one. You have to walk the walk.
And the walk is love. For everyone regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, political view, etc.
Then there are very, very few Christians.
We try.
I’m sure.
I mean – I am sure there are people under all “labels” who try to live in a way that they are sure is the best for everyone.
But.
There are many Christians who don’t try to disregard “race, gender, sexual orientation, political view, etc.”
(Sorry – just got hung up on your “We” there.)
Core of christianity.
We can’t possibly be like him.
But that doesn’t mean we can’t try!
You’re right. There aren’t that many.
But then again, I’m not a Christian, but I follow Christ.
Labels bring baggage.
I figure just following Jesus’ ideals is good enough for me.
But you don’t believe in Jesus Christ as the son of (and aspect of) God or that he died to absolve sins, and all that?
(now I’m just curious, not just getting anywhere with this, I think)
i believe in the bible as the irrefutable word of God.
i just find that corporate religion usually leads to religious corruption.
i attend church. at my church we have a viewpoint that is we should love everyone unconditionally.
no matter what person walks through the door, they will find peace, comfort, and brotherly (or sisterly) love.
Now I’m utterly confused.
How are you not a Christian?
Unitarian…
*aahs and oohs*
Thanks, that seems a plausible answer.
Oh wow, I thought I was the only Unitarian on here. I don’t feel so alone any more.
I need to work on loving the people who hate me, though. I’ve gotten to ‘You live your life, I’ll live mine, and we can get along’; but haven’t gotten
past returning fire to those who condemn me.
Oh well, it should come in time.
It turned out Jojo is not a Unitarian, but a Christian who prefers not to go by the label Christian. You’ll have to keep looking, in other words. There might well be others here.
Because what the world defines as Christian is what
you see in the picture above. I jumped that ship so that I wouldn’t
be lumped in with the very small percentage of “Christians” in the world
who are really just bigots or nutjobs who hold on to the label
because they have a misconstrued idea of what it means.
You managed to be both bigoted and an nutjob all on your own then…:)
Congrats!
Okay, so you are really a Christian, but don’t call yourself that?
The whole lake of fire apologia suggest you are correct!
Well, if Fester’s arguments are correct, if you were accused of being a hateful bigot every time someone found out you had a religion, would you want to be lumped in with that? Not that I agree with that strategy, but I understand it.
Oh, I understand it too.
I think that Jojo later establishes that
1) She’s pretending not to be a Christian when she cleraly is… so much for courage of convictions
2) Holds most of the nastiest of the mainstream views and several the civilised world kicked out as ‘barbaric’ during the Enlightenment.
-
So, she’s not only a liar and a hypocrite, but a coward…
Can you see no good in anybody or anything at all? Why do you always think the worst?
Are you pessimistic because you’re old? What’s wrong with being optimistic or at least givng somebody the benefit of the doubt?
OK, little Mary Sunshine, spin that harridan’s bile into something positive…
“We should love everyone unconditionally.”
Says she. That sounds fairly positive.
That’s it? one poxy line? Well, you’ve swayed me… I was all wrong about her…
Actually, that buys nothing against the back drop of just nastiness down the line, unless you buy that view too…
Ok, that’s the first thing I saw. I wasn’t searching hugely as (at 1300+ comments) This is a long page. (Longest ever?)
-
I read Jojo’s comments to find the nastiness you mentioned. I found some stuff about unconditional love. Ok. I found some stuff about why she didn’t like the label Christian and some stuff about God’s love that didn’t seem particularly offensive. (People may not agree with it but it wasn’t hate filled.)
-
I did find one instance where she patronised Starrfade: (“lamb’s wool”) that was mean. However, I don’t think your problem was with that one comment, I think it was because she said that “belittling people of faith,” as you do, was just as bad as hating gays.
Mostly I get a sense of confusion from them (selection of quotes):
“at my church we have a viewpoint that is we should love everyone unconditionally”
“Now in my church, I am strictly against gay marriage. But outside of my church, in this great nation of ours, which my church does not control, I am indifferent.”
“Don’t blame your own sinful nature on God.”
“But if you don’t follow God, you follow Satan. /…/Satan and all of his followers will be cast into the lake of fire.”
…and a final, more specifically directed sample:
“Uncle Fester once again shows how ignorant he can be.
He is like a festering scab on the skin of society. One that should just be pluck off and flicked into the trash, where he belongs.”
Find the bit about Hell? There’s some pretty unpleasant stuff in there
I offered to save her a seat, but TBH, I think she’s already in one of her own making…
And belittling people of ‘faith’ isn’t the same thing, unless you subscribe to the notion that ‘gay’ is as much a choice as ‘faith’…
@Danbala: Jings, I missed that last quote… Yeah, that’s nasty…
@Fester: my 4:47am post was, originally, meant to mean in general…
Erm, I’d beg to differ. We were talking only of Jojo’s psychosis, and there is no indication you meant it as ‘general’ when you typed it…
Thus, I repeat, does Jojo’s single, rather rote, mouthing of ‘unconditional this and that’ really ring true with the rest of her output?
She had no right to call you a “festering scab on the skin of society,” but seriously, Fester, how do you expect her to react, how do you
expect someone to react when you viciously attack her core beliefs? I think she reacted exactly as you expected her to; you pushed until she snapped.
I think the point here is that Jojo starts out by being very Love-oriented, saying that the Westboro Baptist Nutjobs are not Christian, because it’s not meant to be about hatred, but it takes only a couple of posts on the Internet to show a very different set of core beliefs in behaviour.
.
But then, if I lived with beliefs based on a god of unconditional love and also that everyone who does not follow said god would burn in a lake of fire, I’d probably be very near snapping-level most of the time.
Doesn’t something have to be flawless and non-contradictory
to be irrefutable?
Never understood that one as it was always thrown up there like, flawless, bla bla, words that were handed down from god, bla bla bla.
If that was the case, are you telling me that the god inspired Moses to write
in the first and third person? As well as about his whole life up until after he died.
Which version/edition of the Bible is the irrefutable word of God? Which printing press is the irrefutable printing press of God? Which font is the irrefutable font of God? Which contradictory passages from any of several of the hundreds of versions of the irrefutable word of God is the correct and irrefutable passage that contradicts the other irrefutable, and yet somehow contradictory, word of God?
Color me Baffled by this adherence to the edited, revised, translated, assumed and poorly understood work of historical fiction. It is a rich fountain of knowledge that has been filtered and altered innumerable times so that the original language of the original story is lost to the ages. When God hands me a copy of his word I will believe it is his word. When Pat Robertson asks for my Mother’s money at the same time he is condemning me to Hell with that manufactured, man made, buy it off of any bookstore shelf, commercial product, forgive me if I am absolutely certain that any godliness it might have contained in posterity, has been leached away and replaced with a profitable publication that is useful for controlling the sheep.
Honestly.
Amen.
Cheers to that!
I’m not Christian.. but I wish more could all be like what you just said. Because you are right, they give you guys a truly horrible name. THESE are the “Christians” that you see everywhere, and these are the people I think of when I think of someone who is Christian, as bad as it sounds. They really do ruin an image that shouldn’t be.
Make love, not war! For we are all the same species when it comes down to it.
There honestly aren’t a many of them as you seem to think – there are more than there need to be, to be sure, but the fact is that one stupid, loudmouthed jerk gets more press than a dozen quiet, unassuming folks ever will. He’s a charicature, not a representative.
Quiet and unassuming in their bigotry, safe in the knowledge of who god told them to hate
It is a bigoted thought to assume another bigoted and hateful in the quiet of their mind.
Or someone who’s had practical experience of the same sort of mealy mouthed apologist you appear to be, certainly judging by the level of post you come up with…
Could you elucidate your meaning, Uncle Fester? nlphippps didn’t seem particularly “mealy-mouthed” (“avoiding the use of direct and plain language, as from timidity, excessive delicacy, or hypocrisy; inclined to mince words; insincere, devious, or compromising”) to me. And one way or another almost everyone on this site could qualify as an “apologist.”
Since you appear to be the same cloth, I’m not overly surprised…
It’s one of those ‘trying to teach a pig to sing’ problems… I would simply waste my time and annoy the pig…
That seems rather unfair to me. Honestly, it’s responses like this that make me want to just say “to Hell with it.” Assuming sincerity on your part, Fester (and I have no reason yet to doubt you), I can’t help but observe the irony of condemning prejudice while at the same time directing it against another group. With a welcome like this, it’s no wonder more moderate and liberal Christians aren’t vocalizing their support.
Westboro Baptist Church is not an accurate representation of Christianity in general, nor even of Baptists in particular. As has been pointed out, most of his “church” are also members of his family. Which is not to say that homophobia and bigotry aren’t problems within the institutions of the religion, but people like this tool escalate it to incredible levels.
I could try to make all sorts of arguments against this sort of attitude, attempt to present examples that Christian ideology isn’t nearly as unilateral on these issues as you seem to prefer to think…
Eh, have it your way. The world’s a simple division of “Us” and “Them” with no ambiguity or complexity to make your head hurt. Don’t mind me, I’ll just go misspell an offensive banner and practice my mouth-breathing.
TBH, I’ve not seen a Liberal Christian (other than Spong) who, when you scratch the surface are any more egalitarian than the Westboro lot… so why do you think I should treat them differently than I would the Westboro crowd?
You have not met my mom. I am not a Christian (or Catholic) myslef any longer, but I have always been able to respect my mom’s belief and practice as a devout Catholic that ignores the homophobia and bigotry that the leadership and other members often spout. It is possible Fester- just because you have not met them does not mean they are not real. They are not common I would have to agree though- to give you some support in your POV, the homophobia and bigotry are usually only slightly disguised under hyperbolic rhetoric. Chris woudl probably not be thrilled- but that is assuming I know God and Christ’s thoughts- and I don’t, that is why I left the church- pretending that one group KNOWS thought their prayer that another groups is wrong even though their prayer tells them they are right—-we do not actually know. period.
nice to know the Normal distribution curve does have a far end…
Uncle Fester! The ‘your mom’ joke was right there!
I was leaving that to the more desperate Christians who need the points on this thread…
The benefit of a doubt, maybe? The moral high ground. Common courtesy. Political expedience. The Golden Rule. A general acknowledgement that a person is a little bit more than the sum of his labels. I don’t know, I just always sort of thought that’s how tolerance and understanding worked. Of course, I’m only assuming those are at all desirable values.
Doesn’t look like you’re trying very hard to scratch the surface, ATM; looks to me more like you’re spoiling for a fight.
But, in deference to your obviously superior experience, I’m not going to push it. I’m not going to agree that anyone who calls himself Christian and claims to have no problem with same-sex love (or just same-sex sex) is just deluding himself about at least one of these two ideas, but I’m not pursue this meaningless debate any further; if I fight you on it, I’m only reinforcing the image of intolerance an self-righteousness, and if I remain silent I only contribute to the absence of evidence for an “egalitarian” Christian.
Given that I lose either way, I’ll opt for the one that’s less work.
Have a nice day
Well, Matt,
that was a lot of words to say nothing much while admitting that the dear old Christian is basically an intolerant, judgemental SOB who seems to get off on classing everyone as a sinner in the name of their despotic, undead, god….
Yes, Christians classify EVERYONE (including THEMSELVES) as sinners). The only difference is that they are forgiven of their sin.
And, as a Christian, I don’t hate anyone, especially those with sexual kinks. Because then I’d be a hypocrite and have to hate myself.
You missed the despotic undead god part…
And while ever you call anyone but your self a sinner then you have a problem…it’s called being an arsehole…
Blatant hypocrisy FTL
Indeed, that would the the case…
Yeah, the WBC is pretty small…but they make such an impact you see em everywhere. It is pretty much Fred Phelps and his family. Their website scares the pants off me. I wish God would be ironic and smite them with fire.
Eerrrrr… I don’t wish bad things on people.
But it would SO ironic.
were u dropped as a child?
So utterly this.
The Bible in 12 words: Book One: Do what God says; Book Two: Be NICE to people. = )
There is the third law of robotics… except where it contradicts book 1
Show me the contradictions.
Oh, Lord, please don’t get into that argument. There are too many contradictios to mention.
Mention them. Keep them in context. You can’t win a debate or argument by saying “there are too many to list”.
No one is likely to win an argument or a debate when the the problem has been resolved to no one satifaction since the canon was decided at Trentino…
TBH, no one really want to hear you preach on the subject, but Frou is too polite to say, Yo! Arsewipe, we’ve all heard it before…
You lost what few manners I have with zealots when you claimed historical veracity and invariance with time… so I have few qualms about saying, Yo! arsewipe, we’ve all heard it before and we don’t need another mono-braincelled muppet who’d drag us back to the bronze age to tell us it again…
I’m sorry, but that is completely untrue. If you look in the Bible, Jesus condemned many people to Hell, mainly anyone that didn’t follow him. He said it was better to abandon your children, parents, wife, husband, etc. and follow him than to stay with them and not follow him.
Thankyou xxx
You are totally and utterly incorrect. Show me one verse where Jesus condemns anyone or anything. (Minus the Fig tree, that’s the only time he ever condemned anything.)
What about the sin of omission?
What he *didn’t* condemn, e.g. slavery?
What omission? When did He approve slavery?
Why do you think he was silent on the matter?
Silence often condones the actions of others.
Right. Because Jesus had his own slave and wanted to keep him, right?
Hey it’s a fair question.
The question is fair, yes. The “silence is consent” comment is an assumtion.
As I understand the historical context, Jesus did not condemn slavery because it is directly sanctioned in the Old Testament. Remember, Jesus was not technically a Christian in a historical sense. He was a Jewish radical reformist, and as such he was trying to get other Jewish people to interpret the Torah and other holy books in a different way, not trying to start a new and separate religion.
And to be fair, Jesus also condemned the money-changers in the temple. Maybe not in specific words, but I don’t think you can get much more condemned than being driven out with a whip.
Well, Jesus actually does comment on slavery… he does not disapprove of it in the comment. Also, the bible does outright condone slavery… A point which the Bible and Qur’an agree on nearly word for word is that when you sell slaves, male slaves are worth about twice as much as female slaves.
that…does not condone slavery. If you want something to not exist, you don’t normally make a business plan for it
Wha? Yeah, it was condoned, so they made a business plan for it. Nothing incongruous about that.
@FaileV: … Are you thinking “condemn” instead of “condone” there, or something?
.
(Hur, hur, I ALMOST said condome, hur, hur.)
And you’re going to take a *ribbing* for it …
can you refer me to those verses that describe Jesus condoning or not condemning slavery?
He certainly didn’t mention to the Centurion that slavery wasn’t a good thing, now did he? And there was a great moment for it… Paul more or less tells people to suck it up on the whole slavery thing, and the OT has vast rules about how to own slaves, people selling their family as slaves and what price God said to take for them…
Over all, the white slave owners used the bible to great effect in their justification of the ownership, and husbandry, of slaves until the War of Northern Aggression (I can only assume you’re a southerner) ended all that in the great American tradition of War as business by other means…
But the OT also said that slaves had to be freed in the “Jubilee” year (every 50th year in the Jewish calendar). Also, all property had to be returned to the original owner if it was taken for payment of debt.
Um… isnt the bible a book written by a second party “source”.. basically revised thousands of times over the eons? Wouldnt that mean that some of the content has been edited, omitted or even just plain wrong because some guy in the 14th century decided that because everyone in his country was white, or bearded, or tall, that jesus should be too? I really dont put much stock in the bible as a reference source. its a book of short stories thats interesting to read, but not meant to be a “life for dummies” manual IMO. The great thing about life is that we’re all entitled to our opinion, even these Westboro ppl. If i remember correctly, these actions they perpetrate against others will come to justice when its time for them to be judged. For me, God is pretty cool, but I’m not a church person. My mother is what some like to call a “Jesus freak”. that turned me from the church. Doesnt mean one cant believe in God.
Jesus’s main point to all of his teachings was to love one another! He lived among the sinners, the prostitutes, the untouchables, for it is not the healthy that need a doctor, but the sick. He said that the greatest commandment was LOVE. “Christians” who preach hate and fear bother me sooo much.
however, Jesus/God also hates evil: Satan and sin. he does condemn those who sin against him, BUT HE ALSO FORGIVES. a billion times. The Bible says he’s like our Father, so when we disobey his laws (which he has in place to protect us, because he loves us) he gets upset (like our parents) but he still loves you unconditionally (like our parents… ideally).
“He said it was better to abandon your children, parents, wife, husband, etc. and follow him than to stay with them and not follow him.” what he meant by this was that you must love God above anyone else on Earth
if you want to know for yourself, read the Bible. don’t judge what you haven’t read. and pleeease don’t judge “Christians” by those who preach hatred to others.
that was much longer than i planned… but i’m done now. lol.
I have read. It’s a monstrous book.
Again, please look at more historical context before you toss out the whole thing. There are many actions and teachings, especially in the Old Testament, that seem “monstrous” to us, but were the only option the person/people had at the time.
Case-in-point: Lot. According to the courtesy and hospitality laws and customs of that era, once you invite a guest into your home, it was a sin to allow harm to come to them. He literally had no choice but to do everything in his power, including offering the mob his daughters, if he was to fulfill his obligations. But no one bothers to figure out that part anymore. Do you really think the angels would have saved him if that had been a terrible thing to do?
Okay, off my history soap-box.
Then lot had sex with his daughters and made babies. Really, one of the more hear t warming tales in the bible… although, who could ever forget that tale of love and endurance that resulted in Moses commanding his troops to rape or kill everyone in the city they had just conquered. Side note, the Muslims leave the part about Lot having sex with his daughters out due to the belief that Lot was a man of God and having sex with your children is bad.
I know the historical context… even then, it’s a monstrous book…
Uncle Festor, you are worse than those you incorrectly judge into condemnation. I feel for you, I really do, that something somewhere happened in your life to pull you away from God. If you really think the Christian Faith is based on hate, you are ignorant to no end. I have been taught, as a Christian, to love everyone but hate any and all sin, including that within myself. No, I am far from perfect. But your constant attack on Christianity is vile and putrid, and you are speaking against God.
something somewhere happened in your life to pull you away from God
What do you mean? Everyone is originally born as Christians and then get torn away from that? Right.
and you are speaking against God.
Somehow, I don’t think that’s a worry.
Yeah, have to agree with you there, Danbala. Making faith based arguments with Fester is perhaps the most futile exercise in the world. But the argument that Fester’s spewing of hatred is vile is valid.
If I went around spewing the vitriol Fester did, I would be screamed off this board in a second by everyone here. And rightly so. But somehow when the hateful atheist does it, it’s OK. Not even gonna pretend that makes sense.
Oh, put on your big girl panties, God boy…
As to spewing vitriol, you try and fail… how many times have you tried to introduce the Democrat victory into this conversation now? When religion is almost exlcusively a right wing stick to beat the masses with and has been since Roman times…
So, I’d say, you’re pretty much in my league, troll boy, whether you like it or not… just at the ineffectual end of it…
I don’t want to spew vitriol at all, if possible. As for the Democrat victory, I’m pretty sure only once, and then couching it in terms of possibility for changes to civil union laws and little out. And in my experience, religion is a stick the left wing uses to win without fighting. Scream “Hate” loud and long enough and people scurry like roaches.
And you calling me a troll is especially comical, since you start most of the crap that happens here. The difference between you and I is that you get off on being a jerk, whereas the only person I’ve ever been unkind to here is you. In fact, I’ve tried to be fairly conciliatory most of the time.
Now, let’s see how the text wrap destroyed my sentences…
No, generally you’ve used it in your usual weaselling fashion…
You really are a boring little man who spend most of his time defending that which should need no defence, yet does at every turn…
And as to trolling, you’re the one who chose to follow me around and shout banalities, while not making a single point… So, Fidei Defensor, what now, more defensive boring prose?
Yeah, have to agree with you there, Danbala. Making faith based arguments with Fester is perhaps the most futile exercise in the world.
Umm, that was not really my point, but possibly a subset of my point.
Faith-based arguments like “you are speaking against god” is not an argument at all.
I’m Robert’s bête noire… If it wasn’t so irritating, I’d be flattered…
Danbala: Ahhh…I see. I’d have to agree, stupid argument. My point was that it is especially worthless in this particular setting.
Fester: So trying to get along with people is weaseling? Explains a lot about you. My point is and will continue to be that being a raging ass to everyone you disagree with is about as useless as the argument that you’re “speaking against God.” As for following you around and shouting banalities, as someone who rips apart anyone you disagree with, whether they said anything to you or not (see Machelle @ the bottom of this thread, or, for that matter, me), I figure you have little ground to stand on in that regard. I engaged you because you started it. Perhaps immature, but it is what it is.
Finally, you not an anathema at all, Fester. You are something of a figurehead, however. I have this (crazy) idea that maybe, if people treat each other with just the tiniest bit of human decency, maybe relations between all groups, be they age, race, creed, or ethnicity, would improve. You have put yourself squarely with the Westboro bunch in my personal hierarchy. You run around, flinging about nastiness, accomplishing nothing but driving the wedge deeper. The difference between you and the Westboro bunch is that I can’t engage them. You seem to be more than willing to continue. So, yeah, more prose.
And you really don’t get the joke…
Well now I’m just sad…I didn’t realize it was an attempt at humor.
In your opinion… I’d suggest that your God comes and tells me he has an issue, since, tbh, I doubt your opinions deviate much from the party line…
Although feel free to tell me that being gay isn’t a sin…
I’ve read the bible, knew it’s context, and it’s what pushed me out of religion completely, but that’s a different matter. The part i find odd is when people equate God to being Parental and Hell is a punishment.
To me a good parent punishes the child so they learn a lesson. You get grounded for breaking the lamp and when your punishment is over you know not to play baseball in the house.
With Hell however, it’s eternal. there is no lesson to learn, you don’t get to come out later and know better, it isn’t punishment, it’s torture, and what kind of loving parent tortures their children.
This is mostly assuming you actually did sin somehow or had the bad luck not to accept jesus (poor lads born in the middle of nowhere) Original sin adds a whole new level of ghastly outlook to it.
That’s the way I’ve always felt– I can’t worship a god who’s so obsessed with everyone worshipping him (without even supplying proof he’s real) and then torturing his “children” who he supposedly “loves” for not worshipping him, even if they’re good people. I can’t worship a god who would send innocent people, and especially CHILDREN, to burn in hell for eternity just because they never heard of him.
you’d think an all knowing, all powerful, all good being would have a better system than people trusting in one human being to keep them from burning for eternity. You’d think it would be the thought that counts. if some poor sap happens to be born in the middle of nowhere and spends his whole life practically acting like a saint and dies, he’s gonna burn because he didn’t have the good fortune of being born in a place where he could hear about a guy that died two millenia ago. Better luck next time kid, at least it would be if your soul wasn’t being tortured for eternity.
You can live like christ all you like, loving your neighbor, being a good wholesome and honest person, but you’re screwed if you never heard of the guy.
Try this picture [link]
Or this one (a favourite of mine…)
*sigh*
General consensus (in the bible and elsewhere) is that if you have not heard of him but are doing you’re best to follow God (‘cos you’ve seen the wonders of creation and whatnot) and do good, it’s close enough…
Chapter and verse please…
i don’t have my bible on me… but it is mentioned in revelations… the jews who died before jesus was born do have a chance to enter heaven…
yes but…aren’t jews a different matter from those of use that are not jewish. The jewish people were god’s chosen. When i read revelations I didn’t take it as everyone has a chance. I read it that they were special. Anyway before Jesus all god’s people would need to be jewish so…i suppose they got grandfathered in, but those that were say on the other end of the world and not privy to the jewish tennets or jesus’ sermons, what are they supposed to do?
Paul said something about it, I think… I can’t think of any keywords to search for but I’ll go look…
My Dad helped! Round about Romans 1:20.
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Pope JPII also said he believed those who hadn’t had a chance to hear of Christ could be justified by Paul’s reasoning…
So effectively you’re taking something out of context and leverage it into a meaning you want it to… that’s cool…
I’m familair with most of the arguments…
There isn’t one that actually unequivocally
says what you want it to say… You came up with a common one, but it’s really not swayed that many of the faithful…
Swayed the pope…
Also, question: (not an insult) why are you so grumpy?
Do you really actually hate everyone?
Somehow, I don’t think you’re any more impressed with the posturing of a Pope than I am… JPII was a politician, more than a theologian. He was trying to deal with Jews, Islam, AND get over the PR nightmare that was the forced conversions scandal, not to mention the Franciscan behaviour during WW2.
On the whole, he’d say anything to get some of the bad light off the church (pretty much like any other pontiff who couldn’t raise an army to wipe out the people who were complaining)
and the number of idiots does little for my sunny good nature…
Why are you so wet?
Why are you so wet?
Because it’s raining!
I don’t really use the adjective “wet” so I wasn’t sure what you meant… Here’s what wiki gave me. [LINK] I hope you weren’t calling me a moderate conservative…
No, I was using not uncommon British slang…
‘Wet’, ‘bit of a damp rag’, ‘waffy’, ‘ditzy’, ‘not the sharpest tool in the box’, the flickering light bulb on the Christmas tree’…
In this case it was mostly ‘silly little girl’….
Ooooohhh… You meant “glaikit numpty.” (Sorry, my silly little self isn’t familiar with such regional word usage) I probably better classed as “dippit.”
Honestly, there’s no need to hate me. I wasn’t even trying to insult you. I was honestly wondering why you felt the need to insult everyone else…
Hate is a strong term… I don’t ‘hate’ anyone. Level of passion I’m probably physically incapable of… nothing here has raised my blood pressue per se… I just play whack-a-mole with people who are clearly fools.
fair enough, It’s just hard to understand how people think sometimes. . Why is God so jealous? It is not as if his power is dependent on his name (considering few people actually use it because translation issues. So if someone worships one all powerful god and called it “billy” and billy created this beautiful world, wanting them to be good and kind, and they were, they would still burn for not getting the name right?
Then there’s the idea that morals comes only from religion (christian in the cases i am familiar with) It strikes me as…strange that there are people that believe the only thing stopping them from being an amoral druggie murderer is the word of god, that an atheist in my case has no internal ability to determine what is and is not a morally alright. meh i should end this before i start to rant about ethical naturalism and…retconning and meh
I know! But, the kind of people who think that The Fear Of God is the only possible reason humans would be treating each other civilly, tend to be too daft to realise that they just admitted that they would be bastards if they thought their God “wasn’t looking”. Meh. :p More seriously though, most people I’ve asked about that, tend to say “well I would be able to behave even without my religion, but it’s more generally speaking”. (Which I interpret as a “it’s all dem dar other people wot need to be under god’s thumb”.)
I’m just extremely bitter on that matter. I’ve had more than one person tell me to my face I have no morals because i don’t believe in their god. that I am selfish to think that good things can happen without god wanting them to happen…so on and so forth. it’s annoying, particularly since ethics is one of my favorite things to study.
I have faced some of that, as well. But mostly I just get to hear that my life has no meaning and that my days are full of futility since I don’t believe in an afterlife. The logic behind that also eludes me. :p
That’s because there is no logic, just people propping up a world view they know is basically wrong…
“your life has no meaning because you don’t believe in the next one” ?
I rather find my life full of meaning, it’s mine. selfish i know but that is meaning enough for me.
Yeah…there’s really no excuse to be hostile when talking to people about religion. As I’ve already said, I think the best way to make people more accepting of your view is to be the best person possible. You’re an emmisary of your group, and when you act like a pompous ass, like whoever you talked to FaileV (or Fester, for that matter), you weaken your argument and alienate others who don’t share your view.
i enjoy that ideal. I have quite a few religious friends because i don’t really care what people believe so long as they don’t push it on others by crafting laws to their doctrine or doing things like…well the picture above. They have the decency not to try and convert me. It all works out and i get to learn things about the way others think
I always figured that if one of my friends that weren’t religious wanted to talk to me about it, they could always ask me.
@Robert:
Yeah…there’s really no excuse to be hostile when talking to people about religion.
Oh, the most beautiful part is that it’s made in a Christianly Loving way. “I feel so sorry for you, but some day you will find God too. I will pray for you.”
It’s like finding yourself in a fight with an irate lamb who tries to FLUFF you to death. It’s vitriol and loathing disguised as Love and Care.
FLUFFed to death, FTW!!
I LOLed muchly, D., and will blatantly steal
your line. (My former “sugar-coated black
widow spider” needs to be retired, due to
overuse.)
Hmm. That sounds crunchy and nice, though, as a snack.
Well, I suppose context and tone matters, but how can you be sure they don’t care about you?
Yes, content and tone is all that does it here. I am not offended if Random Dude who has a habit of saying “I’ll pray for you” or “god loves you” does that. (It’s not something one usually does in Sweden – but we get our share of forn people, like merkins and stuff, who occasionally do that – like one guy that I used t
o buy “Faktum” from (the paper that homeless people here make), who was just of the opinion that his customers were doing a good deed and that was his way of thanking them).
.
No, it mostly comes up after any form of religious discussion where it’s clear we have disparate views, and very often after I have explained that I find it offensive that people think my life is useless because I don’t believe.
.
If believers really cared and wanted to pray for me, they’d not have to say it. ;p
“No, it mostly comes up after any form of religious discussion where it’s clear we have disparate views, and very often after I have explained that I find it offensive that people think my life is useless because I don’t believe. If believers really cared and wanted to pray for me, they’d not have to say it. ;p
That logic is unassailable.
Casting demons into pigs so they drown themselves is condemning pigs.
Just saying.
He also, by omission, condemns non-believers to a lack of eternal life, at the “softest” level of interpretation, or “hell” at the hardest.
The Year of Living Biblically, by A.J. Jacobs. You might enjoy it. You obviously have much to learn from it.
More Hallmark card frippery for the hard of thinking…
Oh come on Fester, can you honestly tell me you have never had the urge to stone someone for working on Sunday? Think about it, if we brought back stoning for everything they stoned people for in the bible, we could solve global warming, food, space and over population problems over night!
D: but then once a month i would have to go live at the edge of town…it’s cold out there.
I’d visit while I was digging a hole to crap into…
Bring some jars? they keep breaking mine.
Not sure I can, you being ‘unclean’ and all… If I have a nocturnal emmision, then I’ll be sure to…
don’t let the succubi get you, they like to tempt priests in their sleep.
I hope you’re keeping your head covered! that can tempt men and angels according to Paul…
Given that the gospels were not even eyewitness accounts; the closest thing TO an eyewitness account (the gospel of Thomas) was declared blasphemous by the church, along with the gnostic movement which had a much stronger claim to be following in the footsteps of Jesus than Paul’s little death cult; the Council of Nicaea was so politicised and agenda-laden that it more or less rewrote the bible from the ground up; and the Vatican still dedicates itself, in part, to suppressing anything that might emerge to contradict its official position on what Christianity means…
How do we know?
The G. Thomas’ problem is that Jesus tells the disciples to go to James, not Peter.
Thank you for saving me the time to make this same comment.
(((Jojo)))
I think the comment was largely dismissed as wishful thinking…
Amen
Try reading the rebuttles before beginning… you look less of a tosser that wayu.
Try reading your comments before replying… you might look like less rude that wayu.
Thanks for poiniting up my typing error. as you know it happens from time to time…
As to ‘less rude’, you one eyed, web footed, pile of foetid pig’s offal, why would I want to be ‘less rude’?
People might be more inclined to listen to you?
Why on EARTH would people listen even then? They have their book or rules, and will vote to preserves, have killed to preserve it, and will do so again…
I’m nothing more than a noise whether I’m rude as I like, or polite and studious…
I’m nothing more than a noise whether I’m rude as I like, or polite and studious…
Then why do you try and change people’s views? If you’re going to try and argue your point then why jeopardise it by acting the way you do? You sound as though you’ve given up or something.
I don’t try to change people’s views, since it’s a waste of my time… I Point out that their idiotic for my own amusement, much like I do everything else…#
-
Behind my name, a Dilbert cartoon that explains my position…
You have given up. You’ve given up treating other humans nicely because you’ve encountered idiots in the past and can’t see that everyone’s different. I think you underestimate people if you claim that insults are the only thing they can understand.
And I’m going to make a guess. It may be wrong but I think it makes sense. I don’t think it’s true that you don’t care. You wouldn’t still be in a discussion on this thread if you weren’t trying to change people’s minds. And I don’t think it’s true that you insult people because it’s like “playing whack-a-mole.” You reserve the most invective for those who won’t rise to it and those who genuinely wish to debate with you. And I don’t think it’s true that you are just looking down at other posters. I think you wear this superior air because you are afraid your views may not stand up in an argument and want to distance yourself from the possibility by pretending you don’t give a damn about what happens on this site. I could be wrong but that’s what I think.
NO, I gave up along time ago… now it is my own amusement…
Well, why give up? If you’re got something to share why not share it? If someone disagrees with you why give up at once? Why are you still on this thread? Most of the”amusement” has moved on. Why does it amuse you to sit there insulting people when you could talk to them instead?
*you’ve
Robert is sort of amusing… You’re still flogging a dead horse…
Jojo I nailed to the floor, as I did phipps and Brad, but that was mostly with history they couldn’t actually argue with, without the faith card, and they knew the faith card means they’ve not got a leg to stand on…
I may still be flogging a dead horse but you’re still not answering the things I asked.
Robert may amuse you but why not share with him the superior knowledge you claim to posess (and which, it seems, he’s curious to know) instead of typing numerous posts telling him he’s stupid?
Read the Dilbert cartoon…
What part of ‘neither the experience nor education needed’? Don’t you get?
You know your problem? You’re too ignorant to know you are…
Same with the Defender of the Faithful…
I read the cartoon. How can you judge someone when you only know them through a few posts on a forum? What makes you so able to look down from on high and tell people of the knowledge you’re witholding which they could never understand? Why are you so certain that this knowledge cements your superiority? Why do you think everybody is the same?
I know my ignorance, plenty others do too. I want to know things. I get the impression you don’t as you are, seemingly, convinced of your monopoly on truth.
Actually, you don’t… otherwise you’d not be asking the fool questions…
Addendum: As a Christian, you’ve claimed the monopoly on truth…
You may not know Origen, Irenaeus, Marcion, Arius, Athenasueus, Eusebius, Constantine, Theodoseus and Augustine… but that simply because you’ll not be told by your clergy the history, if they’ll discuss them at all. you have ‘faith’…
Hell, you don’t even know when Paul’s letters became popular in the church… and from whom… I could write pages and pages, detailing the social and political back drop of 1st Century Judea, and you’d not be interested, since it’s not what’s in your damned book (there were a lot more people in Jerusalem than Romans and Jews… it was the confluence of the Spice and Silk Roads with the Greco-Romano trade routes that extended to Iceland… It was where Chinese dealt with Viking… but that’s not your ‘history’… ) Christianity only benefits from the ignorance of its followers and its cultural mass to prevent major dissent.
And all the foregoing is pissing in the wind…
I don’t believe we have a monopoly on truth. I am sure of a particular truth and I believe it is an essential truth but I know that there are smart people and perceptive people everywhere.
I don’t think you know what I will or will not be interested in. You don’t know me but you have judged me.
I know a little of what you are speaking about. The information came from theolgians actually. God gave us brains and, presumably, expects us to use them. Christians such as my father have often introduced me to complexity, confusion and more doubt than atheists ever have.
Also, your 7:34 post? Are you saying that, if I think I’m ignorant, I shouldn’t ask questions to get answers?
I think that you need to get the grounding to be able ask a meaningful question on the subject, rather than simply the party line…
Patronising people without answering them? You’re not a politician by any chance?
I answered as best I could… if you don’t understand the answer, no need to get pissy with me… I suggest you do more reading… I was about your age when I embarked on my research… but then, I knew I didn’t know enough to frmae a question that wasn’t rapidly going to get me out of my depth…
You don’t have even the elementary reading… and if you want being ‘partonising’ the comment about ‘Church you made above was patronising tosh, but I chose not to rip you a new on then… you’re now just irritating.
The only thing in your post that I didn’t understand was your idea that only the enlightened may ask questions. Indeed, I wasn’t aware that questions regarding your motivations and attitude could “rapidly… get me out of my depth.” I got “pissy” because of your continued assumptions as to who I am, what I know and what I think…. And I’m still looking for this Church comment of which you speak. Glad to see you chose not to “rip me a new one” (new what btw?) it seems you haven’t given up entirely.
Technically, these ppl can be Christians. To be Christian is not to be Christ-like. To be Christian means you believe in Jesus Christ as your savior, repent of your sins, and ask Him into your life and heart. As Christians we ARE CALLED TO BE CHRIST-LIKE
…(sorry for the break in comments) but our actions do not define our faith.
I am not condoning these people’s actions. They are a horrible representations of the Christian faith. They will be judged for what they do, but it’s not our job to be their judge.
So, do you hold the personal opinion that people who are gay are sinners, or do you hold it because a book tells you this?
God’s word (not “a book”) tells me that ALL people have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. I am no better than anyone who may be condemned for their actions, simply because I am straight.
And where do you get God’s word from, exactly?
…A book?
No sh!t, Sherlock. I’m trying to get nlphipps to realize that his religion comes from a book, unless God speaks to him directly. In that case, I suggest anti-psychotic medication.
Rather, the “book” comes from what you call religion.
‘The Book’ was written down years after the religion started. Nice ry, but when a confirmed Christian such as myself can easily shoot down your arguments as being stupid, then you need to really look at what you believe and try to figure out WHY you believe what you do, rather than just thinking ‘well, the Bible says it’s true, so it must be’.
And who wrote it?
I am curious how you are a “confirmed” Christian. Is there some right of passage through which you went? I don’t believe you’ve “shot down my arguments as being stupid”. You’re simply saying I’m wrong, which is very interesting to me since, as you put it, you are a confirmed Christian.
I know WHY I believe what I believe. If the bible says it, it IS true. But there is abundant grace and mercy from God in my life to confirm His presence.
As a confirmed Christian, where do you get your truth, if not necessarily the bible?
You don’t want to go down the road of who wrote the Bible, because you’ll get answers that range in scope from the Council at Nicea to anyone who had a vested interest in making over Christ in their own image. There are so
many different authors, most of whom took out pieces of Scripture they didn’t like and added things they did like that the Bible is no longer close to the form it started out in. The first Scriptures were mostly rote, given by word
of mouth, not written down. The Old Testament as a whole is almost pre-dated by the Epic of Gilgamesh, if you want to get really picky. Anything
before that was simply oral stories handed down.
-
Now, you say you believe in the Bible because the Bible says to believe in it. I think you should believe that grass is purple, not green, and the
reason you should believe me is because I say so. Does that make sense? Of course not. You can’t believe something because that particular something
says you have to. There needs to be outside proof. You say that you have received grace and mercy from God as your proof. That’s great, but it’s
nothing that will stand up in court. You can use the Bible as a road map for your beliefs, but don’t expect someone else who was not raised
in the same life as you were raised to take you as anything but a brainwashed idiot.
-
As far as your statement: If the bible says it, it IS true, I refer you back to my previous example of the purple grass. The Bible was inspired
by God, but it was written and changed by man. You have to glean your knowledge from what God is showing you as real, not ‘it says what it says
so I must therefore believe it’.
-
I didn’t go through any ‘rite of passage’ other than confessing my sins, accepting the grace of God and Jesus into my heart, and being baptized
in order to become a Christian. I have, through many friendships with both Christian and atheist, realized that you can’t believe the Bible because it
says to. You also can’t believe an atheist because he calls you an idiot. You have to form what you know by using other things, such as your personal
revelations. You can not, however, use a logical fallacy in your arguments and be expected to be taken as anything but a Bible-thumping idiot,
just like the Phelps’.
Authorship varies wildly. which part are you asking about?
The OT is a late version of oral tales that had been recorded about 400BC and then revised and re-revised to fit changing times as the Rabbis saw fit
The earliest NT is 1Thessalonians, which written in the period AD50-60, and is primero-Pauline. The Gospels earliest writing appears to be post AD70 due the Greek theatrical structure of the text. John, from internal evidence was the last one to be recorded in that form, and seems to be largely an anti-Thomas diatribe
So the book arose from oral trad, then became canon in the 1500s and thus the source of the current religion…
I didn’t ask “who revised it?”. Uncle Fester’s reply is much more correct that yours, froofrou. How is it, that in the original text, many different people penned it, over many years and on many different continents and there is not one contradiction within?
Personally, I don’t care that “God’s grace and mercy in my life” will not stand up in court. (Where I would be swearing on a Bible, btw.) God’s grace and mercy in my life IS WHY I believe Christ is our savior. I did not say “I beleive the bible to be true because the bible says it’s true”. Therefore, most of your argument is invalid. You may question why I know Jesus. That is fine. But you are not the One to whom I owe my life. I don’t expect someone as confused as you seem to be to understand me or my beliefs.
I rather enjoy reading someone’s argument with self.
A quote from you, my dear: I know WHY I believe what I believe. If the bible says it, it IS true.
-
You just said that the Bible says it to be true, so it must be true. It’s a logical fallacy, and doesn’t explain why you believe what you believe. If you stick with your personal revelations, fine, but don’t try to throw logic into an argument where no logic you are using can stand.
-
Trust me, my religious views are anything but confused. It’s taken me a long time to get to where I am, and there is no way I can take the word of man as the perfect word of God. Not when King James basically made up what he wanted to make up, kept what he wanted of the ‘original’ Bible, and threw out the rest. Perhaps you need to go back and research a little more. ‘Revising’ is not all that was done to the Bible over the years.
-
I also do not expect someone as bull-headed as you are to understand that just because you say it, it must be true. Go back and read the teachings of Christ, and leave Paul out of it. Jesus was a bit of a hippie, and was all about peace and love.
-
As far as no contradictions in the Bible, please don’t go there. I haven’t the time to point out the contradictions between the first four books of the New Testament alone. That doesn’t mean I don’t believe the story, however, I don’t believe the details, because those change depending on who wrote thebook and who he wrote it to.
Frou, We’re dealing with a ‘drity stinking ape
without God’ er… We’re both wasting our
breath, since it’s like talking to a fence post,
but at least the fence post tries to
comprehend what is being said, rather than
this creature, that is composing his response
(never an answer) to what it thinks is being said…
@Broken sinner boy – Go peddle crazy somewhere else, we’re all stocked up here and about to have a fire sale on it…
And I was reinforcing that idea?
You might want to try to focus less energy on me and more on getting your comment in the right spot. Of course, it might just be my computer playing tricks on my mind by putting your post at the bottom.
And it was…haha. Funny.
Nice. I’m sure you enjoy making people look stupid. However, I believe you understand what I meant. I haven’t gone down to the nearest Barnes & Noble, picked up a copy of any old fiction novel and believed it to be the word of God. The bible is historical, traceable, unchanging in its original text.
In all honesty, I did laugh at froofrou and The…’s comments.
Glad that I could make you laugh. And I should extend my thanks to you as well. This is keeping me busy from an otherwise uneventful night.
You’re on crack, or dumber than a fence post if you actually believe that…
Well, it is traceable, technically. You can trace all the changes they purposefully made from the original manuscripts.
True. So read the original manuscripts.
And which would those be? There are several books not considered canon in the Dead Sea Scrolls which would be thrown out by any self-respecting fundamentalist Christian as ‘adding to the Bible’. So what original manuscripts are you referring to?
The ones that none of us can actually read anyway because they’re all in Aramaeic or Ancient Greek or some other language that hasn’t been spoken, let alone read, in hundreds of years.
Say what? So much for *my* classical
education …
semantically his argument is correct because it all hinges off the phrase “original text”.
conceptually, he’s full of sh!t.
Blah, original text my foot. I might believe half of what the Bible said if even remotely looked like the original text…in which case I firmly blieve it doesn’t, which is sad to think, but I fairly certain it’s true.
*if it even
Then I’m pretty good at studying history while I’m on crack.
Actually no… you’re nearly wholly delusional if you think what you’re spouting is anything resembling ‘historic fact’… it may sway the semi-literates you pull into your tent revivials, but anyone with a brain and the will to use it, can quickly establish you’re talking rot…
b.b.but he graduated with a 4.0 GPA from Bible College!
Thinking, socially liberal, bisexual female here and I believe the Bible in most cases. Then again, I’m usually the exception to the rule….
Christians that are not like Christ are not Christians at all.
Suffix
“-ian”
1. (as an adjective) From, related to, or like.
2. (as a noun) One from, belonging to, relating to, or like.
If you claim to be like the man that Jesus was, but act the dire opposite, then you are a fraud. Just like these people.
Anyways why are we so caught up in labels?
Hitler called himself a Christian.
Technically, these ppl can be Christians. To be Christian is not to be Christ-like. To be Christian means you believe in Jesus Christ as your savior, repent of your sins, and ask Him into your life and heart. As Christians we ARE CALLED TO BE CHRIST-LIKE,
Considering the many different groups, sects, divisions, etc. that call themselves Christians, it’s impossible to give any one definition/ instruction manual. In your defense, you do present a view of Christianity, but it’s not necessarily the *right* or *correct* view.
What is incorrect about it?
You misunderstand me. I was simply pointing out that there are many definitions of “being a Christian.” In this case, it really is impossible to say that you are incorrect, but likewise the same holds true for everyone else. Though, as the name of the religious grouping implies, I do agree that being a Christian requires that something in your belief has something to do with Christ.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. The one, true definition of being Christian is in the bible. We can not reach God through our actions, only by our faith in Jesus. There is ONE path to salvation. Not many.
Tis ok, mon cher.
I am too illiterate of the Bible to enter in to this argument. I’d just like to ask a question of a Christian whom I will most likely never meet: based on the ‘We can not reach God through our actions, only by our faith in Jesus. There is ONE path to salvation. Not many’ thought, is Gandhi then not a man of God?
According to the Christian belief, no, Ghandi was not a man of God in the sense that he was a Christian and was saved as such.
-
He did, however, do God’s work, and there is some debate as to whether that’s what you need to do in order to reach Heaven. It really depends on who you ask.
Oh. So there is more than one way to get to heaven.
Based on common dogma, Gandhi burns in Hell… It seems even God has to follow the rules…
I’m sorry. That came out more sarcastically than I meant it.
Like I said, it depends on who you ask
If you ask a Christian Southern Baptist, Methodist, or COC, there is one way to Heaven and that’s it. If you ask a Jehovah’s Witness, a Mormon, or a Pentecostal, there is a different way to Heaven. If we’re talking a Catholic-type religion, there is another way. But if you get down to cut and dried, straight out of Jesus mouth (if you believe the Bible literally), “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, the only way to Heaven is through Me,” then there is only one way.
-
and there we have it… Gandhi burns in hell forever, since he no only knew of Jesus, but chose not to follow him, despite mostly liking the cut of his jib…
-
Behind my name, an artistic creation depicting it… [link]
There are a few definitions of ‘Christian’.
You say it is anyone like Jesus.
I say it is anyone who believes Jesus to be the son of God.
Many others say it is anyone who believes Jesus is the son of God and follows his teachings.
No, there is only one true definition of a Christian. One who does exactly as Jesus did.
The other “definitions” are called “misconceptions”, based on centuries of corporate religious corruption and misusing the term “Christian”.
Cool… does that mean if you don’t get better after being nailed to a tree, you’re not a Christian?
That is what you believe. But words change and evolve.
That may be what Christian meant originally, but that isn’t what it is accepted to mean now. And words only mean what people say they mean.
Nuh-uh! Gay means happy and happy only! I have been miserably married and am therefore TOTALLY against gay marriages!
(If I couldn’t have it, why should anyone!)
.
On a related note – “kåt” once meant “happy” in Swedish, and now means “horny”.
I would make the argument that to be horny is to be happy in some respects. Slang amuses me, sometimes.
Hehe, my friends and I use “happy” to mean either horny or homosexual. The only difference in the use is the inflection.
See why aren’t there more people in this world like Jojo. I’m not a christian, but
if I was, I would hope to be more like you. These people you see here are the Westborough baptist Church. They not only give Christians a bad name, but the whole human race. According to them, God hates gay people, the USA, China, the UK, Australia, Sweden, Southeast Asia, the rest of Asia, Muslims, Buddhists, Russia, most of Europe, every country in Africa, every country in South
America, Canada and Obama is the antichrist. If all those things are true, then God has done a really, really bad job.
Btw, we’re all going to hell for condoning gay relationships. But our countries
don’t really. But we’re going to hell anyway. Apparently “condoning” gay relationships means not burning gay people at the stake. I have a gay friend who was very offended by these people, they make me kinda sick.
The biggest fault with these Westborough Baptist people’s ideology is that God cannot hate. God is love and his perfect love casts out all fear.
Hate is a sin, and its is bred in darkness and fear.
So if God casts out all fear with his perfect love, how could he possibly hate?
Its illogical.
These people use God as an accessory to assist their ignorant cause(s).
God loves them but he is sure saddened by their making his name filthy in the eyes of the world.
Since God created gays, Americans, soldiers, etc., he loves them all the same. See, God doesn’t see labels such as ‘gay’ or ‘straight’. God sees the heart. As long as your heart is in the right place, then you don’t need to fear judgment. Anyways, who cares what these people say. They’re extremist bigots, sure, but haven’t we learned anything in elementary school?
I’m rubber, you’re glue…
Hate to break it to you, Ryan, but most Christians are fairly mellow, and I’ve never met anybody like these jokers. They should be offensive to anyone, instead their straw men set up to make all Christians look bad by bigots like Fester.
“they’re”
Apparently I can’t spell tonight.
And the Social conservative can never deal when his coin is paid back with interest…
But thanks for the name check, means I’m pissing you off… You want to stick your nose in other folk’s lives playing the culture card, then expect no quarter from me
How was the cross burning?
Wait…what? I have no earthly idea what you’re talking about. What coin are you paying back with interest? You don’t piss me off, Fester, you make me tired. I don’t understand how a human being can be so incredibly hateful, for one, and you don’t even seem to realize it, which aggravates the problem. Finally, I don’t want to stick my nose in anyone else’s life. But, and here’s the crux of the issue, I don’t want anyone else sticking their nose (or any other part of their anatomy) into my life, either. And quite frankly, I’d expect quarter for Santa Ana or Franco before I expect it from you.
The cross burning wasn’t quite as good as the lynching last week, but at least I had a clean robe. You’re a moron. You know that, right?
OH it seems you do… the ‘Progressive’ card earlier showed that the ‘Social conservative’ is a live and well… Only perpose of a social conservative is to make everyone equally miserable as they are.
I enjoy upsetting them… and you’re really very easy to get to dance to my tune…
But please, give me your ‘liberal’ qualifications…
I simply pointed out that Progress for the sake of progress is really stupid. And, I’m still not sure what you’re talking about. I never said I had any “liberal” qualifications. I’m pretty sure in order to qualify as a social conservative I’d have to be against civil unions and homosexual adoptions, though, and I’m not, so yeah….I’d probably also have to be against the legalization of most drugs, and I’m not that, either. I tend to run more or less libertarian, truth be told.
And conservatives are happier than liberals. [LINK]
And here’s the Google search page, too, just for giggles.
http://www.google.com/search?q=conservatives+happier+than+liberals&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
That’s because they have liberals to make miserable…
(
-
I’d tend to run politically libertarian, but for this particular point, it’s a lot morefun to have pungent opinion, since no one takes notice of a balanced approach anyway, do they?
-
And conservatism is railing against change for changes sake, or does that only apply to points that you’re not much in favour of, after all you’ve established that the drug use is why you seem to think that way… It appears to be change for changes sake only when it doesn’t affect your liberties, otherwise it’s an acceptable change… Least that’s the subtext of what you’ve written above
I’m not sure what your point was, but I’m gonna try to address it anyway. I’ve never used anything harder than alcohol, for starters. And my reasons for drug legalization are various. It’s a waste of money to chase around non-violent drug users, it does nothing but dump money into Mexican cartels and deals more damage to inner cities than chasing it down helps. I think that whatever someone wants to do to their own body is their right. And finally, for the most practical reason, because outlawing something that someone with a heat lamp and fertilizer can grow in their house is ridiculous and a waste of time.
So, it’s change for nothing more than rights
that can be taxed and other fiscal reasons…
and that’s a ‘good’ reason to change a long
standing culture… I see…
I could start a tax debate here, but that would be silly. And I generally consider “long-standing” to be more in the neighborhood of thousands of years, not thiry. I’m generally against the government legislating the crap out of anything, though, be it drugs or whether you can use your phone in the car, so there you go.
The problem of ‘recreational’ drugs goes back to the time of Luther…
I think you’re now pulling arbitrary figures to justify position that really is just you pulling the Eww!
The cultural backdrop is a lot longer and we both know it… however, you will play the dumb card like it gets you out of jail… ho hum…
Actually, they have new uppers in the Armed forces… but if a civillian has them, they’re illegal. Nothing changes, just the way the culture back flips…
As to other cultures, strawman. We’re not discussing ‘other cultures’;, just the one you want to support right up until it affects you negatively…
Playing ignorant really doesn’t cut it… and you’re just hedging.
There’s really nothing to discuss, and you playing the ‘obtuse’ game really just gets the ‘cretin’ card played back…
You’re doing it again. If I’m ignorant of something, I’d love for you to enlighten me. You wanted to know why I felt one way about one thing, and another on something else. I did my best to answer you. But, you being the way you are, I could have written a frickin’ doctoral thesis and you wouldn’t be satisfied. I’ve said my piece as best I can. If you have a question/attack/actual statement, I’m happy to respond to it, but if you keep being vague I can’t really help you right now.
And other cultures is more of a red herring or a non sequitor, in that it either a)distracts from the actual point or b)doesn’t really apply to the conversation. I didn’t really intend it as such, I was just trying to explain my thought process to you. But if you’re going to accuse me of logical fallacies, at least accuse me of the right one, k?
You can’t really ‘help’ me, since
1) you’re reasonably thick headed
2) you really have no idea what is being discussed, but you know the answers you want to give…
I’m getting tired of basically arguing the toss with a fractious child…
Robert,
You need to get out more. There are a lot of “Christians” everywhere that are just like Phelps and his bunch. They are bigots and don’t ‘need’ anyone like Unc Fester to make them look bad, but they thrive on the attention they recieve by the media (not caring if it is good or bad, just lots of it). BTW, speaking as someone who knows bigots and bigotry up close and personal, Unc Fester, while being many things, is no bigot (unless you fail into the catagory of stupid).
And to address a comment you make further down the thread about conservatives being happier than liberals – hah, and double hah! Happiness is subjective, and perspective has much more to do with the state of a person’s happiness quotient than their socio-political leanings.
These people ARE indeed Christian. They believe that the Bible is the literal, inerrant word of God, and they believe that Christ died for their sins (although, apparently, they only believe that he died to save THEIR sins, if you start looking at their twisted logic). Believing Christ is God is the only prerequisite for calling oneself Christian. Anyone who has an argument with them about the veracity of their Christianity will surely lose, these people know the Bible better than anyone , so they know what the actual doctrine contains. Christ will preach tolerance and forgiveness, and then on the next page, he’ll be smashing on anyone who doubts that a human could actually walk on water.
I don’t mean to be unkind, but the fact is, calling these people the “false” version of Christianity only serves to make moderate Christians feel better about skipping over about 3/4s of their professed doctrine and believing some pretty improbable things. Given the accuracy of their scriptural interpretations and knowledge, the WBC is the closest thing to true Christianity I’ve ever witnessed. (I say the “closest thing to” rather than “the true” Christianity because it is impossible to follow every tenet/passage in the Bible, since they contradict each other on several occasions.)
When people start throwing around the cant that nlphipps is, then you’re on the same continuum… I don’t see the difference.
By their fruits ye shall know them… well, most of the professing Christians and ‘Christ followers’ just leave me puzzled as to how they live in something that small and delusional. I came to the conclusion that it some how prevents them from random acts of violence…
Thanks for this piece of good reading. I was trying to compose something vaguley similar the other night, but failed and then went to sleep instead. Now I’m glad mine remained unwritten, you expressed it far better than my attempt.
I very much agree.
“I do not want hypocritical religion. I want love.” – Jesus Christ (Message Translation)
The Message has little leverage with the ‘True Christian’ since it’s a paraphrase, not a translation…
Interesting, Jojo. Would THEY consider YOU to be a real Christian? The sad truth is that your particular denomination or interpretation does not have any particular monopoly on the term. As much as I GREATLY appreciate that you feel a clear sense of revulsion towards these people, unfortunately they do fall under the hierarchy of ‘Christian’ since they believe in and worship Jesus Christ as the messiah/savior (however divergent their views of him might be).
The funny thing is that what you seem to figure is a REAL Christian is a fairly modern invention. For much of history it was more like these folks, except with swords and inquisitions, so by way of tradition they might have a stronger claim to the label than you do.
The Bible seems to function as a ‘Build Your Own God’ construction kit, because the various sects pick and choose what is literal truth, what is symbolic, and what is best glossed over entirely. So one can end up like you (thankfully), focusing on his good works and compassion, or one can read in all of the smiting, jealousy, intolerance, genocide, and take Genesis as an excuse to suppress science to boot. In the end they all believe in and worship Jesus Christ as the son of God, and it’s mighty hard to prove that you’re the TRUE Christian (and they aren’t), because JC just didn’t stick around long enough to exercise editorial control.
I would like to say that he would have some harsh words to say about it, but you know… it’s been a mere 60+ years since they started worshiping a fellow named John Frum on Tanu, and there’s already wildly differing interpretations of who he was, where he is, and how best to honor him (and indeed significant question as to whether he existed in the first place). Imagine how the legends and exagerations must have flown about over a charismatic iconoclast like Jesus Christ.
Oh, now I want to repeat that other post I just wrote, but that’d be dull, so… Cheers at you for a well written post, expressing things I tried to write before, but actually managing to do it, and do it excellently.
The “no true Christian” response… fail.
Most Recent, Visible Example: See previous entry re: Palin, and similar.
Those guys in the pic reaffirm my hatred of organized religion. If they’re right about God, then I want nothing to do with Him.
We think alike my friend.
They manager to affirm my faith in human nature…
Don’t you love when people live down to your expectations.
Oh they mostly exceed my expectations…
Ah, I see, if you expect the worst you go through life always being pleasantly surprised!
They’re usually nastier and more stupid than I expect
I don’t know where these people come from… But I’m like you n8. I’d want nothing to do with THAT God.
Fortunately, you get to make up your own god, so you can have a just, kind, loving god if you want. Unfortunately, these people have a damn good handle on what the Abrahamic god is actually supposed to be like. You have a choice: reject the psychotic god of the Bible, or join Westboro Baptist Church. Decisions, decisions!
Try Landover Baptist instead. LOL
They have WWJD thongs!
Amongst a variety of other parody items.
It’s a parody? I was going to convert! It just made so much *sense*…
Shocking, sorry to break it to you.
And THAT God wants nothing to do with these actions. HE did not tell them to condemn.
But he told you you’re a broken sinner with just enough intelligence to be venal…
Nice guy… Still sounds like an abusive parent to me…
I live in the same town as the a**holes. Let me assure you that even the people here that are participants of organized religion think these guys are f**king crazy. In fact, the town has taken to ignoring them for the most part and the Girl Scouts of America chapters in town like to chase them off of the street corners by choosing to set up cookie stands right where these dicks like to protest.
This is a small group of idiots (mostly related) and they have quite a bit of money because most of them are lawyers and they never participate in violent protests (and wait for people to physically attack them) so that they can later sue and they have made craploads of money doing this. Pretty sure that this “church” is hungry for attention and in no way, should you draw a parallel between this group of insane fascists and organized religion in general.
You Go Girl(s Scouts!)
Yeah, these “people” are in no way a representation of the majority of Christians in this country. It’s like saying the jihadists are a true reflection of Isalm. Not gonna buy it.
“they never participate in violent protests (and wait for people to physically attack them) so that they can later sue and they have made craploads of money doing this.”
They can’t sue if they’re dead!
No one does the job right these days
My way would be to start a mini “gay pride/Flying spaghetti monster” rally right next to them, while pretending they weren’t there make out with a few girls, just to get them going.
Ramen.
You would think their God would protect them from a horde of angry Girl Scouts…
@Jane – yes, really, especially if they are “right” and all the rest of us are “wrong”. D!ckwads.
This problem is nothing that a Firetruck and powerful stream of water couldn’t solve.
Girl Scouts… I’d have thought they’d be promoting God’s dislike of Gays along with the Westboro team…
They don’t have time for that! Dear god man, it’s the height of the cookie season! Those cookies aren’t going to sell themselves, get on the corner and shake your money makers girls!
So they leave the Chrisitan bigotry to the Boy Scouts of America…
the boy scouts just don’t like gays and atheists… everyone else is fine…
It’s still a nice bit of bigotry for an outfit who goes to town
councils with the begging bowl…
Do they refuse the tax money of gays and atheists too? I seem to remeber that not being the case in several large cities where they got reduced rent at the tax payer’s expense…
You certainly like to throw around the word bigot a lot. But when you generalize an entire group of people based on the actions of a few, isn’t that bigotry?
Well, let’s find out.
Bigotry:
1 : the state of mind of a bigot
2 : acts or beliefs characteristic of a bigot
Bigot:
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
Taken from Merriam-Webster.com
Then yes. He is a bigot.
=P Glad I could be of service.
Statler and Waldorf were operated by one person too…
Huh? =P Implying that I be a sock, do ye?
And, if not, my humblest apologies.
Um, “bigotry” is being ascribed to an “outfit” that
is known to exclude gays. Or did you think he meant
“outfit” as in a yellow striped top with blue paisley
pants and green cowboy boots?
That is FIERCE girl!
Grrarrrr!
reduced rent at tax payer’s expense? since when do boy scouts have to pay rent? most boy scout troops are operated out of churches of different kinds and are considered a nonprofit organization…
.
speaking as an eagle scout we never went before the city or any other government agency looking or money…
There have been a number of Cases where they’ve finally been turned out of reduced rate city owned property… A simple google pulls up the cases…
Since when was Most=all?
Just for ubr
Philadelphia – (BSoA are issuing a counter suit for the right toi have low rent and bigotry)
foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303420,00.html
msnbc.msn.com/id/21367636/
San Diego – Park rental at $1 a year?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnes-Wallace_v._Boy_Scouts_of_America
That’s pretty much it. The Girl Scouts very specifically do NOT discriminate against gays and atheists. And, they have cookies. Much cooler all around.
It’s because of the cookies that the Girl Scouts can afford to not discriminate against gays and atheists. They don’t have to depend on the deep pockets of others for donations – they go out and earn it.
*years for some Tagalongs*
*years=yearns
Read over post, then submit, Elbie.
Perhaps I’m chocolate-deprived.
Well, the boyscouts sell popcorn, but it’s overpriced & it sucks. The girl scout cookie talk is killing me. I need cookies…I should have gotten my cookie order today but our receptionist was out sick, the stupid cow…
Boy Scout popcorn, bleck.
Dammit, now I’m craving Thin Mints.
i got kicked out of boy scouts because i ate a brownie.
and ended up on the child sex register for 10 years
I was a boy scout. I wasn’t even a boy. (Still am not.)
You must have eaten a special brownie…
I volunteered to quit the Brownies. I took offense when my scout leader made me walk home at night in Alaska in the freaking winter without snowpants just because I forgot to bring the rest of the calendars I didn’t sell.
@Jane: Good thing you got out before ubr’s
brownie eating spree…!
Tagalongs FTW!
In this case I take “related” to mean “inbred for at least the last five generations.”
At last! Some reasibabke insight into their family structure. Oh, and don’t forget the next 5 generations of inbreeding, they are probably working on it already. (Yuck!)
I myself am a Christian and wouldn’t associate with the people in this image, I forget the name of them, but something something baptist church group, it’s been a long time since I’ve seen them on the news or the paper so I forget their name, but anyways, they always appear at soldier’s funerals, I really think these idiots make all the other Christians look bad to the rest of the country.
Westboro, name’s Westboro. They say “God hates you’re tears” and some crap that is best left ignored. People like this are pretty much the reason religion SEEMS stupid to some.
Virgin births, zombie who are magically their own father and will cast you into a fiery pit for all eternity for torture if you don’t accept the gift of god sacrificing himself to god, since god wouldn’t forgive mankind with out a sacrifice, all over a piece of fruit…
You’re saying that only ‘seems’ unreasonable? Did I miss a memo, or them handing out some powerful psychoactive drugs?
you have a right to disbelieve, but when you belittle others for their beliefs you are just as bad as the group of bigots in question.
kudos Jojo
I think Chrisitans got there first, with the “sinner this” and
“sinner that” and ‘You’re going to hell…”
Well, if there’s a hell, I’ll save you a seat…
To add my two cents to the lovely flames, the church I was raised in doesn’t think the conception was immaculate, doesn’t believe in unity of the trinity, doesn’t have original sin, and lastly, doesn’t have hell.
Whoo! All the good bits!
I assume you are very comfortable knowing there is nothing to worry about then? Does the lamb’s wool fit nicely over your eyes?
How is Starrfade’s worldview any more bewool’d than your own?
It doesn’t need as much magic God dust…
I was just trying to point out that not all forms of Christianity have the same tenets. There are still ways of being and not being a good Christian, but how is free will free if you must pay for the sins of your fathers?
There are lots of bits that aren’t nearly so nice, there is a reason I said I was _raised_ in that church.
Knowing English isn’t your first language…
Mary is the target of the doctrine of Immaculate Conception. This means, that despite Saint Anne doing the nasty with her husband, she was free of the taint of Original Sin.
Jesus was a Miraculous conception, since Mary didn’t do the nasty with anyone… It’s all popeish frippery anyway, but I thought I’d mention it since most of the Christians here didn’t seem to know the difference…
I knew! It was on QI!
I knew since I’m familiar with the workings of the Church of Rome…
Since English _is_ my first language, I meant what I said. I was taught that God has a corporeal form, and Jesus was made in the normal way one makes a baby (although they tend not to stress that bit when talking to others). The original sin bit was referring to us all being born as sinners due to Adam and Eve.
Oh, sorry… That’s an interesting dogma… not seen it applied to Jesus.
Interesting how ‘original’ sin is a feature…
Ah, I made that too confusing…. what I meant was that there _isn’t_ original sin, I was attempting to clarify what I meant by original sin above.
It seemed something of a handbrake turn… sounds pretty Unitarian…
Mormon, actually
Sorry, the kitten decided that the mouse
needed to be moved as I was hitting enter.
It just goes to show how much of a
difference cherry picking can make when
describing aspects of religions.
I knew it!
and Jesus was made in the normal way one makes a baby
Yeah, the outright deny it, loudly and stridently. I dated a Mormon, once upon a time. Great people.
People like this are pretty much the reason religion SEEMS stupid to some.
I’m glad you added the “to some”. I think most people who find religion stupid do not base that on these guys.
Well you can be re-assured that He ain’t like that. These people, well there isn’t much you can say about them that you can’t gather from just looking at them. Anyway, they are wrong, cause the only thing God hates, is sin. He loves everybody.
p.s:I am a Christian, but even I think someone should shoot them.
“I am a Christian, but even I think someone should shoot them.”
Yeah, Jesus was really big on shooting people. Way to represent!
RhoRho… ouch…
Now, now… Athanatheus had his religious apostates tortured to death and he’s now a Saint, so, don’t be so quick to judge…
Jesus would knee Fred Phelps in the nuts so hard they would fly out of his mouth.
Why? Point out where he’s doing anything the Lord wouldn’t, if he had the facts of the matter…
Considering the fact that Jesus hung out with sinners, tax collectors, hookers, and various other rabble that was socially unacceptable at the time, I think that Forge has it pretty much right on.
and I repeat… point out where the Phelps have got their theology wrong, especially knowing your strident views on the gay community.
Point out one time, ONE TIME Fester, where I have ever bashed the gay community, or said anything other than they should live in peace just like everyone else. I may not agree with it, but that’s a personal thing and THAT’S IT. My strident views on the gay community begin and end with ‘They are adults, they can do what they damn well please.’
-
The Phelp’s klan have their theology wrong in that when Jesus was casitagted by His own followers by hanging out with the riff raff and the sinners, He told them to shove off. He had no problem being friends with them. He wanted them to repent.
You’ve repeatedly said you think it’s a sin… based not
on your own opinion, but that of a book… At the risk
of dragging DWN off his bed of pain, I’d say it was like
forming one’s opinion on the behaviour of Jews from
Mein Kampf, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and
the tale of the Martyrdom of William of Norwich.
-
Basically, God said it, I agree with it, isn’t an argument
from a position of strength, simply one from the point
of view of someone who is prepared to be told their
opinion…
I think that overeating is a sin, but that doesn’t mean I condemn those who do it nor stop myself from eating too much at the dinner table when I’m presented with ham, sweet potatoes, and Sunday yeast rolls.
-
I think you’ve mistaken me for a fundie, Fester. I’m not a Bible-thumper, nor do I condemn people for doing things that I do not do. I’ll admit to being bloodthirsty, but a bigot I’m not.
and why is being gay a sin? Overeating, is
taking other’s resource when people are dying
in the streets.
Homosexuality, takes nothing from anyone… in
fact it’s no one’s business but the people
involved, so why is it a sin?
Please pardon my interruption, but I feel
compelled to say that, with almost 7 billion
humans on the planet, I could easily argue
homosexuality to be a practice that deserves
promotion, and certainly not chastisement.
On that note, there was a study among chimpanzees that pointed to a connection between overpopulation and homosexuality.
It’s possible that homosexuality is a mechanism to combat overpopulation, if this study was indeed true.
Ooh! I’ll play! Homosexuality is atrociously ineffecient, and spreads STDs faster than any other lifestyle (see link-not the point, you’ll have to read down a bit). But that doesn’t kill you immediately-you suffer and waste away. If we’re really interested in knocking down the population quick, let’s just start nuking major cities! We could set up some sort of lottery! It’d be great!
Of course, before Fester accuses me of being a “bellicose monster” I’d like to point out that I say that purely to show the absurdity of your argument for homosexuality. I’m gonna say the same thing I say about marijuana-I don’t care what you do on your own time, but please stop trying to convince me that it’s somehow a superior lifestyle, k?
Actually in studies of Bonobo chimpanzees,
the most successful groups have between
1 in 7 and 1 in 10 proprortion of gay couples.
The Gay females do breed, but the males
tend not to. The males also stay close to the
group, and defend it.
It has been also found that the young males
fare better if the perimeter is breeched by
an invader, since they have more ‘play fight’
training with the local ‘gay’ males who don’t
venture as far, than groups with foraging
males only.
Who is saying that being gay is superior… I’d say equal, but no it has to be less…
@Robert: Please paste the passage from your
article indicating that STDs are spread faster
through homosexual sex than through
heterosexual sex. I’m not finding it.
Please also expand on how homosexuality is
“inefficient.”
Your nuclear alternative suggests going
against nature, rather than going *with*
nature, which is what I’m suggesting.
I made no claim as to the superiority of
homosexuality. Is that what you’re claiming?
If so, please indicate what I wrote that gave
you that impression.
Umm… Rho, the nuke thing was a joke, I think… At our (very liberal) school we were told that HIV is spread more easily through gay sex…
At our (very liberal) school we were told that HIV is spread more easily through gay sex…
Did they explain why?
There’s more likely to be contact with blood, apparently.
And lo my illness continues for its sixth day and my wang shall no falter, despite the delay… I shall club the nonbelievers like whimpering baby seals with the wang of truth…
That said, saying gay sex spreads HIV more is a bit ignorant but makes some kind of sense. A gay man is still a man and men have a higher sex drive. However, this is oversimplification. Sex is sex. Amount of sex or gender is irrelevant. It is the level or lack of level of protection involved and precaution. Choice in lovers also factors in since their choices compound with your own.
But yea, I’m still mentally deficient so I will let it drop here.
I’m still waiting to hear from Robert. The
“inefficient” comment intrigues me more
than the others. Frankly, it’s funny: Do gay
people need to be taught to conduct their
relationships more efficiently somehow?
Will there be sexual time management
seminars for gay couples hoping to “catch
up to heterosexuals?
One comment on the STD thing: He didn’t
limit the discussion to HIV/AIDS, either.
Just a thought, there.
It’s inefficient as a means of limiting populations, hence the suggestion to use nukes. Since most of the particularly nasty STDs are viral (HIV, herpes, etc.), they spread at a similar rate.
And yes, the nuke thing was tongue in cheek-I don’t approve ofnuking cities in an effort to limit populations.
I don’t recall the study, but it was done by a Gay scientist. It was in Time magazine in early 2008, I believe. It showed that homosexual couples are 3 times more likely than heterosexual couples to break up. Which could be interpreted that Gay people have 3 times more partners than heterosexuals do.
It was in Time magazine in early 2008, I believe.
With that many partners it greatly increases the rate
at which STDs are spread.
Thats all I will say.
I’m remaining objective, and I haven’t given an opinion on the
subject of Homosexuality.
So flamers (forum trolls, not gay people) you can’t fire a rebuttle
at me, since I am being so neutral.
Didn’t mean to post the line:
“It was in Time magazine in early 2008, I believe.” two times.
I don’t know how that happened. Oh well.
Dang it, I missed one…
It’s only thought of as a gay disease in the US, and mostly cuz it is here. In Africa, it’s pretty indiscriminate (no condoms), in other parts of the world, it doesn’t seem to spread as much period. I’d imagine it has something to do with the gay culture’s idea in the US that having as much unprotected sex with anonymous partners is somehow desirable. Add to the that previously mentioned increase virulence of the disease and you have a serious problem.
@Robert:
Do you have statistics on the hiv-spreading in the US? (Tried to find earlier but was probably too tired then to have any success.)
Alas, not handy, and they’re hard to find, for some reason. I had a friend who did a report a couple years ago, and I read through his stuff. That’s the only reason I even know that the stats are different here than in comparable European countries.
Here’s the 2001 CDC stats…
Thanks.
Robert, you still have not produced the
excerpt from your link or any other backing
up what you have said, so your argument
about STD vectoring is wiped out. “Previ-
ously mentioned” is sloppy, and moot.
Your sentence beginning with “I’d imagine”
isn’t suitable for horse water. You assume
way too much in that statement.
Of course I understood that your “nuke”
suggestion wasn’t serious. It was a useless
comparison, as well.
What I’m suggesting is that society should
recognize homosexuality as a natural
phenomenon. As it is, much grief is born of
the denial, desperation and violence
associated with calling it “wrong.” If homo-
sexuality were accepted, there wouldn’t be
so many children born of gay people trying
desperately to fit into the norm by getting
married, then divorcing after having
children. Gay couples should also be able to
arrange to have their own children and adopt
children, if they want. Many good homes for
children are wasted, again due to ignorance
and prejudice.
“The high risk of contracting infection with HIV among homosexual men is usually attributed to contact with semen during unprotected receptive anal intercourse or other practices associated with the exchange of body fluids. Efforts to educate gay men in safe-sex practices to prevent HIV infection have been only partially effective in changing behavior20. Those who continue to engage in unprotected anal intercourse with multiple partners tend to be younger, to belong to minority groups, to engage in sexual acts more frequently, to use drugs or alcohol in connection with sex, to have psychiatric disorders, and if previously tested for HIV, to be seronegative21,22. Such men may have adequate cognitive information about HIV transmission but may entertain a false notion that they personally are “safe” when they engage in high-risk sexual behavior. Lapses in safe-sex precautions by men who ordinarily do practice safe sex are also common — in 45 percent over the previous six months in one study23.”
So, basically driving a group underground
has made it more counter culture in all
areas… Quelle surprise.
And then people go pell-mell to vote into
legislation something that actually defines
something that wasn’t defined in state law,
to ensure that the group knows it’s marginal,
second class, status, then bleats that they
don’t like their morals. I see… makes
complete sense…
Havign said that, Robert is simply a stupid,
bigoted, redneck who feels threatened
by any change, other than to his lower taxes…
@Robert: Your quote *still* doesn’t address
the difference in STD (not just HIV/AIDS)
vectoring between straight and gay sex.
It just doesn’t.
Unc’s point about the underground status of
gays in our culture at large accounts for
much of the difference.
If you cling to what you’ve just posted as
the only proof needed, then, in your own
weird way, you’ve just proven my point:
Gay sex, by virtue of spreading deadly
disease, is far more efficient than straight
sex in population control.
Glad you finally came around.
Sorry, rho, misunderstood what you were saying. I’m willing to concede that the only real difference for other STDs is the insistence of gay men on having multiple anonymous unprotected partners. And I wasn’t arguing gay sex vs straight sex, just gay sex versus war, plague, settling in a flood plain, etc.. No, you’d be quite right, it would be a much more efficient population control by virtue of spreading disease.
Okay, and would you be willing to entertain
the notion that, if our culture at large were
more accepting of homosexuality that the
“insistence of gay men on having multiple
anonymous unprotected partners” would
likely change, by virtue of not being driven
underground and treated as loathsome and
despicable?
I’m being nice here, so you’ll know. I don’t
agree with the way you phrased the passage
quoted above. Frankly, it made my skin
crawl, but I’m refraining from slinging poo
because it looks like we’re nearing a type of
consensus.
I’m willing to accept the possibility, but given the empirical evidence to the contrary, it seems somewhat unlikely. San Francisco is one of the worst places for the disease, and it’s the most open city for them. I live less than a 4 hour drive from San Francisco. Quite frankly, the way they act there is absurd. If they’d stop acting like animals at every Gay Pride parade, that in and of itself would change a lot of minds. But, much like what Fester does, people see that and they make assumptions. It’s not right, but if you want to combat a negative image, running around and acting like a bunch of sexual deviants in public is perhaps not the best way to do it.
Sorry to get on a tangent. Yes, to sum it up rho, I can agree to the possibility. I’m sorry if I made your skin crawl, but I answer phones for one of the HIV clinics in San Francisco and it’s amazing some of the things I’ve heard.
Well I suppose that’s one way of coping
with those all-too-scary
wet dreams that keep recurring no matter
how many Hustler mags you fall asleep
with…
Face it Robert, you are no less bisexual than
the rest of us “heterosexuals” – you know
part of you lurves teh ghey – even if only
in your dreams. It’s delicious and that
scares you. Big deal. Get over it. Your
homophobia and intolerance of your own
nature makes you a bigoted creep.
Are we putting people here up on the Kinsey scale? That should be a fun exercise…
As someone who frequents a gay bar, I say it is bigoted to say that HIV is a gay disease or say that it targets gays, or to suggest that gay culture encourages rampant sexual activity. It’s certainly no worse than the way most young straight guys act… you really just can’t paint them with that broad brush.
There are, however, some gay guys who are turned on by the “damning” effect of HIV. (My personal analysis of these guys is that they’re miserable, suicidal and stupid, or they’re already pos.) My friend was propositioned at the bar we go to with a “hey, do you do positives?” To which he said “hell no!”
I guess you could say that’s part of gay culture, but that’s like saying anti-gay protests at funerals are part of Christian culture.
I agree it’s a bigoted statement. As far as I know, the actual statistics show the disease is fastest growing amongst hetero black females, at the present time, People tend to overgeneralize because they are uninformed.
I’ll admit my ignorance of the current fastest growing group, but proper protection would eliminate the disease completely, which implies that people are making a decision that is likely to lead to getting a fatal disease. Seems unwise.
And I don’t recall identifying my sexuality. I’m bi in the sense that the idea of the act is intriguing, but I find men on the whole completely sexually unattractive.
I agree people should just keep it in their pants or at least use rubbers, but before making blanket statements, you should know the facts. That’s all I was trying to say.
Noted, but I did say at the start of this stretch that my figures were a few years old. And we get back to the issue of this is a disease that is spread largely through irresponsibility. It’s not like it’s gonna float across the room and get you. So I guess that’s my biggest point.
So you expect a vilified and excluded part of the community to behave ‘responsibly’ by the mores of the ‘culture’ you seem so keen to preserve? I’d say they’re damned no matter what. The behaviour isn’t that unusual in certain segments of the straight culture… although ‘swingers’ are always at pains to point up their great record of low HIV infection, there is a segment that bare rides are a speciality…
When you have a culture that forces a self loathing paradigm onto a segment of community, then I’d suggest nihilist behaviour is the best your going to get from some parts… Now, I’m left with the cleft stick of you being naive of stupid, and based on your tax arguments, you’re too cynical to be naive…
*sigh* Vilified and excluded, huh? Whatever. This go around grows tiresome.
I know I always blame society for the self-destructive life choices I make, though, so I guess you’re right there.
Simply your sociological ignorance shines through… Group behaviours are something of a closed book, eh? Ah well, I tried to play like you’re a nominally intelligent human, and you simply throw it back in my face…
-
you’re not related to clergy are you?
@Robert: The extreme (to some) behaviors
that you described in San Francisco are not
happening in a gay vacuum, where no one
had childhoods elsewhere, and no one has
ever been exposed to cultural bias against
homosexuality.
Anti-gay sentiment, through both implicit and
explicit means, is pervasive. It’s naive to
think that as soon as a gay person crosses
the border into San Francisco that no
memory of intolerance crosses with him or
her.
I’m getting back to what I said earlier about
homosexuality being accepted in culture as
a means of (1) affirming the natural state of
it and (2) diminishing extreme behavior on
both “sides.”
Benefits: Reduced number of fake hetero-
sexual marriages/relationships, reduced
number of hate crimes, increased harmony,
reduced number of unplaced orphans,
increased wisdom, increased prosperity,
decreased teenage suicides, decreased
depression, decreased drug abuse, increased wisdom and cultural enrichment in general.
Robert has not the first idea of how groups work… or at least gives every impression he doesn’t.
I understand what you’re saying about socialized behaviors, but I have to argue that people have the ability to make their own decisions about their lives, and blaming the world around them for their choices. I would still make the argument that the intolerance you’re talking about is less pervasive than some people think. Of course discrimination exists. But you have to make the decision to overcome it or capitulate to it.
Course, if we shipped people like the picture to a small island of their own where they could all be obnoxious to each other, that might help, too.
I’d also like to add that, although I don’t think the kind of behaviors seen at the gay pride parade are representative of the culture, it also makes them very poor emissaries of tolerance.
See, you can make sense from time to time…
Fester, a backhanded compliment from you is worth a parade and a float from anyone else. That wasn’t even completely backhanded.
I have warm fuzzies now…
You spoilt it by not shutting up while you were ahead…
@Robert: Point taken, but I would say that
you have to bring your own “ick” factor with
you. Other cultures (at large) would certainly
be more accepting than ours.
The point you made about “blaming the
world around them for their choices” is
lame for one, and possibly two reasons:
1. Nurture: The culture in which one is
raised has much to do with the values and
attitudes one has. I used the word “perva-
sive” there. It’s not a matter of *blame,*
certainly. You need a second thought on
what I said there.
2. Choices: Please don’t tell me you’re one
of those people who believe that sexuality
is a choice, and that gay people can just
erase their check mark beside one sexuality
and check the other. If that’s what you
meant by “choice,” you’re too far gone for
repair.
@UF:
“you’re not related to clergy are you?”
Oi. There’s nothing wrong with us wot are. :p
One of my antecendents was a missionary in the Middle East in the early part of the 20th Century.. Broke the back of the local Arab slave trade, despite the warnings not to interfere. The Methodist church fired him from their missionary corps for ignoring their ‘advice’. Still, it stopped the trade for five years, which was something…
-
So really, I shouldn’t say stuff like that…
There are some modern clergymen who are awesome, too. The last archbishop of Sweden, K.G. Hammar*, is one of the most interesting Christians I have ever heard talk. (I am not trying to imply that I’m related to him). Of course, not popular amongst all other Christians. :p
.
*) That wiki-article is a bit out of date, it says “He cited personal reasons, but declined to comment further. K.G. Hammar is married and has five adult children.”
while one of the reasons (if not the only reason) he quit was that his wife died.
rho:
I understand what you mean about socialization. I’m just of the opinion that you shouldn’t let your past rule you. Easier said then done, to be sure, but an attempt should be made.
As for sexuality, as something as complex as the mix of hormones, childhood, genetics, and culture is decidedly more than I’m prepared to tackle without a ridiculously bloated research grant. That said, even if I was of the opinion it was truly a matter of choice, I don’t believe in hosing people for how they choose to live their lives. I might have (or attempt to have, for that matter) an intelligent discussion, but that’s only because I’m curious about other people’s pasts-where they come from, their ethnicity, core beliefs, etc.
Wow…I totally wandered off topic there.
Summary: I feel that question is beyond my pay grade and will not make any judgments based on something I don’t fully understand.
Not that I think we’ll ever know for sure-way too much politics involved.
Thanks for defending me, and yes I was kidding. I wouldn’t shoot them, nor do anything that would physically hurt them.
So, being gay and in love is fine. but to physically act on it is ‘stupid’… and God made them that way… I see…
If God loves everybody, then what’s up with throwing people in a lake of fire to burn for all eternity? “I love you, but I’m going to sentence you to an eternity of agony for turning out the way I knew you would when I created you.” Uh, thanks God… really feelin’ the love!
it wasn’t his idea! how do you think he feels about it??? he loves you more than any and every thing and people just hate him in return! Its our fault we end up where we end up when we die! so don’t blame him…. he just wants you to love him that’s all.. I mean he gave you life that should be enough
It wasn’t his idea? His hands are tied? The -omnipotent creator of everything- is powerless to deviate from the course?
It’s all so clear to me now. THIS is how George W. Bush happened.
He/she is only Christian4life, not Christian4FieryEternalAfterlife.
Actually, they appear to be Chirstian4life, which may possibly be something entirely different.
Or it could just be a typo.
Maybe she’s just saying her name is Chirstian and she doesn’t care if you want her to change it.
She seems to be a retard of some sort, no matter how you spell her name…
A retard by any other name still sounds just as stupid.
Man, why’d you go and say that? Everyone else was just bringing the lols, and you just have to call names.
You’re the only one whining here…
Wet blanket much?
I’m going to have to agree with Christain4life, but I will say this was God’s idea. God created a Heaven and a Hell. Those who trust that his son Jesus Christ died on the cross to forgive them of their sins will go to heaven for eternity. But those who ignore it and believe their good works build them up o heaven will still go to hell because they ignore and pushed God out of their lives.
God doesnt care if you cure cancer or cure aids or something else awesome in life, if you dont trust and love him, you are undeserving of Heaven. Even the most brutal killers about sentenced to death will realize they need God because death is scary, many have asked for forgiveness before they were put to death in jail, and even though, they stole, killed, commit crimes all their life, that one moment of being a man and asking God for his forgiveness saved his soul for eternity.
So he loves everybody, and sends people who don’t love him back to hell?
God does love everybody. That’s why he allows each person to choose where they want to spend eternity. Those who accept God’s love choose to stay with him in Heaven. Those who reject God’s love choose to spend eternity without him in Hell.
It’s as simple as that.
Massed retard alert… Short brutal and nasty, and that’s just their family life….
Fester, this Sunday, why don’t you go to Church.
You have previously said that you only attend for funerals/christenings etc. and that you don’t like it because someone was nasty to your Mother. Maybe you have been and didn’t like the sermon. I don’t know.
Possibly, If you went and then said why it was bad, these discussions could be saner.
I do know that you never miss a chance to spew hatred (possibly as great as that of the WBC) at the mention (or opportunity to mention) religion.
Seriously, it seems like you stubbornly refuse to see the good in anything.
If you go to Church, I’ll read The God Delusion.
I’d not inflict Dawkins on anyone… not even I was convinced by the God delusion
I’ve been to church… numerous ones… I’ve yet to be impressed.
I’d recommend ‘Deconstructing Jesus’ by Robert M Price…
Yeah, Dawkins was the first one I could think of…
You’ll have to forgive me for assuming that you weren’t a churchgoer. The only things I can recall you basing your dislike of church on are from bad examples like the WBC.
I don’t know what the churches in your area are like so I can’t comment. I don’t have “Deconstructing Jesus” lying about the house at the moment, so I can’t comment on that either.
However, you can’t say there’s no good in this worthy old cliche. [LINK]
Gah! Guess who forgot to add the link…
I like high church, since it’s more or less the procession of Osris (thanks to the Alexandrian church), but I have to tune out the clergy, since they usually have a no grasp of the historical context of what they’re spouting, otherwise they’d not be able to do it straight faced…
I’ve never seen high church, being a dour presbyterian in the kirk…
the low church is just dull…
Full-in-yer-face-latin-RCC-mass-with-full-choir-and-tinkling-belss.
That’s ace… means nothing but God’s death, it’s theatre…
Rituals?
Bells?
High and Low churches?
Heirarchy?
Gosh, my little kirky soul gasps at the thought…
We’re sometimes lively… when the baptists and evangelicals are over for holy week or something…
Alistair the minister always said you could spot the presbyterians in a crowd -they always sit at the back. Seriously, once, at the evangelical, they’d blocked off the back pews… the back of the room was filled with traumatisedkirk folk realising they’d have to take a pew further forward.
not to mention: Incense!
i’m an anglican (fester you can translate for the masses) we have smells and bells on high holy days… it pretty much looks like a catholic mass except we don’t praiy to the virgin mary and we don’t talk about the infallibility of the pope…
We don’t even do altars…
Ubr is what is commonly termed ‘Episcopalian’ but a specific sub-variant which is the Church of England (They have Bishop Rowan Williams has head, rahter than someone else). All a schism of the RCC, and claims Apostolic Descent from Peter.
actually we’re not epsicopals anymore… after ECUSA instilled a bishop who was openly adulterous my church (and many others) split from the episcopal church of the united states. we are now members of the anglican communion directly… for a while we were actually members of the diocese of uganda…
Episcopal just means you have bishops…
technically yes… but here it has turned into a dirty word…
That’s because Christians are worse than ferrets. If they don’t have apostates to fight against, they fight each other…
Seems like a great system. Go with it!
*backs away slowly*
So:
So he loves everybody, and sends people who don’t love him … back to hell?
.
By the way, I’d be willing to consider accepting some gods’ love if said gods offered it to me (not by proxy.)
That ellipsis was misplaced, making my whole post daft. (The devil within me made me do it.)
.
(Should’ve been
“So he loves everybody, and sends people who don’t love him back … to hell?”
of course.)
John 3:18
You keep citing that. To be honest, I don’t think it contains the damning proof of God’s evil that you think it does. You choose darkness, you gain darkness.
you don’t choose Jesus, you get darkness… it’s like the King parable…
Personally, I think all the people making a lot of money off religion should take a long look at John 2:15-16…
The enemies dead come judgement time…
Exactly, having read the passage you will know that Jesus is described as the light. i.e. not the darkness.
when ever I hear of people making a fortune off religion, I usually think of W.C. Fields…
Above was @ UF.
@Diss: absolutely!
It’s either “tough love” or he’s bipolar: Your call.
There ain’t no devil, just god when he’s drunk’ Tom Waits
Hehe.
I’m glad I don’t have to bother with deciding which one to choose. ;p
He’s really jealous and conceited that way.
“So he loves everybody, and sends people who don’t love him back to hell?”
`
That’s pretty much what I’d do if I were all-powerful, but then, I’m not a very nice person.
Then obviously your god has his priorities way out of order. Why is your god such an attention whore?
Does this mean… Paris Hilton is God?!
Just what I wanted! To spend my afterlife with crazy psycho killers who only remorse because they don’t want JUSTICE for what they’ve done in their life!
In my opinion, this is absolutely ridiculous. Let’s say there is a doctor who has performed many, many surgeries and procedures throughout his life, such as transplants or heart bypass surgeries, things that have SAVED people’s lives — but he is atheist or agnostic, and though he saved many of “God’s creations” and blessed them with health and a longer life, he is going to hell? Yet some knife-wielding, bloodthirsty, greedy psychopath who rapes, robs, and kills the same amount of people gets absolved and live a fluttery happy afterlife because in a split second he wants “forgiveness”, just in case?
I see no justice in your God’s way of thinking, if this is the case.
There is no justice, only submission.
That makes absolutely no sense.
It makes perfect sense in terms of the meme… Danbala was affirming your point that it’s maggoty dingo’s kidneys, in a wet pile…
Oh. Sorry. :/ It made perfect sense in my head when I wrote it. ;p
I meant that the god of such rules is not primarily aiming for justice as one would usually like to see it – as consequences to actions towards fellow humans (and animals) – but that it’s far more important to be submissive to said god. (All expressed in a “There is no X, only Y”-pattern that goes back to … Ghostbusters, I believe.)
I hope that what you just said is just you being insane, and not a true representation of Christianity. Because if that’s the Christian God, I’d rather cure AIDS and go to hell.
I don’t hate your god, just as I don’t hate unicorns, elves, hobbits, fairies and Santa.
I DO hate elves, those uppity bastards.
Fairies: nasty, whispering, tittering, thieving creatures…
Ow! It bit me!
I’m with Lady Cottingley…
[link]
I had a calendar full of these several years ago… pressed fairies..
Oh, I’m sorry. I naively expected that people would be able to tell the difference between literature and [lewisblack]REALITY!!![/lewisblack]
She was joking… Sake…
Ok. Apologies.
@ “It wasn’t his idea…it’s our fault…”
No offense intended, but you sound like a battered housewife making excuses for an abusive husband.
It’s not “loving…you more than any and every thing” to require following and obedience with the threat of eternal torture for non-acceptance of said “love”.
Zing! That’s it exactly.
Yep… their God is like a creepy stalker who sends you roses… if you don’t want the roses, then he, or one of his employees with carve a smile into your face and then throw acid in your eyes…
Yeah, I’ve been of the opinion for some time, that this Jehova/Yahweh/Allah creature of the abrahamic religions, is, in fact, an evil god. Possibly one who jealously usurped power from any more benevolent nature powers or earth mother type deities that existed in the region before. Probably was some political maneuver of whatever his cult was trying to accomplish and they’ve ruined religion for most of the western world since. …
you Gnostic you…
LOL I’ll just go back to my corner and philosophize with so-crates and Bill&Ted.
Dust…wind….dude.
Every rose… has a thorn!
There is no lake of fire. The early church made it up, just as they made up most of the canon that is considered the “inspired word of god.”
Prepare to be ignored by the faithful masses gathered here, despite you hitting it squarely on the head…
There’s something very Orwellian about the religious. You can change their “history ” and they deny it was ever any different…
Yes, this makes sense. The omnipotent ruler of the cosmos, who created everything, can’t save his own creation. How does that compute? The way I see it, this god of yours is one of two things: either a) he’s not all powerful since he can’t save his own creations, or b) he’s a sadistic #&^$ for creating human beings with certain normal needs and desires, then telling them to deny said needs all their lives on pain of eternal torture. Not the sort I’m wanting to spend eternity with.
Cthulu on a plane, if I hadn’t been practically born a pagan I would be one now because of all the lunacy associated with major religions.
“It wasn’t his idea”? Isn’t he supposed to be the all-powerful, omnipotent being and creator? So then whose idea was it? O_o
God’s Boss: God, we need to have a fiery infernal pit where people who don’t believe in you burn for all of eternity.
God: What? NO WAI! I don’t want to do that! I heart everybody!
God’s Boss: Too bad, God, I’m the BOSS and you do as I say.
God: Well…all right…I’ll do it but I don’t like it…
God’s Boss: By the way, I’m going to need you to come in on Saturday…
It isn’t for all eternity. There is a way out of Hell. You just have to honestly repent your sins and ask for forgiveness. However, since Hell was invented by Catholics, who wear guilt like a sweater and refuse to take it off, Hell lasts for all eternity. For the rest of us, all God asks is that you honestly repent and he will make clean your soul and welcome you into Heaven. Honesty, of course, being key.
“I was raised Catholic. Then i reached the age of reason.” – Dennis Miller
“I was raised Catholic. Then i reached the age of reason.” – Dennis Miller
um…wasn’t that George Carlin?
Dark Dragon lowers the collective IQ of the species by 12 points with stuff that appears NO WHERE in the bible…
God, it must be like the Dark Ages in his head every waking hour of the day…
Wait, so Catholics invented hell, and can’t escape from it because they loves them some guilt…but everyone could end up in hell, even though apparently it’s an invention of man (specifically Catholics, those incense burning bastards)…I’m so confused.
Seems like bad form on the part of the Catholics to make hell last for all enternity when everyone else can just, um, honestly repent…especially since they’re always going to confession and everything. Poor form, Catholics!
The Pagans invented hell, the Early Christians made it a place of schriving, and the RCC made it a permanent place of torment…
I believe under-/netherworlds are one of those ever-migrating myths in mankind’s history. The Catholiic take on hell was of course the Catholic invention. But yes, of course, it’s an invention of Man, just like the God that’s punishing them.
I love the Sandman comics on this bit – Lucifer moaning about having to try to punish people who want nothing more than to be punished. Quite a dilemma. :p
It’s a very well wrought SM-contract, religion. It even has that safeword mechanism. :p
God doesn’t throw anyone into the lake of fire. We throw ourselves by choosing to sin.
Don’t blame your own sinful nature on God.
You can’t blame the government if you commit a crime.
Oh please, you need an abusive father to keep you good and you know it…
You can’t even compose a logical argument as to why ‘eternal’ punishment is needed, other than a sinful nature that your God, as the only creator in town, made…
*UUUUUUHUUUUUUUNNNN*
Want to go for double Jeopardy, where things can really change?
God didn’t create sin. We did.
God is an everloving father. He gave us free will so that we would choose to love him. (You would rather someone choose to love you, than force them, right?) We created sin out of our own free will.
Hell is a place for Satan. It is the punishment of Satan. Hell was not created for people to go to. But if you don’t follow God, you follow Satan. There are only 2 paths.
Satan and all of his followers will be cast into the lake of fire.
So… If you’re reading this, than it means you’re alive and still have the choice of who you would like to follow.
But your god did make sin, if you think about it. He makes naturally curious creatures, tells them ‘don’t eat off that tree’ and stands back to see what happens. Big surprise, the creatures take a bite. And your god, rather than saying, ‘oh well, I guess that was bound to happen’, blows his stack and condemns not only the creatures but all of their ensuing progeny. Thus sin only exists because your god made it be so. And don’t give me the ‘free will’ bull. If a person had free will to choose between loving your god and not loving your god then there wouldn’t be any negative outcome for not choosing him. Otherwise it’s like saying ‘love me or I disfigure you with this pen knife.’
It’s like playing russian roulette, but with 5 bullets, not 1
So anything you do wrong can ultimately be blamed on
someone else? Isn’t that what you’re saying?
The very idea of free will, is that we are masters of our own
destiny. God created us and gave us the earth. We created sin
by disobeying.
So what you’re saying is by giving us the option to sin, God
created sin?
Does that really make any sense to you?
Say you have a child, and you give them the option to touch
anything they want in your house, but you tell them not to touch
the stove, because it is hot and they will get burned.
Say they, out of curiosity, go and touch the stove and get burned.
Are you responsible for the burn?
Or are they?
I’d say God telling us not to eat from the tree did the opposite of
create sin, it warned us against it.
We took it upon ourselves to sin.
To create it out of disobedience.
So, mankind gets punished forever for one error of judgement…
-
To take the stove analogy, child touches stove, gets
burned. Burn heals. But God as parent, reburns the
same place. Heals-reburns… child grows up has kids
Grandpa God not only keeps the burn fresh on mom,
but burns the kids too. Forever…
-
Tell me, do you not actually think before you post, or does faith somehow remove your critical faculties?
I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying.
Because Adam and Eve sinned does not mean you are
condemned to hell.
That was the original sin, but the only relation it has to you, is
that because of it, you are aware of sin.
You know the choice you have.
You mentioned that God “reburns”. Does that mean after Adam
sinned by eating the apple, God is forcing more apples down his
throat?
I’m having trouble understanding your point, if any.
No, you’re not understanding it since, essentially, you’re a stuiptd zealot who tries to spread the stupid like it’s truth, rather than the social coping mechanis of a m an emotional cripple…
curse that touch pad!
* – the social coping mechanisms of an emotional cripple…
Says the guy who can’t have a civil discourse but instead devolves into cursing and name-calling if you dare disagree with him.
No different to you, pal, no different to you…
I manage just fine with everyone else…
You need to get out more…
perhaps it is different in your denomination, but there are those that believe a child, unbaptized, goes to hell for original sin. so reburning.
there is also the great pains during childbirth thing. If you believe that is a punishment god gave women then you believe that all women are still being punished for a lack of judgement from eve. So…reburning.
It isn’t just that we are now aware of sin, it is that man will never go back to a time when they are not being punished for it.
I don’t know who believes that. Even old-school Catholics believe tehy go to Purgatory, which wouldn’t be all bad cuz you could hang out with Plato and Socrates.
now i suppose. I was under the impression they went to limbo, which was technically a part of hell, until the pope said there wasn’t purgatory
‘Limbo’ isn’t a part of Hell. It really isn’t a part of anything. In the OT it is described as ‘the bosom of Abraham’, which is pretty close to Heaven ifyou read the Parable of the Slave from the NT. Jesus tells about a slave who went to the ‘bosom of Abraham’ instead of (or on his way to) Heaven.
The idea of Limbo being a part of Hell comes straight from Dante (who also said that’s where unbaptized infants went).
Which Pope said there wasn’t a purgatory? My familiarity w/Catholic dogma is a little sketchy of late.
Canon gets iffy, especially with the catholic doctrine (to me anyway) bI am willing to believe that limbo isn’t part of hell, i’m no expert, but iit’s still a form of punishment so far as I understand. From what I know the…real punishment of hell is to know of the presence of god and be seperated from it. babies in limbo could not get to heaven.
Limbo isn’t purgatory, in purgatory you work off your sins, the only ones that do not go to purgatory first are saints. so the babies went to limbo, and never went to heaven. Now i assume they go to purgatory and work off their baby sins…
Link in my name to an article on the recent decision (2007) of the latest pope to abolish limbo.
“Pope Benedict XVI has reversed centuries of traditional Roman Catholic teaching on limbo, approving a Vatican report released Friday that says there were “serious” grounds to hope that children who die without being baptized can go to heaven. ”
~So unless i critically misunderstand the catholic doctrine, the unbaptized babies were being punished for original sin
Seems valid, but it does eliminate the argument that you go to Hell for original sin, which is what it seemed like to me was being bandied about earlier.
IT ‘eliminated’ the argument, since infant mortality was so damned high that people were falling from the church since they didn’t fancy that god…… so, as with so much of the canon and dogma, they made something up on the spur of the moment.
Now, Limbo has a bad press,so, what the RCC invented, the RCC did away with…
Ever noticed how this sounds a lot like discussing the rules of AD&D? There is a reason… It’s cos four men in a room with a drink and paper made the whiole thing up… Unless you think AD&D is divinely inspired… It’s certainly had as much work put into it as canon…
Original Sin was inveneted as a catchall and is still part of canon…
It wasn’t that the babies were going to Hell, it was that they were being punished at all that really bothers me about original sin. The babies used to go to limbo where they suffered for eternity. perhaps not as much as one would in hell, but still they suffered. Now I’m not sure what happens to them, but i’m guessing purgatory, where they would still be punished, but for original sin so eventually they get to heaven.
I don’t like the idea of sinful babies. I find original sin to be a cruel joke on the part of God, that simply by existing to take part in his wonderful creation that he made for you, you have done wrong and you are unclean.
It strikes me as a parent making a room just for you, but you’re grounded if you ever go in it.
It’s more a case of “Don’t touch this thing, because I say so.”
You, as a parent, are obviously responsible if the child gets burned after that. And if you, to add to that, punishes the child for its mistake, you are despicable.
Furthermore, your idea that there shouldn’t be a
negative consequence is merely wishful thinking. Wouldn’t it
be nice if nothing we did in life had negative consequences?
I go back to my example of the stove and the child.
Its like God telling us as the child to either not touch the stove,
or touch it. Of course there has to be a negative consequence,
otherwise he wouldn’t tell us not to touch it.
One thing non-believers have the biggest struggle with,
when it comes to being open-minded about our beliefs, is that
there are very real negative consequences for our decisions
in life. Modern society raises you to think that there is nothing that
you could do that can’t be fixed by medicine, meditation, or money.
My beliefs say that there is good and there is evil. If you choose to be evil, you accept the consequences that go with it.
I know its hard to deal with the fact that there is ultimately a fiery destination for people who choose to be evil, and its sad to think that we all can’t go on living with no consequences for our actions, but that’s just how it is.
See above, you’re a cretin.
And you’re ignorant. End of story I suppose.
Oh, my dear thing, you beat me on the ignorance stakes… I’m perhaps a fool for bandy words with someone clearly as impaired as you are, but uoi beat me on ignorance every time… hammered in to the ground I am…
that’s a very blanket statement. I for one know there are serious concequences for my actions. I can’t stab my best friend and expect money and meditation to fix our friendship, or fix my life after i have been thrown in jail. I believe an action is bad because of the negative effects it has on myself and others, and an action is good for it’s positive effects. I find it…mildly disturbing at times that there are people that do not consider the consequences of this world, but only the outcome in a next one. If the only thing preventing you from doing evil is the idea of self preservation, you are many levels below a person that does good f for the sake of others…just my opinion anyway.
I’m not sure who you have met that’s admitted they do not believe in consequences.
I’ve never, ever come across that. Most people are well aware of negative consequences, and as far as non-believers go, “we” can focus on the very real consequences that happen in response to our actions, and not get diverted by any ideas about what a fantasy higher power might do in the afterlife. For instance, I have no reasons to treat people badly to score points with a god. The “heaven/hell”-thing is not real consequences.
Fact, eh? Funny use of word. I know it’s very much harder to deal with the actuality that your actions here and now, in this world, amongst living people, matter here and now, and that is the only thing worth focusing on. I feel sorry for anyone who can’t see what’s right and wrong without pondering whether it’s a “send to heaven”/”send to hell”-action.
looking this over again i had a thought “One thing non-believers have the biggest struggle with,
when it comes to being open-minded about our beliefs, is that
there are very real negative consequences for our decisions
in life.”
that’s like saying “the problem with theists and their struggle to be open minded is that they all think that everyone and everything is really a small part of one giant elephant god” sounds silly doesn’t it? it isn’t even accurate to the group belief that i’m basing my assumption on
All that hell Satan demons lake of fire stuff was thought up after the fact. K’reck me if I am wrong but Jesus never spoke much of eternal damnation, at least not in graphic specifics.
Not specifics, but John and Synoptics both contain clauses that say “but if ya don’t follow me I’m gonna cut you so bad your momma won’t know ya, and if she don’t believe, then I’ll cut her up too…’ (paraphrasing heavily)…
The lake of fire wasn’t created for humans. It was created for Satan. After judgment day, when God sends Satan into the lake of fire, Satan will bring all of his followers with him.
There are only two paths to choose in this life.
Follow God, or follow Satan.
God isn’t sending anyone into the lake of fire. Those people are gladly walking that path on their own.
Most don’t know it, and that’s why I’m telling them.
God is saddened when people ignore him and skip down the path into the lake of fire.
He intended it only for Satan.
Its really up to you which path you take.
Its not up to God.
He’s merely given us a guidebook.
God’s stripes and wounds, but you live in a nasty, Hamburger universe… God in the top bun, watching for you to screw up, Satan in the bottom bun trying to make you screw up… It’s like a breath of the 1400s…
What’s really sad is, this mouth-breather gets a vote.
@what what?
i’m not a Christian but i am glad someone else had the same reaction as me
As a Baptist, let me tell you, there is nothing ‘Christian’ about Westboro Baptist Church (The people in the picture).
Organized religion isn’t the problem, it’s organized bigotry and hatred.
I believe God hates some of the things we do, but he loves us. (things such as murder, terrorism, abuse, failure to love and help others). However, His message is about forgiveness and compassion.
He wants us to love eachother. I shudder to think that people equate my loving, giving, welcoming church with this evil doctrine.
(First Corinthians 13)
11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.
12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is LOVE.
“I even went so far as to become a Southern Baptist for a while, until I realized that they didn’t hold ‘em under long enough.” –Kinky Friedman
since when was Paul the word of God? Ah right… about 200 years after everyone involved was dead…
Spare us the bollocks, since there are passages that countermand all that…
20 years or so, was it not?
A fair bit of the new testament was written MUCH later. Plus, the ancient went through a “pick and choose” phase where they “decided” what would be official canon and what was to be thrown out according to what THEY thought should be in there. The whole modern faith is based on what a bunch of these early priests thought should be in the bible.
…and a bunch of creative translations, as well, iirc?
Translations, transcriptions, re-transcriptions… you name it. I saw a comic strip once that featured a monk proofreading something over the shoulder of another one saying something like “Oh, no, it was supposed to say “celebrate”, not “celibate.”
Bart D Erhman: Misquoting Jesus.
According to Wiki: “The Acts of Paul is one of the major works from the New Testament apocrypha, an approximate date given to the
Acts of Paul is 160 C.E.”
Paul’s letters tho, were earlier, were they not?
[LINK]
Wow, I quoted a passage saying the greatest thing we could do was love, and you argue about the writer of that passage?
Fester, there is something wrong with you.
“Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all other philosophers are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself.” H. Mencken
By the ‘same’ writer who wrote most of the stuff that people have
been given the biggest collection of reasons to oppress and hate…
so forgive me if one swallow doesn’t make a summer, you cherry
picking loon…
“Do you believe in god?” “No.” *BOOM*
“Do you believe in god?” “Yes.” “Do you believe in MY god?” “No.” *BOOM*
“My god has a bigger dick than your god!”
- George Carlin
The man was always right.
George Carlin abides. (Apologies, Dude).
In my version of reality, he’s on the eternal UFO tour with Bill Hicks… there’s a line up I’d have paid a lot to see…
I think I’d be standing right behind you (that way if, for some reason, we had to turn around and run, I’d be in front)
1. Partake in religion founded by a man who taught his followers to love one another before anything else
2. Hate other people
3. Employ cognitive dissonance
4. …
5. Profit, apparently.
It’s worked for everyone from Eusebius to L. Ron Hubbard…
one of the funniest stories i ever heard was about a bet that l ron hubbard and isaac asimov had… their wager was: who could start their first religion and have a thousand followers… hubbard definitely collected on that one…
Hubbard cheated some, since he got hints from Aleister Crowley and Jack Parsons…
well then obviosly the only remaining option is that they are wrong about God.
One of the many reasons I gave up on organized religion.
They are not. Everyone is a hypocrite but these people make it into an art form. They hide behind “god” to push their ignorant views on the populace while conveniently ignoring everything about God that contradicts their beliefs.
Bit like everyone who’s been twitching that ‘they’re not “True Chrisitans”‘
Splinters and planks one feels…
Religion is not right about God. God did not invent religion. Man did. The bible is the true and living Word of God. In it you will find Jesus condemning the “religious”.
Man invented God in his own image… disprove…
Maybe that was God’s plan all along! Just wait for man to invent him….
Prove…
prove…
prove any of your counter-theories.
prove anything.
or just continue being a forum troll.
I think I’ve pretty much nailed your sorry ass to the floor several times, Godbotherer…
All you’ve done is shown that you have nothing backing your disbelief but spite for people who do believe. Pretty counterproductive if you ask me. Unless you’re just trying to annoy people. Which you have done quite well.
Actually I have
1) the origin of scripture, which I have reference
2) the unhistoricity of the bible, which I have referenced
-
you’ve brought
1) Post Augustinian exegesis, which I recognised as such, but you really just played the ‘faith’ card…
In the end, Twain had it about right, and you’re just a nasty person hiding dehind an imaginary god that forgives you for thinking stuff you can’t forgive yourself for, based on a crappy book that you have no idea of the history for, since you’re programmed not to ask…
If it’s any consolation, you have my pity, while I regard you as the human version of human nuclear waste… dangerous and contaging in equal measure
But then Christianity is a religion…right?
In ur pictur, makin broad generalizations.
Get the hence to LOLcats you moron…
Screw off you bigot. See? I can do it too!
you can talk you mouth breathing spaniel lick turd…
westboro baptist church = widely known for being extremist.
the vast majority of christians = not like that.
Prop 8 begs to differ…
I would like to see the numbers of the groups that consisted of the people who voted for prop 8, but that’s unlikely to happen.
All I know is that not all of them were Christians.
In fact, I would wager to guess not a lot of them were Christians.
They were just people.
Many different kinds of people.
With many different reasons to vote on that proposition.
I don’t know why they did it.
But don’t blame that prop passing on Christians.
If you believe in equal rights for all, how about stop playing the blame game and perhaps work on a project or cause that will help equal rights?
All that I’ve seen since the prop passed is a bunch of people sitting around complaining about it and not doing anything.
So go do something about it.
If it matters to you stop blaming the church and start blaming yourself for not doing what you could to stop it.
If you care to know, although I am a person that believes being gay is a sin, I did not vote for prop 8. Because I believe in freedom for everyone. Regardless if that freedom contradicts some of my personal beliefs.
Now in my church, I am strictly against gay marriage. But outside of my church, in this great nation of ours, which my church does not control, I am indifferent.
If I ever feel the need to judge someone, I just go back to Matthew 7:1-2
“Judge not, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”
So there… you now know my viewpoint.
Lots of Obama voters, as it turns out-blacks and Hispanics. And you should have seen some of the slurs that the left wing blogs (you know, the bastions of tolerance and equalities) were throwing around after the vote. Of course, the Mormons got the blame, but they were a relatively small portion, at the end of the day. So basically, we have Barry to thank for Prop 8 passing. That, ladies and gentleman, is known as irony.
Someone call Alanis Morrisette.
and blacks and Hispanics tend to be Baptist, Catholic or Islamic
As to it being Obama’s fault, I’ll blame their bigoted superstitions over their choice of president, rather like I blame your parents repeated blows to you head making you such a loudly stupid redneck…
Don’t you have a cross burning to attend?
Uncle Fester once again shows how ignorant he can be.
He is like a festering scab on the skin of society. One that should just be pluck off and flicked into the trash, where he belongs.
Yeah, you must be new, Jojo. See, Fester’s quite loud and stupid himself, so when he runs out of anything that resembles substance, he resorts to what he learned on the playground beating up kids smaller than him-if you just call enough names, maybe you’ll demoralize your opponent into giving up. Since this only actually works on the weak and the stupid, I could really care less, beyond that he doesn’t further the dialog by being an insufferable ass.
And so, the Chrisitan reveals their true nature… I knew it was there…
And since when has the ‘bully’ been on the loser’s side, Roberto?
Dunno if you’ve noticed, Fester, but you seem to bring out the worst in people. Maybe it’s cuz you show all the restraint of a baby with a shotgun?
Oh, yeah, Fester, cuz shouting down people who disagree with you in an environment where you’re in the majority view is the pinnacle of bravery, right?
Awww diddums… do I offwend you?
Good… about time some one did…
-
I’ll try and make my point so it won’t dent your little tin brain…
Nothing I say will ever make a jot of difference. Now, I could be nice and courteous and studious and be ignored, or I can have fun pissing off the zelots and still be ignored…
Jojo is a cretin. I know it, you at the bottom of you, know it… but it’s easier to hide behind being offended than it is to address points… After all, what sort of retard pulls the race card and then says ‘blame the President’? Ah, right, that would be you…
And again, Fester, you offend me only in the sense that you’re a member of the human race who doesn’t seem to want to talk. I don’t care that you disagree with me. I don’t care that you think religion is silly. And I’m more than willing to pay attention to me. But if you have a discourse, rather than fling around insults, I might listen to what you say. Let me rephrase that. I’ll listen either way, cuz I actually like to know what other people think people think about stuff. But other people might listen, too, if you treated them like human beings.
Oi….I’m not done. Jojo has her opinions. I don’t agree with everything she’s said, but I’m not gonna call her a moron cuz she believes it. And it’s hard to address points when you don’t make any, you just fling bile.
It’s hard to make points when people just
fling bronze age superstition over laid with
hatred of the species like it’s fact.
I’ve made points, but you choose to address
the insults, therefore it must be the insults
that interest you…
I address the points you make. The insults frustrate me. I know you’re capable of intelligent conversation when you choose to be.
And rereading my freaking post again, I grow to loathe the poore text wrapping on PK.
No, you get but hurt over being called a cretinous redneck…
“butt”
And, a) I’m neither a cretin, nor a redneck, and b) I grow tired o fthe loud idiot who won’t have a conversation but instead flings around insults, and c) which of your “points” have I not responded to?
Use the web page search function… you’ll see them. And remeber, faith means somewhere between nothing and an indication of some sort of mental impairment
Yeah, I know better than to argue with you on the basis of faith. If you won’t answer my question, I suppose that means this particular thread has reached a dead end.
they are like, soooooooooo unlike christ lol.
Let’s see
Jesus – Dead, those lads – not
Jesus – supposed son of god, those lads – not
Jesus – had a naked youth with him in the Garden at Gethsemane, those lads – strangely silent on the matter
Jesus – strangely silent on his dislike of gay golk, those lads -not
Nope, they’re not like Jesus. Paul, they are a lot like…
::gahahaha:: I hate Paul so much. Preachy hypocritical bastard!
Concur!!!
Yeah, those aren’t Christians. They’re more like a cult than anything. And not even a legitimate cult like Scientology…
Find the fault their theology before you say that… they have the same amount of exegesis to make their assertions, and are more convincing in them than anyone who states ‘They’re not Christians’…
Because according to Christian dogma, a stance of hatred is pretty much the opposite of what the Christ would have done, and because anyone who says they are “Christian” are in every literal way saying “I am like Christ,” anyone who follows such a path would most definitely NOT be a Christian. It’s a paradox, and oxymoron.
Also,
cult –noun
1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7. the members of such a religion or sect.
They use the name term “God” which is unequivocally religious. Their posters certainly seem extreme and unorthodox to me. We can argue the whole “Jesus loves me”/”God wants to smite me” contradiction, but even considering that, what they’re promoting here seems just a tab bit over kill and uncalled for in any social group that claims to be civilized.
I’m afraid you’ve not actually disproved their theology, just given me an opinion, which is largely specious in terms of observed behaviour of the large group of Christians…
You really must try harder to understand what you claim to believe…
It’s a matter for debate. Some read Leviticus as laws for everyone to abide by, others read them as a code for ancient Israelite priests. It is argued that the laws existed to distinguish Jews from Canaanites who practiced temple prostitution as part of their religion, and that it’s that act that is condemned, so it is not applicable to stable, loving homosexual relationships.
Then there’s the whole Sodom story. God promised Abraham he would spare the entire city if there were righteous people in it. He sent 2 angels to see if there were, and they find only Lot’s family. While the angels are in his house, the men of Sodom demand Lot hand them over so they can rape them. Lot refuses and instead offers them his virgin daughters. Some read that as God destroying Sodom because they were homosexuals. An alternative interpretation asks why would a guy who knew them offer a bunch of gays his daughters to stop them raping his guests? This interpretation argues that the men wanted to rape the angels not because they were gay, but because it was a way of establishing dominance over them. Given that male on male rape is frequently carried out by men who would only be interested in consensual sex with women and that rape has been used to establish dominance for many centuries, this would seem a very plausible explanation.
Then there’s the whole question of the applicability of the Old Testament laws. It can be argued they apply only to Jews, the stringency of the laws is why Rabbis are required to try to dissuade people from converting to Judaism, being a Jew carries special obligations that don’t apply to Gentiles. Then you have to consider the belief that since the coming of Christ the Old Testament law no longer applies, there’s numerous references to that in the New Testament. Galatians is largely about just that, for instance. Or maybe take Christ’s assertion that all the Old Testament laws can be summed up in two commandments, love God and love your fellow man.
Romans 1 is also part of the issue… so basically, we can now eat rabbits, have tattoos but if two people of the same gender fall for each other, they are under Levitican law… simple really… next…
I love you. I have made that argument about Sodom many times but most people refuse to hear it.
*returns to lurking*
I’m afraid anthropology has little sway with most folks… they’ve been otld what it means and that the end of the game…
*told
Westboro baptist “church” is simply nuts. They are a small church and do not have any members outside of their extended family.
As to whether they are “Christian,” this is an interesting debate. For a long time Protestants did not believe that Catholics were “Christians” and vice versa. It’s not a terribly useful term.
It’s all besides the point anyway. It’s a logical fallacy to say “some of group X are dumb, therefore all of group X are dumb.” Westboro baptist church is equally scorned by conservatives and liberal, Christian and not.
IF you look at Chrisitan beleifs from the outside, it’s all pretty nuts, from the bit with the two people in the nip at the start to the bit at the end with all the mad stuff with the beast and the end of the world and dead people getting better and digging themselves up…
‘No true Scotsman?’
Very much so…
In what way are they not Christians?
Because they’re putting their own prejudice before the word of God. The New Testament rejects the laws of the Old Testament and sums them up in 2 commandments, love God and love others as yourself. It also brinks in annoying little things like not judging others. They’re doing just that, and using God’s name to do it. They’re using God’s name to attack people they don’t like. You could easily argue that is hurting their fellow man and showing disrespect to God by using his name to do it. By doing that, they’re breaking the two commandments with which Jesus replaced all the Old Testament laws.
Aren’t they interpreting the word of God to tell them to do what they do?
No, they’re cherry picking the bits they want to to justify attacking a group they don’t like. There’s no real merit behind their theology, it’s just hatred wrapped up in a thing veil of Christianity.
Heaven forbid that a believer would cherry-pick from a religious text or use their religion to justify their own prejudices! Mercy!
I know, shocking isn’t it?
you mean like people above are cherry picking to distance themselves from the group while actually holding pretty much the same views on most of the tihngs they do…
“Using God’s name to attack people they don’t like.” This is a perfectly apt description of the history of the three “great faiths”, if not all deistic religion!
Ah, so I followup with a second reply to this same post, since I’ve had more time to think now.
I’ve heard lots and lots of people say that they are against homosexuality in one way or another because of their Christian faith. It ranges from “at least they shouldn’t be allowed top get married in Church” up towards the Phelps-insanity. Are they all not Christian – is there a limit where the way you express your hatred “in the name of God”* makes you not a Christian?
.
Isn’t it more a case of “good” Christians and “bad” Christians (being a case of “in the eye of the beholder”)?
.
*) I am fairly convinced that many of those would be as homophobic even if there were no Bible to blame it on.
Amen! Testify!!!
They are a f***ing insane family from tennesee (?) I think. they have no church members beyond their family. Also, ALL they do is protest shit in the most offensive way possible. Like they protest the funerals of dead American soldiers because the Army lets in gay people. Ask yourselves: would the Christians you know do such a thing?
google westboro baptist church.
No, no, no — we have plenty of nuts of our own in Tennessee! The Phelps a-holes are from Kansas, thankyouverymuch!
aye, one of the things that sucks about living in kansas is dealing with the Phelps family… as they are the only people from kansas who get in any form of national media
You guys have Bob Dole and Kathleen Sebelius.
Amelia Earhart was from Kansas, too, right?
Dust in the Wind?
Yeah, I know what they do and I certainly agree that they are twats.
“Ask yourselves: would the Christians you know do such a thing?”
That would seem fairly irrelevant to the question.
Christian = Christ-like.
Did Jesus ever hold signs and protest against gays?
No.
In fact he spent most of his time with people that society would consider “unclean”.
He hardly spent time with the people who followed him because they already knew the truth and were following him.
So he would spend his time with people that actually needed him.
And he loved every single person he met.
A complete, irrefutable, indiscriminate, perfect love.
Christian = Christ-like.
Where do you get this definition of the word Christian? It’s certainly not the most common one, and suddenly using this meaning of the word changes the question s well. (into a question I couldn’t care less about.)
It’s the usual semantic rubbish one gets when you corner a cultist… it’s a bit like a black rat, just with fewer scruples about accuracy…
You know, of all things that person just said up there, you focused on the one thing that wasn’t the most important part. Christian actually does derive from those that claim to be followers of Jesus Christ. The implication was that their goal was to be like Christ. Now, if you’d get past that little bit of semantics, you’d see that over all, they were pointing out that the ‘Christians’ in this photograph are not what a Christian should be. Keep in mind, that the term Christian is just another way to bunch us all together, because there’s a lot of us. The problem is, Christianity was never meant to be about being an organized religion, but because we are human, we don’t know how to do anything but jump together and make up crap. The faith is what is at the center of it. It’s supposed to be about an individual faith and relationship with Jesus Christ. It all boils down with what you do with the resurrection.
UF will ask someone to clarify and then call it semantics…
The invective is just refusal to acknowledge that someone else may have a point.
Generally speaking, it is a semantic back flip to make a word mean something it clearly doesn’t from the context…
But then, I’d not expect that to make sense to you… since in most debates you’re a cornered rat…
Oh, so to be on top of an argument, you must be rude and abrasive, while the context of your argument has little to do with whether you are “winning” or not. I think I would prefer to be the cornered rat that makes interesting points than the bigot that ignores valid points, instead point out semantics.
i agree! all uncle fester has done is make off based insults and show a general lack of knowledge.
You’re wrong-Fester knows a lot. That just makes him more frustrating. You’d think someone who knows that much would be just a little more level-headed, but nope.
Jojo relies a little too much on faith to be actually much use in an agrument… that and an IQ in the low 60s…
And, Redneck, facts seem to get ignored unless back with mustard gas and loud explosions here… it’s the culture I’m afraid…
Why do you constantly fall back on ‘redneck’ as your only means of insulting people who don’t agree with you. Sounds like
someone probably grew up getting abused and harassed by rednecks.
Why do you prop up your inability to deal with the real world by claiming everyone who believes differently to you is going to hell?
Everyone else abuse you?
As to the redneck insult, I speak as I find… Some are rednecks, you’re a cretin…
Why does it matter what she believes? How does it affect you? Why do you prop up the inability to deal with the real world by claiming everyone whoe believes differently than you is a raving moron? Everyone else abuse you?
Ah, the parrot method of trolling… you really are some sort of cretin… to think it acutally works on me… but since you bother, oh white knight of the “oppressed” majority, I’ll indulge you, although you are really devoid of seeing the horror that Jojo really is at heart…
Basically, what she believes it the mental version of plague.
She came to spread it here.
You seem to have no problem with her poison, almost like you enjoy it…biology boy… Seems I’m pissing in the wind as I said I was… A red neck cretin and a delusional self loather… a match made in heaven…
I’m sorry if turning your own words against you makes you so unhappy, Fester. I don’t know anything more about Jojo than you do. I’m just not prepared to indite anyone based on their belief system. And again, I’m here where I’m about as far from the majority as one can get. You run around, spouting intolerant inanities, and then claim to be some sort of hero for the downtrodden. I think she has the right to believe what she wants, as do you. I just have this crazy idea that groups shouldn’t be impugned for the actions of an obnoxious minority. Which is why I don’t hate all atheists even though you’re an enormous douchebag.
Oh, and you seem to get much more in the way of jollies from her “poison” than i do. I just have this crazy idea that people have the right to express their beliefs, whereas you seem to think that anyone who believes differently than you is a syphilis-addled mental case.
Hell…
“indict”
No, it was an important part. People are saying that these nutjobs aren’t Christian. The common meaning of “being Christian” is to believe that Jesus was the son of God (and God), the saviour of man and he died for humans’ sins etc.
Yes, there are many different flavours of Christianity, but the question that it’s okay for any other Christian to judge these at not Christian because of their behaviour is not answered by talking about “Christian” as “behaving like Christ” instead.
*sigh*
This atheist, at this point, would dearly love to lamp you into the middle of next week’s Quaker meeting. You’re giving all of us as bad a name as the Westboro lot give Christians. For the love of humanity, please stop.
How do you mean that Uncle Fester’s comments give you a bad name?
Good catch. I don’t much appreciate having my feelings
spoken for, if I haven’t even been asked to portray them.
Gwenwhatever should not speak for a crowd, without
consulting them first.
Perhaps because he’s an intolerant ass?
Ah, but the question is not about Uncle Fester’s style of discussion, but how it gives her a bad name.
I understand, but I think that’s her point-she doesn’t want people to think athiests are all that way, in the same vein that I’m not really wild about the Phelps clan being held up as some sort of example of Christians.
Yes, I would also interpret that as her point. But I wanted to ask her how she meant before I started discussing it. Alas, she seems to have left the thread.
It’s possible that she didn’t click the “Subscribe the Thread” box. Happened to me when I first got here.
Do you mean the “Notify me of follow-up comments via em
ail.”? Does that send a mail for every comment in the thread, or just for the direct followups, or for every comment hierarchally (hierarchicly? hierarchicacally? herionymically?) under your post? I never click it – seems spammy. ;p
That’s the one. Yeah, it is a little spammy, but it’s easier (for me) to just wade through all the comments that come through rather than try to remember what I posted on what, when, and then try to track it down after a week or two.
Yes… I’ll try it some time.
Suffix
-ian
1. (as an adjective) From, related to, or like.
2. (as a noun) One from, belonging to, relating to, or like.
Ah yes, my question was poorly phrased – I meant it more in a “why this – not the definition we’re using here”, but I worded it as a question about etymology. My bad, sorry.
.
(“Christian” stems from Latin/Greek (kristianus/kristianos).)
You do realize that all religions are “cults,” don’t you? A cult is simply defined as an organization with a specific set of beliefs. Christianity is a cult. The military is most certainly a cult. It’s only in recent times that we’ve given a negative association to the word “cult” after various doomsday cults have been put into the limelight. Granted, groups like WBC do fall into that category of nut job religions, but that doesn’t make them any more or less a cult than mainstream Christianity.
this is a devastatingly stupid post. Is the democratic party a cult? Are the New Atheists a cult? Is the boyscouts a cult?
The boy scouts certainly are. They have their set beliefs, you have to be inducted in via a means of proving yourself, and they alter the way in which you think about things. In a GOOD way, yes, but altering none the less. It just depends on how broadly you want to apply the word. Random House Unabridged Dictionary offers the following as a definition of cult: A group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc. Would you not agree that all 3 groups you mentioned could fall under that definition? They all 3 have their specific ideals that the venerate.
Not that atheism requires the veneration of anything. Not reason. Not the scientific method. Not even (gasp!) Richard Dawkins! All that’s required is a lack of belief in gods.
One could argue that the staunch declaration of a lack of anything in the afterlife is also an ideal, and thus qualifies as a cult belief. Saying that there is no chance for anything to exist is most certainly a belief.
*is getting a distinct sense of deja vu*
“Saying that there is no chance for anything to exist is most certainly a belief.”
That depends on how narrowly you define the “anything” that one won’t believe in.
Comparing the statement of “there is nothing” to the statement “there could be something,” which is the generic atheist vs agnostic comparison, means that the atheists are in fact stating a belief. A belief in nothing, but a belief nonetheless. The New Atheists have a belief that main stream religion has a negative effect on science and education. Their “ideal” is to combat this, prevent it from happening. As such, they are a cult. Neither good nor bad, they simply are.
Hm. But the belief is on par with “my sock drawer does not contain an obscure sock stealing mini-micro-pygmy tribe”. Not believing that such a tribe doesn’t exist isn’t the same as a belief in their nonexistance.
.
Well, technically it is. I believe that Santa doesn’t exist, Hogwarts is just a magical school in a fantasy book etc. I cannot know they don’t, because proving something’s nonexistence is kinda tricky.
.
I guess I just don’t see how “There could be a Santa” is less a belief than saying “There is no Santa”.
WIN.
There’s a difference for sure. If someone says, “Everyone who believes that Santa exists, stand over here, and everyone who believes that Santa does _not_ exist, stand over there.”
.
Where does the person who can’t decide what they believe stand? They’re in a third, separate category.
.
I’m not trying to extend the analogy here, btw
Yes, absolutely – they’re a third category, but that was not what I was “arguing” against.
My stance is the Buddhist stance: it simply doesn’t matter if there is a God or not. Or, more precisely, it may matter, but no one can prove that it does, therefore, it is pointless to worry about whether God exists or not. As no human can prove there is a God, and God himself hasn’t proven His existence to me, God’s existence or lack thereof can have no possible bearing on how I live my life. Oh, it could if I chose to let it matter, but then I would have to decide on WHICH God I believe in. The chances of getting it wrong are obviously greater than the chances of picking the right, One True God. There is simply no way to logically decide which of the thousands of Gods humans have imagined over the years is the real one. So, along with other completely unanswerable questions such as ‘do I have a soul?’ and ‘what happens to me after I die?’ I choose not to waste any energy obsessing over the issue.
Wonderfully put, as always Seth.
Great post, Seth… pissing in the wind… but as always, great…
ALSO WIN.
Yes. One thing I’ve noticed is that many people who have a faith seem to interpret atheism as a stance against their particular god, which is rarely the case, I think. I’m not a non-Christian – I don’t go outside and see the wonderful nature and go “Oh, what a beautiful world the abrahamitic god has not made for us” (nor any other god). Atheism, to me, is not a “I will not be a Christian”-stance, though it seems like Christians have a tendency to think that’s how it works.
I personally think that has a lot to do with the way these two groups collectively view one another. Generally, atheists see Christians like this Westboro lot of halfwits, while Christians see atheists as a lot of anti-Christian half-wits.
It’s more just the impression we get from hearing the loudest members of the group, ya know?
I am sure that this is true for some cases. I am not sure that the “Generally, atheists see Christians like this Westboro lot of halfwits” is correct, though. But I am under the impression that “while Christians see atheists as a lot of anti-Christian half-wits” is correct. For some atheists it probably is true too, because the only religion they find themselves having to go head to head with is Christianity. Most atheists aren’t non-christian, though, they’re non-religious.
.
All this, just in my experience, ofc.
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
–Stephen Roberts
Perfect quote!
Brilliant! I’m putting this on my screensaver immediately!
Indeed.
Atheism is a religion like not-stamp collecting is a hobby…
I hate sound bite comments, but that is pretty much true…
It’s a position of pure faith that lacks substantive proof-sounds like a religion to me, there, boss.
And in your instance, Atheism is a religion the way running around screaming about what morons stamp collectors are is a hobby.
“A-” means “non,” whereas “Anti-” means
“against.”
Big difference: The first is a state, whereas
the second requires pursuit.
Anyway, perhaps that is what is confusing
you.
How is not believing in something that there’s no proof for a position of pure faith?
If atheism is a religion, does that mean theism is a religion too?
You could be atheist and believe widely different things from other atheists, just as you can be theist and have your beliefs differ widely from other theists.
You can be atheist and believe Darth Vader created the solar system. You can be atheist and believe nothing is real at all. You can be atheist and have no morals, you can be atheist and have very strong ones. It’s not a religion. It’s a lack of belief in a diety.
Also I agree with Danbala – the default is “nonexistant” and substantial evidence is needed for me to think otherwise.
If I told you there’s a tiger in front of you, but you can’t feel it, see it, hear it, etc. would you believe it?
Also (sorry for the triple post) I’ll point out a very real example: LaVeyan Satanism is an atheistic religion. Not all atheists are Satanists.
It’s cool, I don’t mind. In the instance of a tiger, depends on the environment, but I understand what you’re saying. What I’m saying is that since you can’t prove a deity exists any more than you can prove one does, you’re acting on faith. I have a feeling that this particular discussion will devolve into semanticss, though. Quite frankly, though, seeing as how the odds of life spontaneously arising at all, much less developing into the complex life forms we see today, purely by chance, is astronomical. In my opinion, it certainly creates doubt that there is no deity.
And I would make the argument that a Satanist religion just uses Satan as their deity. Now…Taoists, I think?…are a atheistic religion. I would say Fester goes the extra mile and is an Antitheist, but that’s more of a mission statement than a belief system.
In my opinion it certainly isn’t. The chance is astronomical, the space and time environment our current Earth is placed in is … astronomical.
.
And no, this is not a question of semantics – the difference between believeing in something despite the lack of proof, or not believeing in things that lack proof is … well, astronomical, if you will.
The odds of life happening aren’t so small. Scientists have been able to replicate the earth’s early atmosphere and have watched tiny RNAs form, and oily bubbles, and amino acids… and that’s just in a short amount of time. Give it millions of years (longer than is really imaginable) and you get cells, and cells that form symbiotic relationships with other cells, cells that fold in on themselfes, etc.
Sort of a lots of monkeys on lots of typewriters over lots of years will type coherent sentences thing.
LaVeyan Satanism looks at Satan as more a force of human nature, not an independent diety. Taoism is a fair example, although you could argue that it’s pantheistic.
@Aedriel:
It’s a lack of belief in a diety.
I don’t believe in dieties either. I’ll eat what I want, when I want and as much as I want, thankyouverymuch.
.
Sorry. Sometimes I just can’t resist. :p
Danbala:
Their both positions of Faith. I can’t prove there’s a supreme being (especially if you actively don’t want to be convinced). But no one else can prove that there is no supreme being. Agnostics are the most intellectually honest in the sense that they are open to the idea of a god, but they don’t say they know for a fact.
Aedriel:
You’re talking about the Miller-Urey experiment [LINK]. What was actually generated was organic molecules, not actual RNA. These still don’t explaine how the complex structures that make up a cell developed. In fact, the more they learn about the inside in the cell, the more questions arise. It’s amazing stuff.
Meh, you want to believe in intelligent design, fine. Just keep it out of my public schools.
@Robert:
I can’t prove a lot of things. I can’t prove non-existence of any make-up creature you can come up with – be that gnomes, unicorns or gods. That’s not a position of faith.
Danbala – dangit! Good catch.
Robert – “Experiments conducted later showed that the other RNA and DNA nucleobases could be obtained through simulated prebiotic chemistry” – taken off your link. I’m impressed that you know of the experiment… Again, you must take into account the scale of it, the millions of years and how many locations on the planet it could occur.
It is amazing stuff, but I don’t think there’s a higher power involved.
Also for the record the only argument I have against Deism is that I disagree – I’m agnostic in the sense that I don’t think there is enough proof to determine the existence of a god, I’m atheist because I don’t believe in a god. [link]
Last part was unclear. Take the dash out and make that a new section. I hope you can sort it out
It’s OK, I get it. Of course I know about the experiment-I’m a biolgoy major. And that doesn’t change the fact that under “wild” conditions the genesis of life is incredibly unlikely, and the structures of the cell is amazingly complex.
SON OF A WHORE!
Biology.
Oooh, a biology major. Scary.
I teach Bio undergrads a few times a week…
At this point, I suppose all there is to do is agree to disagree. I’ve stated my point.
Perfectly acceptable to me. I wasn’t trying to be scary. But I love the subject to death. And it’s not necessarily something that, say, a Chem major might now. What do you teach?
I teach first-year bio majors, just basics. I’m not actually a professor, nor do I plan to be… working on the MD thing, might change over to DO.
I just want to cut people
note to self: do not stand near aedriel when she has anything sharp.
Don’t worry, I’m quite docile these days…
And I always have something sharp. I keep a dissection kit in my bag and I just feel naked without my knife…
you _need_ a knife?
I’ve carried it for years, it’s like a part of me
I don’t really need it, but it’s nice to have.
@Aedriel: You’re selling yourself short. Not
only do you want to cut people, but you
want to cut unconscious people, and
rearrange their innards…
You vicious thing, you!
Unconscious?
Well, you know, preferably restrained somehow, but I never said anything about unconscious…
Long as you don’t rely on it being there, that’s ok…
It isn’t like a security blanket, if that’s what you mean… my wristwatch is the same way, I just feel awkward if I don’t have it.
I meant in a fight…
In a fight… I don’t know. Despite my twisted mind and dark sense of humor, I’m terribly non-violent. I haven’t fought anyone since I was in grade school, unless you count my ex… which gets rather personal, and I sort of doubt you or anyone else here wants to know :/
What kind of surgeon are you going for? I want to be a cardiothorasic surgeon, myself. I like the whole idea of cutting someone open and repairing an error in someone’s system.
To be honest, I’m not sure. There’s a variety of things I’m into.
Reconstructive, neuro, and orthopaedic are the main ones I’m looking at… I joke that one day I’ll build a cyberdemon (my first 2.5 years of uni were in comp engineering)…
OMFG! That’s awesome! The only thing you’d need is a physicist with no morals and you’ll be set!
I think neurosurgery would be great, but that’s almost more complicated than even I want to get into.
you’re 12! That explains SO much…
Physicist with no morals? I know quite a few
Almost became one of them, too…
Neuro stuff is sorta complicated, I guess, but it’s so much fun!
And, it’s everything.
Congrats, Aedriel–
Yours is Comment #1300 on this LOL!
I think you will have great success, regard-
less of what specialty you get into. My vote
is for neuro. You’ll need the knowledge for
your cyberdemon, after all…
Would this be a Doom II Cyber demon, Doom III or something more Simon Bisley-esgue?
The mental image was more Doom III… I’m willing to accept some creative input, butonly if you volunteer for some experiments
Too late… there’s not much left to ‘experiment’ on [link]
Yes, my knowledge of DOOM automatically makes me 12. That’s makes perfect sense. And your knowledge of
Doom II being over 13 years old, that wouldn’t make sense…
Fester’s just being himself, Robert. He’s here for his own entertainment, just like the rest of us. If you don’t want to argue with him, then… well, don’t.
And Fester, I see both hands… that means you’ve still got room for a rocket launcher…
I know. Honestly, part of me enjoys the back and forth. I’m not used to anyone keeping up with my raging bull-headedness. It’s a welcome change.
OK, Blarg made a good point, and you’re just loudly stupid…
O.o
/screenshot
I…
agree…
with Blarg…
*head explodes*
*glues n8′s head back together*
It’s okay, Dear. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
He gave logical reasoning for why the boy scouts are a cult. That gave me a warm happy feeling inside.
It’s okay, n8, I try my best to talk to as many sides as possible. But not in an Uncle Fester way where I just disagree with everyone, I actually try to speak TO them and WITH them.
rhorho, please show me where I’ve ever been “broken.”
Jane, seeing something in a new light is often humorous, and can generate those warm fuzzies.
Blarg… best post EVER above… EVER… bar none. EVER!
did I mention EVER!
If I didn’t think the Fester cooties would kill you, I’d kiss you on the forehead… it was THAT good…
What was that?
Was it sarcasm?
Reading it did strange things to my brain….
No… unalloyed admiration for a glimmer of light…
I’ll point it out to you in future.
If I forget it, please do
Hey! Get your own guy! He asked me first!!
Lol Sci-fi-tology..
I would expect this from Scientologists, but who in their -right- minds would seriously rally to these messages? oo I mean, I know all the “love thy neighbor” stuff is a little far into the bible, but come one people, keep reading, it gets better ><
Know John 3:16? It’s always amazing to me that when they’re selling the religion they sort of stop there, when John 3:18 is a lot more the truth of the matter…
I figure if you’re gonna go ahead and look up John 3:16, you won’t stop after 1 sentence *shrugs* Besides, I personally feel Mathew 5 is a much better sample of the Bible than anything in John. Even if you are not a Christian, if more people adapted the teachings in this chapter, maybe scenes like that depicted above would happen less.
Beatitudes! We had to memorise them in Sunday School.
Well, yes, those too, but I was more after the stuff after that XP
Iraneaus, whose dogma is used today, basically said that John was the arbiter.
See now… -you’re- the one who brought up the book of John, so all you’re really doing is arguing with anything anyone says.
You haven’t realized that yet? You must be new to PK. WELCOME! My name is Blarg, and I’ll be your tour guide for this afternoon. To you left, you see the giant hamsters running on wheels that power the innertubez. To your right, you see Uncle Fester, our resident devil’s advocate and recipient of the Argue for the Sake of Arguing Award 5 years running! Enjoy your stay!
To continue with Blarg’s tour…
Here we have Blarg, who always says, “WHARRGARBBLE!!”
I’ve seen y’all use that term before, but what does it mean? I must’ve missed reading the lol that started it. . .
Google it.
Well, since you asked so nicely… Originally n8 said that anytime someone starts a phrase with the words, “you libs” you might as well follow the text with WHARRBARRBLE and the meaning will be the same. It has evolved to mean someone who repeats the same rhetoric all the time.
There’s a rather neat section in UrbanDictionary.com explaining it. (It seems to be at least half a year old.)
(WHARRGARBL)
I did not know that. I was more attempting to explain it’s recent popularity on PK.
Yeah, I saw it first time about a week ago, but I’m a google addict, so I looked it up. (I liked the angry, water drinking dog.)
Yeah, I don’t claim to be the inventor of WHARRGARBL, I’m just putting it to use and adapting it for this environment.
Yep. My comments were not to try to show that “nuh-uh, not n8′s invention”, just to show that WHARRGARBL has a glorious history. ;p
That it does, Danbala, that it does.
Thanks! I try to stay away from Urban Dictionary, anything I’ve ever looked up there has made no sense.
Yeah, it has a pretty bad signal-to-noise-ratio, but a few useful gems do hide in there.
The difference is, I actually THINK before I come up with my whargarbles. But I’d love to see what you say about the times I’m not, by definition below, lib bashing whargarbling. I’d love to see how your confirmation bias addresses that discrepancy.
That would be “by definition above,” the jumping boxes in firefox confused my poor little whargarbling brain. My apologies.
NP, and, as I’ve said elsewhere, I’ll gladly show those
to you as they occur. I’m delighted that you seek the
knowledge.
John, in all Christian cults is the arbiter… 3:18 and you’re a retard…
What was it Ben Franklin said? Something like “Lighthouses are more useful than churches?”
“Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.”–Benjamin Franklin
NOOOOOO, that can’t be right, all our founding fathers were christian, and we’rea christian nation!!!!
Yer rite!!
George Washington, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and others were all evangelicals, not Deists, like them nasty *books* say!
Yup…those’re the words of an person who believes in the cosmic watchmaker, right there. [LINK]
Course, even if allow they were Deists, that still shows belief in the divine.
Still doesn’t make them christian and in no way implies they wanted anything but a secular government.
I would make the argument that they wanted a government that was unmarred by any prejudices, be they religious or anti-religious. We have swung way into the anti-religious territory, though, where saying prayer in a public school is cause for a national incident. I’m not gonna make the argument that the founders wanted a theocracy, cuz it would be silly.
I am, however, prepared to argue that if Washington, Jefferson, and Adams spontaneously rose from the grave, and weren’t flesh eating zombies, there would be another Revolution within a few years.
Right. Because the constitution doesn’t lay out precisely a secular government. Separation of church and state was specifically addressed. They stupidly assumed it was a common-sense given. That people didn’t need it spelled out. The neo-con branch made up of evangelicals has repeatedly tried to re-write history.
In the diverse culture we have now, demands you keep your prayers to yorself, fine with me. the jewish and moslem, wiccan, hindu etc kids in the class DON”T WANT to say a christian prayer. nor should they be forced to. Religion is supposed to be between you and your deity, so why force it on others? You want your kids taught intelligent design? Fine. teach it at home or in sunday school. Why is this so hard for people.
Franky, I think it’s a few loudmouths like Bill O’Reilly who insist this remain an issue in the spotlight at all. Most people can roll their eyes and get over it.
The only separation that was ever intended was to keep the government from mandating people’s religion. Jefferson said the constitution was designed for a religious people because “no document exists that may curb the passions of man.” (I think I quoted that right, but I can’t find it right off the top of my head.
And I’d except your “diverse culture” argument except we’ve started putting foot baths in schools for Muslims and allowing them breaks and providing rooms for their prayers. Which is fine, as long as all the other religions get the same amount of time and rooms of their own.
Bill O’Reilly’s frustration is the anti-Christian drive. Keep in mind, that O’reilly is a hard-core traditionalist, though, more than anything, so he can go overboard. But he does try to remain impartial. I don’t like O’Reilly because I don’t agree with his Populism, but most people don’t like him because he makes his guests answer questions. Course, after that softball he gave Obama, he may have lost his credibility there, too.
Christianity shows very little signs of anything divine… I think that’s why the deists really wanted no part of it, although Jefferson did try to rehabilitate the New Testament.
Given what we know now, I think Franklin would see the universe and its content are process, not artefact, and sticking another causeless cause on top of a process just makes no sense…
You can’t lump all Christians in with these peons. They’re an attention-whoring cult, and nothing less.
Maybe it’s a demonstration. Like, they don’t mean it, they’re just doing something shocking to get peoples attention like someone being blatantly racist to show that racism is still an issue.
Also, there are a lot of “God”(s) Who say’s they’re specifically Christian, maybe they’re Catholic, or Jewish, or… oh who am I kidding? =_= It’s times like this when I wanna tell people like that “Stop being on my side, you make us look bad!” … which I’m sure is exactly what the Church of Scientology told Tom Cruise XD
I’d recommend what Athanatheus of Alexandria did to the Arians, if you want to resolve the problems…
This is obviously your first encounter with the WBC.
Catholics *are* christians. Roman catholicism was synonymous with christianism until the East-West schism which gave birth to Orthodox christianism.
Protestantism also stems from catholicism.
Theology and history fail.
This said, these bozos should be shot and put out of their misery.
What’s that about fail? Technically, All christian sects are cults — variations of a larger religion — of Catholicism, which itself is a cult of Judaism. This becomes especially apparent when you realize that Catholicism and most Christian sects are fundamentally paradoxical in the fact that they break their own rules and assimilate many foreign beliefs and rituals to make themselves more palatable to a wider range of cultures.
Now, I would have ignored your correction, if you hadn’t gone ahead and gotten drunk on your own ego and tried to be funny with that little “fail” punctuation… lets try to be less funny and a little more poignant, please?
You wanted poignant…
I think you actually meant ‘pertinent’, thus I present
I wish I could believe that. Ballot boxes across the country say otherwise, though.
The problem with the Phelps Clan is not what they say, but HOW they say it. They’re too loud, too harsh.
Most Christians prefer to hide behind weasel words like “love the sinner and hate the sin.” The Phelpses are upfront about hating both.
and I say a pox on Augustinian bollocks…
Good Lord Hairy! What Fools Those Mortals Be!
Please specify what you believe is “right” about what they say.
Unlike you, I have a problem from the get-go about the things that pass
for “thoughts” in this group.
They are right in that the Hebrew God only condones sex between a man and his wife/wives. They are right in the sense that the Hebrew God hates those who are not his people.
Regular Christians, in my experience, don’t have a problem with the base of Phelps’ message, only with the expression of it.
This message is why I left Christianity and found better gods.
That’s part of the “pick-and-choose” bible they edited together in the early church. Not everything in the bible is clear as night/day about homosexuality. Also, reading much of the bible, women would appear to be nothing but prostitutes and adulteresses, etc. A lot that might have been good things to say about women probably got removed by those early priests, who, for some reason, vowed celibacy?
In reality, they were just bookworms that couldn’t get any. Celibacy was just their excuse.
“You can’t fire me ‘cuz I quit!”
Excommunication doesn’t really hold the weight it used to =/
I have no idea who the WBC is unless you’re walking about the World Boxing Council. But if that’s them, then I don’t really wanna know T_T
Westboro Baptist Church…
Check out the Westboro Church website…unfortunately, this is not an unusual demonstration for them. They came to our area a couple of times to protest a local church who had an openly gay pastor, and then came back to demonstrate the funeral of a local soldier killed in Iraq. Same signs, same idiotic dogma…
They came to our city to protest because one of our college’s theater departments put on a play about a young homosexual boy who was alienated and murdered for being gay. (It’s an informative thing) A lot of us from our high school came too, just to counter-protest WBC. It was pretty exciting.
(Which is of course not to say that WBC was exciting, but the opportunity to argue against them was exciting. Ignorance is a huge pet peeve of mine, therefore the WBC pisses me off to no end.)
They mean it, but they are a loser fringe group of wackos. They have like less than 20 members, all the extended family members of the head of the “Church.”"”
wiki westboro baptist church.
Same book. Pretty much the exegesis that the church has put forth since the 1600s… I don’t see one can fault their opinion of what God “says”…
I’d say that we’re pissing in the wind to deny, based on what was for a long time and accepted reading, and still is, in a less ‘standing on street corner’ way by the bulk of Christians, that God does indeed hate Gay folks. If Christians DIDN’T believe that God hates gay folks, then prop 8 and the like wouldn’t have been voted in with so much gay abandon (pun intended)
BTW, if you invoke Augustine at this point, I shall be forced to hunt you down and strike you repeatedly, then burn down your house…
Fester, my coffee hasn’t kicked in, so please forgive me for being dense. Are you saying that it’s stupid to deny that God hates gay people, or that it’s stupid to deny that these people believe that God hates gay people?
Based on the bible and accepted exegeses, God hates homosexual behaviour…
Based on the bible, god does not hate. period end stop. He is saddened and dissapointed by behaviour that goes against his teachings. He does not homosexuality any more than he hates, lying, stealing, or not respecting your parents. Actually all of those made his top ten list and homosexuality barely gets a mention. So one would be inclined to believe that rebellious teenagers who do not honor their fathers and mothers get more of gods ire than homosexuals.
How come everyone knows what God “loves” “hates” “thinks” “says” etc?
Has anyone spoken to him recently? Or do you assume all of the above because of what was written in a book by people who claim to know what God “loves” “hates” “thinks” “says” etc?
I don’t think Thou Shalt Not Be Teh Ghay is one of the commandments.
I’m pretty sure there’s one about not coveting your neighbor’s ass, though…
“…an abomination before the Lord…” a bit more than him sucking on his pipe, hunkering down in his easy chair, and getting lower behind his news paper with a resigned ‘Kids today…’
God arbitrarily kills people (Sodom and Gomorrah to Ananis and Sappia), or just screws with their life for a bet (Job), while having the HR abilities of a slowly boiled newt (Solomon, David, Peter, Judas)
Have you taken a double dose of some medication that should be reported?
Here’s the problem, anyone who goes around speaking -FOR- God, needs a kick in the ass, but that’s not our place to deliver. See, God knows what he does and doesn’t like, and he’s pretty much spelled it all out with a neat little clause that essentially tells his people to go ahead and let him to the judging thing and to limit our job to basically spreading the word. So while, yes, the bible has a few specific words on homosexuality, it is not our “job” to go around and tell every person who is homosexual that God hates em and they’re gonna burn in hell for ever… Furthermore “Than God for Dead Soldiers” … what exactly is that promoting? Yay for sending people to die for something they have absolutely no legitimate reason to be involved in? Where in the Bible does it explain that god smiles when someone dies “for their country” because some people in that country don’t follow every letter of his word?
Ah, the ever nauseating apologia of the person who clings to superstitious bollock like it’s real…
Just cuz you’re a faithless, intolerant twit doesn’t mean you have to go around screaming that everyone who’s not is an idiot. While we’re painting with your broad brush, let’s compare all Germans to Nazis, all Britons to Jack the Ripper, all gays to Jeffery Dahmer, all blacks to Jeremiah Wright, all actors to Ben Affleck, all lesbians to Rosie O’Donnell, all conservatives to Michael Savage, all liberals to Michael Moore, and all atheists to you. That seems about as fair, on the whole.
On a completely different note, where’s a drunken illegal immigrant when you need one, huh?
Oh God damn it Robert! Did you REALLY have to say Nazi? Frick…
“all actors to Ben Affleck, all lesbians to Rosie O’Donnel”
I loled.
Though I am ill, I shall not recoil in my duties. For while this fool walks in the shadow of my wang, he shall fear no sodomy for he embraces it with all his quivering anus and thus does it to himself.
And lo, my wang saw this as odd but it saved him the trouble telling him to f#ck himself.
That must be some kicka$$ cold medicine, DWN!
*applauds and wolf whistles* You Go!
-
P.S. And get better soon!
*awestruck by the courage of the feverish Wang, coming
back, against all odds, to do battle against the Wangable*
@Diss: Just taking some Dayquil, I wish I had time and money for doctors…
@Jane: Doing what I can, your ladyship.
@rhorho: I keep my word as best I can. *goes to lay back down*
BTW, we need a singularly nasty, painful death scenario down the thread a way…
I said you were by far the best man for ‘down home EWWWW!’ on the board…
O_O… I’m honored?
I am at work but still a bit out of it. I will see where DWN or my Username is mentioned and try to find it from there.
“I am Cornholio! You have awakened my bunghole!”
Sorry, that was the first thing that popped into my mind when I ran across DWN’s post. I’m new here.
Good job there, Robert. Insulting a man for his beliefs just proves that your religion hasn’t done jack squat for your sense of tolerance, acceptance, loving the sinner while hating the sin, or anything else worthwhile your religion has tried to teach you. If this were uncommon, I would blame you. As it is SADLY common for Christians to lash out in anger against non-believers, I blame Christianity. Thanks for providing yet more evidence that your religion is morally bankrupt, and no sane person should ever pay attention to it.
Go easy, Seth…he missed that day in Sunday School…
I did too, I heard we were making sheep out of cinnamon sticks and cotton balls. Then after snack we got to color a picture of Jeebus.
You missed my point. I’m tired of people doing exactly what you’re doing-calling other people bigots while acting like a bigot yourself. If Fester wants to believe there’s not God, that’s his choice. My issue is when he points at idiots like the picture above and says “yep, there’s your Christianity, right there.” It’s assinine and it grows old.
I think most Christians beat me on intolerant, and if you want faithless, look up how many are pro-death penalty… seems they don’t trust their own god to sort his house…
Red herring, ahoy! You’d be wrong. Most Christians just don’t want putzes like yourself to point at the idiots in the picture and go “Look at the Christians!” as if that’s representative of the group as a whole. It’s not. I don’t know about other people, but I personally support the death penalty because I’m tired of rapists and murderers who get out of prison for good behavior, or whatever, and go out and rape and murder some more. I think the life of a criminal is worth protecting the life of the innocent. I know, the idea that a woman shouldn’t have to be afraid that some psycho’s gonna accost her on her way home is kind of a heady concept, but try to wrap your head around it.
Ah, the god like omniscience… I too agree with the death penalty, but I also want to know how many wrongly accused people it’s ok to kill… I say ‘none’… how many do you say, apologist? 1,5, 50, 500, ? You want to kill the bad guys at what cost?
Speaking of tired arguments, the old “how many innocent people are you willing to kill?” Do you have any idea how long it takes for someone to actually be put to death? Probably not. Let me put it this way: the leading cause of death for someone on death row is old age. More importantly, most appeals are trying to change their sentence, not overturning the conviction. I’m sure that you think the police just run around, bopping innocent people on the head and throwing them in prison, but the court system is really stacked in the favor of the defendant. Amusingly, calling someone an apologist because they make a distinction between different circumstances is kind of ridiculous. How many innocents do you want to be harmed by criminals who shouldn’t even be on the streets? 1, 5, 50, 500? Your argument is an innocent might be put to death-mine is that an innocent will certainly be harmed by continuing to set these people loose.
Yes, I have every knowledge of how long it takes, and they STILL Get it wrong…
So how many?
I don’t want a single innocent person to be killed. Whether it’s by the justice system or a criminal is immaterial to me. I prefer to weigh the odds in favor of the justice system and not the criminal. Yeah, the system’s not perfect, but it also doesn’t show a propensity towards harming the innocent, as Johnny Rapist tends to. Of course, we could set criminals loose and arm the populace. I’m perfectly OK with that. Course, after one or two attempted rapists gets blown away, I’d imagine the crime rate would drop like a stone…
Ah, the every strident cry of ‘Kill them all,
god shall know his own’. Always a crowd pleaser
Actually not what was said, you nit. Do you ever get tired of using the same tired phrases over and over again? I could have a more meaningful discussion with a tape recorder. It’s written, so you should probably just reread it, but let me make it easy for you-I prefer the odds of the justice system over the odds of the person who’s already shown a propensity to do harm to their fellow human beings.
I feel the same about you, you screaming idiot…
“Do you ever get tired of using the same tired phrases over and over again?”
Actually, I’ve been reading the PK comments for a few months now, and I usually find Fester’s phraseology both original and apt.
No, they don’t beat you. Christians vary in the breadth and depth of their tolerance. You are just intolerant of everything.
That being said, you do amuse me at times.
I’ve never voted down someone’s equality under the law,
I’ve never asked for the parents of someone beaten to
death for his sexual preference to ‘plead for clemency’,
I’ve never told people that they are damned sinners due
to a quirk of fate, I’ve not tried to tell single mothers
what they can and cannot do with their reproductive
rights. I’ve never stood in the street with a bull horn
telling all and sundry they’re going to be damned for
eternity if they don’t have the right imaginary friend… I
have told people my opinion that they’re ignorant,
bellicose, bigoted monsters, with no more ground for
their opinion than the ravings of a psychotic Jew who
threw a fit on the road to Damascus, and that they are
wilfully ignorant of the history of their own cult. We’ve not
got into he people I’ve not historically slandered and
killed in the name of my cult… There’s a reason that some
cultures killed Missionaries on sight, and it wasn’t Satan’s
doing…
So, based on one man against a religion, I’d say the
mass of Christianity has me beaten for into ground on
the bigoted, nastiness…
Although, I do agree with him on one point. Mr Fester, you’re not the end of all wisdom, and no one is really impressed with your swiftness to rebut -everyone’s- opinion. Opinions fall outside the realm of fact and fiction, they are opinions, and that’s exactly what religion comes down to in the end, it is YOUR opinion. The problem arrives when you act on that with malevolence. All religion aside, can we all agree that living your life on a platform of hate is a bad thing? Because that’s what we’re dealing with here, no matter what you believe, when you take that opinion to a violent end, it becomes wrong.
He didn’t spend six years in Evil Medical School to be called “mister,” thank you very much….
I gave up with the history, since you’re an apologist, and bordering on a prosletyser… being a pusher for God, is just a pusher, and you spead ignorance and misery in your wake…
That’s why I don’t like it… so shove that up your Augustinian arse and like it, god botherer…
Vagabond, UF’s just insulting you. That means that he doesn’t know what to say next and that your point was probably quite good.
Anyway, your post:
All religion aside, can we all agree that living your life on a platform of hate is a bad thing?
Absolutely.
AC,
with due respect, I knew what to say next, and there was no point.
It’s like trying to discuss things with you… a pointless exercise, akin to having one head smacked repeatedly into a wall… In the end, I toned it down to waht was comprehensible… same as I do with you….
By “toning it down” you mean that you say something along the lines of “stuff your ideas up your ill informed arse -you retard!”
There’s no need to be uncivil.
you want to get into sotto voce commentary about me, expect me to piss down your leg.
And no, I meant generally speaking, he’d not have understood the import of what I was saying and I’d lost interest in being nice to savages…
As to uncivil, I don’t see ‘playing nice’ over an allegedly functional adult’s imaginary friend as being ‘civil’, just indulging a delusion I don’t share…
Wow… you’re really high and mighty for someone who trolls a political satire image blog. Truly I will never know the high honor and sophistication you must feel every time you pound out yet another poignant, intellectual comments.
_
Ah, how depressed you must feel at your own futile attempts to educate us filthy peasants. Surely we will never be so burdened with such vast knowledge and understanding… no, we just doomed to a simple life, full of happiness and care-free living, never to be forced into conversation with people so painfullt below our own intelligence; as pitiful as it obviously is.
_
Though I do wonder sometimes, between wallowing in my own filth and talking to myself… just what it must feel like to be someone like you… so what does it feel like, Mr Fester, to be a god among insects?
Pretty good actually… you may kiss my ring (_*_)
Gotta pull your head outta there first, Mr Fester
Only if you pull you head out of your’s first… but that’s not likely to happen before Skynet becomes self aware…
Now see, that’s where you’ve made your fatal mistake. While you take it upon yourself to argue with anything anyone says, I do just the opposite. I support the loosing side of an argument no matter my personal views because in the end I just like to debate. If I see a good point, I make it.
I am not a “pusher” of God in any sense of the word. I have my set of beliefs, and for the most part they fall outside the religious mainstream. I do believe in god, but I don’t call myself Christian, because I’m not and I don’t want people to view me with their prejudice notions of what a Christian is. I don’t go to church, I don’t make it my job to spread the word or convert people. If someone asks me a question, I’ll share what I know, but that’s as far as I go, and I try my very best to treat people kindly; though I make sure that my ass is covered at all times.
I don’t see that you’re doing much more with that post than again, pushing a world view that supports a delusional mind set… so, where was that mistake again?
Oh, I’ll be more than happy to explain *adjusts his glasses* See, you assume to much.
and I quote, “… being a pusher for God, is just a pusher, and you spead ignorance and misery in your wake…”
to which I replied “I am not a “pusher” of God in any sense of the word. I have my set of beliefs, and for the most part they fall outside the religious mainstream. I do believe in god, but I don’t call myself Christian…”
You assume because I have the gall to defend Christianity, that I must be a Christian, and as such, I must be the same as all other Christian are in your mind. On the contrary, however, I am -not- a Christian. On the other hand, I did say that I believe in God, so I can see your confusion. You must just lump every one who believes in some form of higher power as some sort of mental case… It’s really quite adorable how frightened you are of the unknown.
No confusion… walks like a duck, quacks like a
duck… it’s a duck…
and no, I have little fear of the unknown, since I
don’t have a God. To have a God is to have the
catch all answer to everything, that explains
nothing… that simply belies that you can’t face an
unknown or uncertain, randomly driven, future…
There has to be a controller and creator for your
world to make sense. That, sir, is true fear of the
unknown… Still, it stops you hurting other people.
I’d suggest that if the voices start telling you to kill,
then get help…
So I’m a Christian because I defend them?
Unc’s not too keen on freedom of speech.
I’m not too keen on idiots… but they can say what they like.
Still with the sotto voce comments I see… have some more piss down your leg…
All religion aside, can we all agree that living your life on a platform of hate is a bad thing? Because that’s what we’re dealing with here, no matter what you believe, when you take that opinion to a violent end, it becomes wrong.
Well, no, I’d rather see people living their life on a platform of hatred and not hurt other people, than see people Doing Good by killing, hurting, or otherwise making others suffer.
Any opinion taken to a violent end ends violently. (And okay – that is a bad thing “in my book” too.)
Or, to put it in other terms:
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
:p
One of my grandmother’s favorite phrases.
what’s the pun?
“gay abandon,” voting against Prop 8…
That should have been *for* Prop 8, which was *against* gay rights.
It’s ok, they probably had it flipped around in the British papers…
No, we understood what people were voting on… limiting peoples legal rights by legislation driven by a religious agenda. TBH, I don’t think anyone was either surprise or disappointed over here… we just expect it…
I was just kidding. But I can imagine what the rest of the world must think of the puritanization (yes, I just made that word up) of America. Makes me sick. The fundies are JUST as crazy as the jihadists they hate so much if you ask me.
A lot of people who voted ‘yes’ were not ‘fundies’… they were just Chrisitans who believe that their holy book is ‘right’ for what ever reason.
The same sort of people who are trying to convey their shock, horror and dislike for the Phelps group, although they’re really the same cloth…
It’s the issue, of ‘but of course I’m not REALLY like that…’ when, from the outside, they are…
Well, there’s that, but then you’re discounting all the people who are homophobic for whatever non-religious “reasons” (what I call the “ew” factor that seem come into play for a lot of straight people) and then the people who think gay people who aren’t, say, famous fashion designers or something should just be quiet and sit in the corner and not make a fuss…I think there’s more to overcome here than solely a matter of religious bigotry or perception of “sin”.
In other words, Fester, I think you’re oversimplifying the issue to serve your own anti-religion agenda.
@dis – i’m with you on this one… i’m a christian and i voted no on prop 8 in CA simply because i don’t think that it’s our civil government’s job to regulate the way we act in our own homes.
.
but a lot of people who are not christians voted against it simply because they don’t want to see gay people kiss in public… i’m not sure how not letting them marry accomplishes that… but…
@ ubr: Wait, you mean people who aren’t married can kiss in
public?!! A lot like the people who oppose gay marriage because “if you let them get married, then you won’t be able to tell somebody’s not gay by finding out that they’re married.”
Personally, I’ve never thought other peoples’ sexual orientation was particularly relevant unless I was interested in having sex with them, but a lot of people seem to.
It means that if you try and beat them both to death for it, if one survives, they have equal legals rights…
@Diss,
Damn it, you made me like you again…
So, the a-religious minority who have an ‘icky’ factor about same sex relations carried the day? I see… that makes it all fine… I embrace Jesus as my saviour and recant all I have said…
.
.
.
Actually, no, I just think you’re trying to apologise for being a memboer of the largest group of bigots on the planet… but then, you also know I think you’re an idiot…
@Fester: Hardly makes it fine; it’s more a matter of we can’t solve the larger problem without recognizing all the root causes. I suppose the difference here being that I see the “larger problem” as homophobia, with religion as one contributing cause; while you see the “larger problem” as religion, with homophobia as one effect.
And what I’m saying is, especially considering the narrow
margin by which Prop 8 carried in CA, that I don’t think it could have
done so without the votes of people who were just “icked out”.
I also think that one of the problems (regarding the issue of same-sex marriage) is that the state/civil marriage is so closely entwined with the religious concept of marriage in the US. I believe in some countries (France comes to mind, but I could be wrong) it’s pretty much two separate things; you have to have the civil ceremony to be legally married and then you can do a religious ceremony if you want but it doesn’t have a legal effect. We’d be a lot better off if we had a similar system.
The issue of homophobia is that, even in the
people who are a-religious are still raised in a
Christian culture. The ‘ick’ comes wholly
from religious conditioning of the culture.
Look at the penetration of ‘religious’ terms
and thought into popular culture, even in the
most vociferously atheistic among us.
Basically, the Church winds us as Rick’s
Cafe… everything ends up at Rick’s.
Otherwise, we largely agree
@ Fester: I’d actually be interested in continuing this discussion, but I can’t take the loading time on this lol anymore. A bit unorthodox, but I’ve
responded to you on a lol from last week that didn’t generate much discussion. [link]
Are you freaking kidding me? Puritanization? By what standards? It can’t be drug use, crime, illegitimate births, rampant sexuality, profanity? Please, explain.
I think you’ll find that’s always been a problem with most cultures
Unless you believe the Golden Age crap… which I can quite believe you would…
Well, I suppose that depends on your definition, but I think for our purposes I’ll say, no, every generation and culture has had it’s problems. I’m just in utter disbelief at the idea that America is somehow becoming Puritan.
Dammit, “its problems.” And that was almost civil, Fester. Did you add that last bit because the burning in your brain wouldn’t stop until you wrote something snarky?
America has always been puritan… look at the hoo haa over Janaet Jackson’s bosom… You can have as many deaths on TV as you like, but if there’s a flash of flesh, it’s the end of the world… It’s got worse in the UK too.
Someone with their face peeled off, fine… boobies? Heaven forfend!
Over here we had a programme on our
analogue Channel 4 why Dr Gunter Hagens
performed an autopsy on live television.
An America friend of mine was in the country
at the time, and evinced surprise, not at the
fact he was taking a dead German apart on
TV and putting him in to kidney bowls, but
that we had, on screen, two naked people
(along with the cadaver), with their floppy
danglies, not only flopping and dangling, but
un-pixilated or blurred… I didn’t find either
much out of the way, but I’d have thought the
autopsy would raise more of an eyebrow
than a (moderately impressive) penis and a
rather nicely shaped naked lady…
“BTW, if you invoke Augustine at this point, I shall be forced to hunt you down and strike you repeatedly, then burn down your house…”
`
The only quote of Augustine’s that I can recall was something like, “God, make me virtuous… but not yet”, which I actually thought was kind of cute. I hope this will not inspire UF to hunt me down, take away my chocolate money, and spank me with a cricket bat.
A lot of stuff people quote, unbeknownst, is Augustine, not the bible…
A little OT, my cousin likes to randomly quiz us with quotes and have us decide if it is Scripture, Shakespeare or Founding Father. It is surprisingly difficult.
These people give us Christians a bad name! God doesn’t hate America, he frowns upon some of the people, and he doesn’t care for same sex marriages, but either way, he hates the sin, and NOT the sinner (although the sin cannot be commited without the sinner) My point is, these cult loving FREAKS, wouldn’t be able to find god if he was standing on top of them.
OK, you invoked Augustine, not the Bible…
I shall be forced to beat you with rebar and burn your house down… sorry, but you were warned…
Isn’t that kind of like saying “Don’t hate the player, hate the game”?
Then again, can we really blame them? (The mass population) There’s so much crap flying around the religious circus these days, by an outside viewpoint, it’d be better to just stay out than try to make sense of any of it. On the one hand, if you are agnostic, every religious person hates you; but you’re agnostic, you don’t care. However, if you join a religion, then every OTHER religion hates you… and a good number of other sects in the SAME religion as you. The only difference is now you’re obligated to give a damn and actually defend yourself and your religion. Where’s the motivation? Also, sex feels good, in any form, so for those who don’t chant the mantra (God Hates Gays) it would seem that if it feels good, well…
and that added what to the discussion beyond ‘I’m a beleiver’?
Forgive me for finding the opinion of someone with an imaginary friend up there with the flatulation of pigs… loud, strident, and best ignored unless you’re down wind of it…
The Monkees were “Believers”, too…
Not a trace of doubt in their minds…..
Neil Diamond wrote “I’m a Believer” in 1966.
He also wrote “Red, Red Wine.” (1967)
Among other good stuff! Thanks for the reminder.
Dammit…now I’ve got “I am, I said” stuck in my head…
*pops MG on the side of the head*
There…you should have “Sweet Caroline” now. Better?
Argh! Not ‘Sweet Caroline’?! I’ve had issues with that song ever since I read that Mr. Diamond wrote it with an 11 year old Caroline Kennedy in mind!
*performs icky spider flicking dance*
Out! Out, oh ear worm!
I was a lot happier NOT knowing that.
…yet ANOTHER good song I can no longer listen to…
tangential story (but it makes sweet caroline a remotely ok song)…
there’s a local bar (howl at the moon saloon) and they do a show aclled deuling pianos. two pianists sit at two grand pianos and after their scheduled set audience members call out songs and they just play them, from memory and sing along. they’ll do this for hours upon hours every night. they’ve gotten requests for sweet caroline EVERY night, as it happens with a song you play/hear that much… you get sick of it. now the lyrics have changed a bit to reflect how they feel.
*sing* sweeeet caroliiiine
(now on the bum bum bum part) this song sucks
*resumes singing*
that’s not nearly as cool written out. but sing the song to yourself and plug that in there… it’s giggle-worthy. plus, it makes the song remotely tolerable.
The Will Ferrell’s Neil Diamond ‘Storytellers’ sorted my dislike of Sweet Caroline’ all forever…
“I wrote that song after a big show at The
Forum. Gary and I had been drinking pretty
heavily, and we were driving…”
The magic…[link]
Oh, dis, why did you mention that song?
.
Viking gal, is “ear worm” a German expression? Curious because my boyfriend started using it after a semester abroad there.
*pops MG in the head*
Okay, now it should be “Song Sung Blue.”
*twists ears and checks reception*
Dammit…”We comin’ to America”
*presses MG’s nose three times*
“Longfellow Serenade,” ahhh!!!
Funny, I was getting “Forever in Blue Jeans.”
“*twists ears and checks reception*
Dammit…”We comin’ to America””
`
Hopefully, the James Brown version?
“now I’ve got “I am, I said” stuck in my head…”
`
And no one heard at all… not even the chair.
Okay… seriously, what are you even attacking anymore? Care to explain how exactly my personal beliefs affect the validity of my statement?
Honestly, you might as well dismiss me based on my favorite colour.
“What? You like BLUE? Well screw that, YOUR opinions are no longer valid…”
Come on, man, grow up, stop rebelling against “what I got,” and either contribute to the conversation, or sit down and shut up.
You stopped contributing some time ago
As an addendum, as the one without the imaginary friend, I’d say I had less ‘growing up’ to do than you do…
Oh really? So how about you explain how I stopped contributing, and exactly how what you do -is- contributing to this conversation?
Furthermore, I need to grow up? This is my first, and probably last for a while, visit to this comment section because I’ve got what is popularly known as a real life. See, I don’t spend my hours arguing pointlessly on the internet as it is apparent you do. Apparently so because you’re fairly well known by your fellow time-wasters (no offense meant to any one else here).
So while you waste your life away here, I’ll be running a personal business and raising a family. To top it off, my “imaginary friend” will be helping me stay honest and kind to the people I encounter every day. Because in the end it doesn’t really matter your motivation for being a “good” person, all that matter is that you are.
Now, you can sit behind your computer monitor, with your smug attitude and your “holier-than-thou, except I’m not really because I don’t subscribe to that opinion and you’re an idiot because you do” mentality and tell everyone that everything they think is wrong; but at the end of the day, I don’t care. The opinion of one attention-starved individual is utterly meaningless to me.
And I know, you don’t care either, because my mere response is your ambrosia, and maybe it’s that everyone else has tried and failed, but it seems to me that no one here seems interested in explaining something to you.
You see, the persona we present on the internet is our truest self, the self with no reservations. Behind the mask of complete anonymity, we reveal who we are at our core… and it becomes apparent that you are, at your core, a completely unlikeable douche, and anyone who knows you any different knows only a lie.
Thanks for the glowing character assessment… I’m sure I’ll consider it for ooo… seconds…
As to the rest, butt hurt Christian posturing with insults… my, they really don’t make them like they used to…
As to smug, I don’t make the assertion that the creator of the universe loves me…
And i usually find people who claim to have a life, don’t…
It’s a little amusing that you keep calling me a Christian even after I told you that I’m not. Are your eyes alight, Mr Fester? Or is the problem all in your head?
Also, I’m still waiting for your explanation of how your comments -are- contributing to this conversation. and just to clarify, a contribution is constructive in some way, not just insulting everyone who posts.
I think that was one of the truest posts around here for quite some time. It’s too bad the people that should benefit from it are too thick-minded behind their veil of a computer screen to see that they should pay real attention to what is being said here. Vagabond, you may never come around the comment threads again, but I applaud you for truly understanding the truth behind most of what has been said here. Congratulations, you earn my seal of approval, imaginary friend or not. =)
I think you’re special too, Phaelin…
There’s no leftover nervine gases from somewhere?
The irony of those people is that they make me, an atheist, strongly hope in Apocalypse…
The WBC is sort of a scam. They’re a bunch of lawyers who got together and will say the most outrageous crap in the name of god in the hopes that someone will kick them in the nuts. Then they sue the hell out of them. If any town council / police force refuses to let them protest, they will sue them for their right to free speech. The best thing we can do is ignore them completely…
When they came to protest the funeral of a soldier killed in Iraq, a number of local truckers parked their 18-wheelers in legal parking zones around the church where the funeral was taking place so the parents of the soldier and other funeral goers didn’t have to see these idiots. They weren’t refused their right to protest, but no one got to see them…
Not to mention the Patriot Guard Riders organization, which organizes pretty much the same thing for soldiers’ funerals. [link] for the history of the organization, which was put together because the raving a-holes in the picture
above were disrupting funerals.
Just to add, I think it was initially just military funerals but I think they’ve done non-military ones as well if the Phelps clan is planning on showing up…
Yeah, they’ve been to a few funerals of noted Gays and Gay Rights Activists… The Patriot Riders were here in town for the funeral I mentioned above and hung out with the truckers…it was a pretty cool thing to see fire being fought with fire…
You’ve got to have a warm fuzzy for compassionate bikers!
I live in York, Pa and we have a Harley-Davidson plant here…I’ve seen all kinds of bikers…most are warm and fuzzy…
“The WBC is sort of a scam. They’re a bunch of lawyers who got together and will say the most outrageous crap in the name of god in the hopes that someone will kick them in the nuts. Then they sue the hell out of them.”
`
Step 1: Get kicked in the nuts
Step 2: ?????
Step 3: Make lotsa money
God is the enemy indeed.
heaven must be an empty place if everyone is going to hell…
according to these guys, seems that no matter what you do, you go to hell
so what would be the point of living like them?
you’d just end up in an empty heaven with the rest of them
There’s a book out now, called “The Shack” very interesting read (Christian exegesis in allegorical form) The God characters talk alot about what God is s really like, and how they are misrepresented and misunderstood by humans – for a variety of reasons. The Christ character laughs at the ‘Christian’ label, and says he wouldn’t use it if he were on Earth – it’s been so perverted. (like by the folks in the picture, and by you guys ripping all Christians by using only their example!)
How about a picture of the huge groups of Christians that are STILL making trips to the Gulf Coast, and at great cost to themselves STILL rebuilding homes and lives YEARS after Hurricane Katrina? How about posting a picture of the Christian couple I know that have been patiently loving teen addicts and prostitutes for 25 years, and bringing love, hope, and stability to their broken lives? Would this site post a pix of them, and would you all hate the God they represent? I think it’s a truer pix of who God is.
Just asking. ~Will.
My Dad gave me that book but I dropped it down the back of a chest of drawers and can’t get it out.
Oh man, I freaking hate this book, but only from the standpoint of someone who works in a bookstore. Actual conversation I’ve had with more than one person:
Customer: “I’m looking for this book I heard about at my church. I don’t know the name of it but it has a blue cover and like this shack on the front.”
Me: “The Shack?”
Customer: “No, I don’t think that’s it…”
Me: “…”
Customer: “Well I mean, maybe it is, I just don’t think so. Can’t you just look it up in the computer or something?”
Me: “…”
I think you can imagine the rest of this conversation.
Okay, here’s the new conversation:
Customer: “Blah, blah, blue cover, blah, blah shack.
You: “Right this way…”
Well, despite the initial frustration it is much more satisfying in the long run when you take them to the book and you get to watch the expression on their face when they realize I was right all along and they were a drooling, loud-mouthed moron. Then they try to cover up for their idiocy and I just get to be like, “uh-huh, can I help you find anything else” and then they shuffle off in shame.
Oh, well, since you put it that way…
A friend of mine had a job in a nursery while he was going to school.
A woman came in, telling him that she needed a plant with large
leaves that she could put in her fireplace, but that the plant had to
be okay if she forgot to water it. He told her he knew the exact
kind of plant she needed, a “Silk Plant.” She followed him to the
artificial plants before realizing what he meant.
Gotta love retail!
It’s a great book for people who are swayed by sub-Hallmark sentimentality… It’s like Stroebel is great for people who think that only guilty men are in court…
Both leave a slight ‘vomit’ taste at the back of my mouth
-
And don’t get me started on C.S. ‘I was at the last supper, I was’ Lewis…
You’ve read it?
I read a lot… I preferred ‘Tuesdays with Morrie’
Not read that one… I quite enjoyed 5 people you meet in heaven tho…
I just wasn’t sure if you’d read it since you also said you’d read the bible…
And you claim I have not? I’ve been called worse than liar, but it seems to be the way of Christians, the louder they are the more they denounce people… To repay in kind: You’re a nationalist and a retard who really shouldn’t be allowed sharps…
No, its just that, usually, you mention one verse and repeat it and repeat it and repeat it until someone takes you up on it and then find another verse and repeat it and repeat it. It just reminds me of someone who’s read random bits for the sake of argument. It seems like you’ve ignored or not read parts considered pretty important. I mean, I’ve “read” my physics notes but if you ask me a question about that motion thingy I’d be pretty lost.
As for Nationalism…. I’d probably vote for the pro-independence party (they’re, at least, nice and lefty) but I’m not some saltire-waving fool who believes it be the best country eva!!1! I hope you don’t think SNP supporters are just anti-English types. To tell the truth, I’m a little wary of Salmond and his homecoming plans… But does wanting what I think is good for my country really make me Nationalist?
As for sharps… Well, I didn’t die when I cut my fringe…
Usually the verse applies to what we’re discussing… You may like Sting of peals exegesis… I think it’s bull crap, designed to fool weak minds…
“christians are always saying ´what would jesus do?´. they don´t want to know so they can do it, they just want to know so that they can tell everyone else to do it.” –George Carlin
why are christians so fond of love if they can´t practice it?
Does this mean every Christian?
How ignorant.
(p.s. Love ya!)
Matthew
Basically, it’s an average… but when people choose to use weasel words like ‘Love ya!’ at the end of a message, with the intent of it being a balled fist, I think Carling had them pegged…
Scum sucking, God bothering leech…
How about “Love ya” at the start of a speech?
Love ya Fester. You’re always insulting the thing I love most and I’m sorry you haven’t seen or can’t see what I see. Still, I love you.
Minerva, I love you.
Jane St. Clair. I love you.
Seth, I love you.
RhoRho, I love you
DWN, I love you.
Literal, I love you.
Mothergoose, I love you.
Diss, I love you.
Atheists, I love you.
Agnostics, I love you.
Anyone else, I love you.
My dad always liked “Preach the gospel always, when necessary use words.” I think Matthew’s words were necessary and I felt these ones ought to be said too.
*continues love fest*
And ♥ to Froo, TOS, Eds, n8 and ACSIS…
Ok, now sing Kumbaiah while vomit into a bucket…
My lit teacher in high school made us sit outside in the fall leaves and sing Time in a Bottle by Jim Croce in between discussions of Ray Bradbury’s Dandelion Wine, which I think is possibly one of the worst things ever.
Wasn’t that banned under the UN Declaration of Human Rights?
If it’s not already it should be.
*feels the love, belatedly*
This made me smile. In a good way. Love you, too, AC!
*hugs*
And the rest of you, too.
You’re sweet, AC!
Luvs right back!
Sweet?
*looks over shoulder to see who you’re talking to*
Awwww, I loves my super smart Scottish teenager too!
Big hugs to my big-hearted Scotsfriend AC…
big hearted=calling people liars… (makes a note) pure gold!
I don’t claim to be big-hearted and never have but I didn’t calll you a liar.
Actually, you implied I’d lied about reading the bible… In my book, that’s calling me a ‘liar’ kthxbai!
Read the thread again please.
Thought you hated lolspeak?
I don’t feel loved so much as an attempt at placation… Or a trap. Or an old customer service trick meant to drive somebody batty…
The ‘Love Ya!’ was meant in a humorous way… Kelly said why are Christians so fond of love if they can’t practice it?
It wasn’t a balled fist.
I think it’s time for you to be introspective.
You don’t seem content, so you doubt others can be loving.
You want someone calling themselves a Christian to respond to you with hatred, so you can call them a hypocrite.
You’re full of anger, so you read hatred into things others write.
When you don’t have a point, you resort to calling names.
You denounce references from others, and refer to a comedian as your source.
I copied a passage above about love, and you comment on the author of the passage to invalidate the meaning of the verse. My point was to be kind to and love one another. Is there anything wrong with love?
Matthew
I think you’ll find that old George was more right than wrong and, this will be a hard thing for you to grasp, actually existed…
Your source is a bunch of papers that even the people who sell them as ‘real’ know were edited to death, and have spread, and continue to spread, more hate, intolerance, bigotry and ignorance than all of the Comedians since Aristophanes since concocted a fart joke…
So, cut the passive aggressive crap… you ‘love’ no one here… it’s a noise you make when they upset you…
Kelly didn’t upset me. You haven’t either, even though based on all of your entries, that’s what you were trying with everyone.
As I said above, the ‘Love Ya!’ was an attempt at humor.
When I made a comment in this thread, I wanted intelligent discourse. If I wanted name calling, I would have spoken to the children I work with.
You don’t seem to understand love, which is a shame. You obviously don’t understand ‘passive-aggressive’ either.
I respect your right to disagree with me, the Bible, anything you want.
So from now on, I’m no longer going to interact with you.
Your loss, sugar plum, cos I’ll be right there if you make the loud stupid…
for the most part. having grown up christian myself, i have seen that they focus less on the love they preach and more on how to condemn and weaken anyone who is different.
Love you.
That is not an answer, that is belittling their experience… more or less what you complain of, child.
All of them?
Be specific.
If you grew up Christian, and all Christians focus less on love and more on how to condemn and weaken, that would include you.
Did you do that? When did you stop?
Maybe that was why your experience wasn’t a good one, because according to what you seem to be saying in your posts, you aren’t capable of showing love and you prey on the weak.
Bad people do bad things. This includes religious people and non religious.
I don’t believe that Christians are better than others, but I also don’t lump all non-Christians together.
Ah, we have a weaseling preacher… I’d missed the seminary stench on this one…
Just remember that people like this form a very small minority. Just like Islam extremists, there are a very small group of Christians who are trying to make a bad name for all of us. The vast majority of us live quiet, peaceful lives where we simply try to live our beliefs and have no intent of forcing them on others or using them as a weapon. Nutjobs as shown in the picture are still news. If demonstrations like that were common place, no one would bother mentioning them.
TBH, the fact you’re defending your personal delusion doesn’t help…
Just because some insane cult members go around with signs saying stupid things doesn’t make them true. And anyone who associates said crazed cult members with all Christians is simply ignorant.
As I’ve said before, WBC are Christians, whether you like it or not. OK, they’re the Uncle Eimar of the church family, but really, 99% of Christians hold their views to some extent…
And 79,948 times a day, people make up statistics to prove a point.
And then God boy accuses me of being a liar… thankyou god boy
You’re welcome Fester. How do you presume to know what 99% of Christians believe?
What percentage of vegetarians like peanut butter? You should know, you have all of the stats.
What percentage of cat owners like to feel the cats paws rhythmically flexing as if they are nursing?
What percentage of dentists recommend Trident for their patients who chew gum?
Anyone can make up a statistic Fester.
However, arguing just for the sake of stirring people up is stupid. If someone can honestly present a cogent point for discussion, I’ll pay attention to it.
And thus godboy answers festering troll boy…
Valid point… I was probably being kind assuming there is a percentile that don’t hold Romans as the heart of their faith.
Back to you god boy…
By the way, 4 out of 5 dentists recommend Trident for their patients that chew gum.
)
GB
Five out of five English teachers would notice that you
GG–Grammar Gal
replaced “who” (correct) for “that” (incorrect), and thereby
misquoted the television commercial text.
RhoRho, you and I have always gotten along… What happened?
*sniff*
I think she’s noticed you’re a mealy mouthed cretin…
As a question, what percentage of Christians do YOU believe do not take Romans as the core of their faith? Hmmm?
They never tell you what the other dentist recommends: not to chew gum at all.
@fester: What’s your beef with the big bearded dude? Did God molest you or something? “Can you show the court, on this doll, where the Diety touched you? Let the record show that the witness is pointing to EVERYWHERE!”
These are Westboro Baptist Church people. These people are idiots and are not representing anyone who is really a Christian and who is really trying to live like Christ.
I am a Christian. If I ever saw these people picketing like this, I would junk punch every one of them (well, the guys at least).
Larry, you get the guys, I’ll punch the chicks.
i’ll get the popcorn and lawn chairs… and the video camera.
Good idea, I think we’ll want to preserve this moment for posterity.
…and sell it on pay per view…might as well make a buck or two, don’t you think?!
While its members identify themselves as Baptists, WBC is an independent church and is not affiliated with any known Baptist conventions or associations. The church describes itself as following Primitive Baptist and Calvinist principles, though mainstream Primitive Baptists reject Westboro Baptist Church and Phelps, regarding them as unaffiliated to the Primitive Baptists.[5] The views that distinguish Westboro Baptist Church are views that most Baptists and Calvinists do not recognize, and do not consider to be in any way characteristically Baptist or Calvinistic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
Uncomfortable truths simply make people make assertions they can’t back up…
Their exegeses are good, their ‘biblical scholarship’ (such as it is among the faithful) isn’t that bad… basically, they just say what everyone else in the room wants to…
It should be pointed out that the majority of Christians find this group pretty appalling. They can hardly be considered the norm for Christian behavior, which has enough problems without adding these idiots to the mix.
See above… you choose your imaginary friend, you don’t get to pick church family…
These people are not christians.
Next thing you’ll be telling us that the guys who flew those planes into the WTC weren’t Muslims.
Nonzerosum ROCKS!!
Although this does raise a point. I remember in the weeks after 9/11 there was a lot of anti-Arab sentiment where people were getting harrassed and even beaten up, and other Arabs and Muslims said that terrorists “don’t represent me or my beliefs”. I think it would be wrong to stereotype all Arabs and/or all Muslims as terrorists, suicide bombers, etc. So, does this fall into the same category? Or if it doesn’t, why doesn’t it?
Yep, same category.
Those muslims who are against terrorism but make it easy for themselves by saying “Oh well, those are just the wrong kind of muslims, in fact they’re not muslims at all!”are just as silly as those christians doing that here.
yes. we should go and smite them from the earth. oh wait… that’s not exaclty christian either…
I thought God was all about the smiting.
It’s a shame that those who took an anti-Arab stance couldn’t distinguish between race and religion. Not all Arabs are Muslims. Not all Muslims are Arabs. Logic is tough for some people.
Of course different believers have different perspectives. One Muslim will practice Islam in a different way to another Muslim and both will feel entirely comfortable with their method of practice. Just because one Muslim may believe that Allah wants him to fly planes into buildings doesn’t mean all Muslims will feel that way. Similarly, most Christians will not agree with the methods adopted by the WBC goons. However, both the fanatics who flew the planes into the WTC and the WBC congregation are all Muslims and Christians.
The complaint that those people are not “real” Muslims or Christians exposes the truth of the matter. Each and every believer determines the nature of his or her own religion. Even within the same church or mosque, individuals will have their own perspective. Of course, if the claims of religion were objectively true, everyone would be able to agree on the nature of God. However, the fact that there is total chaos in this regard (even within denominations) shows that there is nothing objective about religion. It is all in the mind of the individual.
Hear, hear.
Has anyone heard the theory that Phelps himself isn’t opposed to homosexuality, but that he organizes these protests to point out the hypocrisy and irrational hate for homosexuals within the church? I thought I heard somewhere that one of his daughters, who left the WBC, stated that her father doesn’t really believe the crap he spews.
I’d heard that before, but not buying it…even if you don’t believe the crap you spew, eventually if you spew it long enough, it becomes part of your belief system…
Although I do look forward to hearing the news that Phelps was arrested doing coke off the ass of a dead underage male hooker…
With a three-foot-rubber-d!ldo jamed up his ass while singing “Jesus Loves Me This I know”
Yeah, that’s why they picket funerals, to show the people that are mourning the loss of a loved one that they stand behind them. If you honestly believe this, you must have some serious faith in people as a whole. I commend you for this, but also know that you’re in for some seriously brutal truths. Good luck with that.
THESE PEOPLE DO NOT REPRESENT GOD OR JESUS CHRIST.
The things on their signs are LIES!
God LOVES you with a love found nowhere else in this world. The people here are like any radical sect of a religion that have little or nothing to do with the actual heart of the religion.
In the same way that most Muslims have almost nothing alike with the extremists that we see on the news every day, real Christians who truly understand the word of God have almost NOTHING in common with these people.
They are not representatives of Jesus Christ, they take a holy text that was meant to save the world with a perfect love and use it to create anger and division and hatred.
Please, please do not lump all followers of Christ in with these vermin.
Tell me how their beliefs are ‘wrong’ according to the ‘true Christians’
I’ll give you the advice I hear given to Muslims pretty much all the time. If you don’t like being lumped in with these jerks, stand up and do something about them.
Be prepared to be universally ignored on that one pal
“Christian” reactions to this LOL so far are providing much in the way of entertainment. “I’m a Christian, and I don’t agree with them, so they’re not Christians” smells a whole lot like every denomination/cult of Christ bad-mouthing every other denomination/cult. Anyone with an agenda can prove whatever s/he wants with such convoluted text, so who’s to say who’s right?
In the light of the distorted, edited and omitted nature of what may or may not be the Bible, who’s to say what anyone (including him- or herself) is? (I’m leaving out the part of the Bible that goes against judging others here.)
For all anyone knows, these whackos can be towing the Bible line.
Rho, I couldn’t agree more. One of the big problems I have with organized religion is that it is generally agenda-driven, disguised in such terms as: “Faith-based initiatives”.
While I identify myself as a Christian, and will probably get bashed by other “Christians” for it…the part of the Bible that most Christians either tend to overlook, or misinterpret completely, is the part where Christ asks us to love each other. To me, “each other” includes those you don’t like, those who are your enemy, those who differ ideologically, those of different races, those of differing sexual orientation, etc…this means that while you may not agree with them, you need to love them…which is why while I may not agree with some of the postings I read on this website, I tend to try to see the point of view of others, make my own decision, and try to repect others that way.
While I do not like “Organized Religion”, and have a very strong dislike of the hypocrisy I see in many of them, I have a basic belief that we need to care for each other while we are here. Maybe it’s all too John Lennon, but we are on this rock for a very finite amount of time, and I find it hard to spend my time, like those in the picture, dwelling on “hating” others because they are different…
So true…I think that’s because it’s the hard part.
Summed up best by Elvis Costello: “What’s so funny about peace, love and understanding…”
I must agree with Elvis Costello’s authority on the matter.
“Maybe it’s all too John Lennon”
.
Nah, it’s not John Lennon enough… :p
.
Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
That’s one of the three songs I have requested my family to play at my funeral; the other two are: Elvis Costello’s What’s so funny ’bout peace, love and understanding and Supertramp’s Logical Song…the three sum up my life, my outlook on life, and my hope of what life can become…
agreed. I’m a chirstian, but I don’t trust the agendas that are carried on by organized groups since they will only be major pains. Y’know live and let live or something….
I can’t even figure out what all they’re protesting… Are they hating on soldiers in general? The war? Do they think the soldiers are gay? I think they need to get their messaging straight–no pun intended. But seriously, if one is gonna hate, can one do it with a little more cohesion and focus? Otherwise, maybe just stick with “God hates everyone everywhere except maybe us.”
Their logic is that the war in Iraq, Katrina, AIDS, etc are all god’s punishment on the USA for not hanging Gays where they find them… It’s the same mind set that had folks praying for a McCain/Palin win, and then McCain being taken to his ‘reward’ in short order (effectively praying for McCain to die)… It’s the same mind set, just at a more lymbic level that got Prop 8 and similar legislation voted in. It’s also the reason why the Libertarians/Constitution first parties are so heavily infiltrated by the Christians… it’s easier to get a state made into a theocracy than it is the Federation.
fester, stop drinking the koolaid. you’re scaring the wildlife.
Care to add anything material to your criticism? You could start by
attempting to make a point…
you could start by coming up with something fresh and new to say instead of following fester around the forum like a sick puppy. the two of you just go around and bash on anyone who attempts to present an argument that differs from your world view. try listening to other people’s arguments before you outright dismiss them. you might learn something.
You could also stop following me round the forum like the moon faced, bile filled bladder of ignorance you are… but then not even Aesop’s scorpion could change its nature….
hahaha… see, the rho and fest tag team… can’t hold an argument unless they work together…
.
so sad…
*lack of material point confirmed*
Give me something to listen to, and I’ll gladly listen…after I deal
with the shock, of course.
that’s why you should see my comment below… it might help a bit with your current dilemma of looking like a moron…
From you, the highest form of compliment…
Thanks for that!
Most libertarians I know are pissed about the influx of the zealot…
But you’re incapable of making any effective libertarian argument, being ignorant of their purpose, their history or even the elementary stuff of what they stand for…
But please, continue to sound stupid since it’s all you’re actually good at…
yes since arguing with you and rho is such an exercise in logic…
.
what i was referring to was your reference to republicans praying that mccain would die… where in God’s name did you come up with that one?
.
and i’m not sure where you got this whole libertarians and zealots argument from. the whole premise of being a libertarian is that you believe in the rights of everyone which is something that zealots have a hard time dealing with. sure, some of the zealots might say and think that they’re libertarians, but their not.
.
the same way how you claim to be a libertarian and sh!t all over the beliefs of others on this forum. if you were really a libertarian you would monger such hate for people who believe differently than you.
*you wouldn’t*
Ah, you’re a Christian… that explains the issue…
yup. i am a christian. and your response just completely proved my entire argument.
you cannot promote the liberty of someone to share theirbeliefs and yet you claim to be a libertarian.
No, I think you’ll find your response proved mine…
The imaginary friend thing helps give weight to the opinion no end…
you’re very delusional fester.
.
libertarian means that you want everyone to have rights. you sh!t on people that you disagree with on a daily basis… you’re just a sad old man with no real friends so therefore you try to be witty on the net…
.
have a good day. may the light fall upon you one day…
Unc participates in an open discussion forum, as do
you. Grow a brain, child!
And I love you, and have a nice day, and may the
light of a thousand angel critters light your path…
open discussion forum with no openness from you and no possible chance of discussion… sounds like a great place to be…
Yeah, no possible chance of discussion, and
I’m not open, so PK is a closed forum.
Way to say absolutely nothing.
stick and stones may break my bones but your insults are childish and boring…
As are your incessant claims of ‘koolaid’ and people lying to you, , like yore actually WORTH lying to…
On the McCain imprecatory prayer… It was on the Forerunner site… Google it yourself, since I’m tired of you implying I’m a liar…
FAIL logic
Sad but true.
A cult is just a religion that hasn’t gotten old enough yet.
I am not a subscriber to any religion, but anyone who thinks these idiots are representative of Christians as a whole is crazier than they are.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about God wanting people dead who happen to serve in the same military as someone who is gay. These people do not protest at only gay soldier’s funerals. They protest at any soldier’s funeral.
Their belief is that God hates America and that our troops get killed because we have gays in the military.
Christians actually tend to be very supportive of the military. More so than we non-religious types, that’s for sure.
god has a long and noble tradition of massive collateral damage, if you actually read the bible, as opposed to what you’re told it means…
want to throw out some facts instead of your usually blithering?
Like you do? I see… Reading comprehension fail by the ‘financial consultant’
you state fact that then do nothing to back it up…
.
.
complete idiocy win by fester the snake wrangler.
If you read around, I’ve scattered stuff… my fat faced ‘triathlete’
the old “i won’t repeat myself argument…”
.
i expected more from you… oh wait, i didn’t. same old bs with childish insult tacked on the end… so much for intellectual discourse…
Well, you live down to my expetaition, including the god delusion…
I suggest you pray for me…
BTW, just for the record… I’ve made the points on THIS DANM PAGE, you lard arsed loon.
Hint: Ctrl-F or F3…
sorry, i’m too lazy and fat to want to look around the page…
.
but i do think that i owe you an apology… i am entitled to my beliefs just as much as you are entitled to yours. i don’t think that me railing on you for not accepting other’s opinions really shows the proper sentiment in that regard. and for that i apologize.
Then we are in agreement… and an unreserved apology in return.
*sings Kumbaya*
I may have to hurt you…
Rho, do you know “I Know A Song That Gets On Everybody’s Nerves”?
That would be “Seasons in the Sun”.
Honey, by Bobby Goldsboro…
“This is the Song that Never Ends”
Oh no you didn’t!!!!!!!!!!
Just noticed what you were replying to here…
READ THE OLD TESTAMENT… Everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah were evil, as was every last man, woman, child, animal and fresh water fish in the time of Noah?
You’re American, and based on battle field performance, I can see you may have problems understanding the concept of innocent casualties…
not every last man was evil… that’s why God made the ark. he also had noah tell them that the world was going to flood and no one believed him. God is merciful, but he also has a schedule to keep and rules that you have to follow… and if you want to bring up the old testament why didn’t you bring up sodom and gomorrah again? God said don’t look back or else… they went against the will of God and earned the consequences. you seem to think that God is this perfectly nice guy who is willing to let people keep testing him. the bible has nothing like that in the old testament. do you not remember the story of moses in the desert? moses did everything God wanted and then he slipped up one day so God said that he would never reach the promised land…
.
.
and quit the american bashing, you’re british. your human rights record is just as soiled as ours. look in the mirror before you start calling other people ugly.
Moses is a good one… God punished the Isrealites many times for not killing everyone, Moses gave the command to kill all that breathes, and the cattle, and the trees, but keep the virgins for your own use… God was cool with that…
Then we have the issue of fresh water fish… IF you add salt water to a goldfish bowl, it’s not a nice death… as to god being a ‘nice guy’ your god is a filthy, arbitrary, jealous, nasty tempered, despot… you’re well matched and welcome to him…
As to Human Rights, I wasn’t mentioning Human Rights, i was mentioning that your side killed more Brits than the Iraqis did…
This is why I just tell people I believe in Christ.
If I tell them I’m a Christian, I get associated with these people.
I TOTALLY agree!
The party frock defence… buying the creed buys a lot of baggage… You’re Christians… suck it up
and you’re an asshole… suck it up…
.
bad things have been done in many names… what you’re prescribing is throwing out the baby with the bath water… do you really believe that christianity has never had ANY positive benefits?
I admit I’m an asshole… you just claim to be something you’re clearly NOT…
fester, please present an argument so that we can have actual discourse… then you might find out what my political beliefs really are.
I’ve seen your unsolicited diatribes, thanks for the offer, so really, there’s little to discuss…
see below… it might offer more insight into my mentality on politics and
religion…
While I wouldn’t necessarily lump everyone in the way Fester does, I do feel that Christianity hasn’t really benefited the world whole hog either. You suggest there are positive effects of christianity as a whole. Can you support any argument that says our western society is ANY better off than it would have turned out if the native peoples had been left to develop their own folk religions? Frankly, we might still have a cleaner planet if we had. Most of the earliest religions were earth-based and revolved around the changing seasons. Even the more complex mythologies, like greek/roman and norse valued principles like honor and family. (These other faiths, I might add, were heavily borrowed from and renamed/reworded in order to convert the people to begin with)
where does negative stop?
Voting prop 8, since the bible tells you so, or picketing a soldier’s grave since you believe your imaginary friend kills soldiers in vengeance for your country legislating gay sex as lawful?
I know, fester, I know. I agree, although I try to paste together a semi-logical argument/statement and present it a little more nicely than you.
Sometime, ‘nice’ just means ‘unclear’…
Maybe. I just try (not always successfully) to frame the arguments with fair an opening for a rebuttal. They usually can’t give one, but tho opportunity exists. I’d expand on it, perhaps ad nauseum, but the forum doesn’t allow well for lengthy debate. Sorry if you thought it was unclear.
for the record i believe that the kind of people that you are speaking of are simple on CRACK. a real christian believes that you have to preach TO the sinners, not attempt to be God’s vengeful hammer… the story of levi and the pharisees comes to mind… “a man who is healthy is not in need of a physician.” disagreeing with them is acceptable, but you cannot exclude someone else from having due process and basic civil rights as well as the love of God simply because you do not agree with them… if God really wanted us to hate all those who did not agree with us would the gentiles have ever become christians?
Would Jews?
well… the original christian was jewish… so… maybe… haha…
.
but your point is well taken… the fact that Christ believed so much in peace and love for everyone has to be the main reason why christianity took off… it sure can’t be the funny robes that the priests wear…
It was commonly spread by conquest… one of the reasons the Romans didn’t like the Christians was the fighting among the sects.
The later gloss of there being a problem with Christians not worshipping the emperor as a god are mostly a post-Antiquity fiction.
Reading the (surviving) Roman record, it was mostly public order problems.
conquest? hmm… constantine was the first main christian that i can think of that actually had the power to conquer and convert anyone…
the real question comes down to how where there so many sects of christians that the romans couldn’t quell their cries?
Constantine was never a Christian. Another myth.
As I said, Constantine was more concerned with
public order than anything else. STFU, pay
taxes, stop making a nusiance to other Roman
citizens…
His stance, rather than the somewhat unruly
approach of Diocletian, was to sort of the ‘one
true faith’ then let them wipe out the others
themselves. If they’d not fallen into line, then
Constantine, who was historically a man who
used violence as tool of last resort, would have
been moved to finshing what Diocletian started,
but he was a far better organiser than Diocletian
ever was.
The reason was they were a nusiance. Like flies
round a picnic. The Empire had bigger fish to
fry than one bunch of in-fighting barbarians
who’d kill each other in the street. That is, until
it became a serious political issue. bit like the
AIDS thing the 80s. When it was just the gays,
there was little political will to move on it. When
it started involving maintream voters, then it
became an issue. Political will hasn’t changed
much in 1700 years…
and as an addendum, how many street
gangs do you need fighting for them to be
a nuisance, and why, with the might of
America, hasn’t their voice been quelled?
One last point: First Christian Emperor was Theodoseus…
i’ve heard from others than constantine was not a christian, but i’ve never seen any real proof… especially since he was the one who summoned the council of nicaea and also wrote the edict of milan creating an opening for christianity
to thrive…
.
but he did weed out many other sects of christians who did not believe as he did… starting with the donatists if i remember my liturgical classes…
He didn’t weed out a thing… that dirty work
was left to Eusebius and his cronies…
As to calling the meeting, it was due to the
imprecations of Eusibesus that the meeting
was called. The Emperor had his own
religion, and a public order issue.
As to ‘liturgical classes’, it’s like asking a
crack dealer the health benefits fo his
product, so forgive my cynicism over the
source of your information. I prefer clean
sources, not ones trying to sell me their
snake oil.
The Edict of Milan is wholly in keeping with
Constantine’s general disinterest in violence
as an end in itself. It was something of a
failed attempt at getting people to moderate
their behaviour, since the Christian cults
knew they were doing god’s work.
Thus the 1st Ecumenical council. If Eusebius
hadn’t produced the goods at Nicea,
Constantine would have been forced to
repeal it(EoM) and go after the Christians in spades.
Up until then Diocletian has simply put down
trouble by killing everyone involved and
making an example of their families… not a
good move against a death cult.
As a book recommendation “When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity during the Last Days of Rome” by Richard E. Rubenstein
in defense of my liturgical classes… you have to start somewhere. how else can you learn about your religion if you only listen to those who either are completely blind to it’s faults or completely blind to it’s virtues.
but i will check up on your book…
To me, liturgical class spells seminary, and I’d be kicked out of most semiaries for my reading…
Nah, you’d be kicked out for your
semiantics. At least for your full blown
antics at any rate.
“and as an addendum, how many street
gangs do you need fighting for them to be
a nuisance, and why, with the might of
America, hasn’t their voice been quelled?”
.
it would take quite a few before obama started rocking crip colors….
.
and unlike the romans we can’t kill whoever we please…
Arrant nonsense… the representatives of Govenernament have always been able to kill who they wanted, and still can…
and the Obama comment really just means I am wasting my time dicussing much. I shall know better in future than wasting my time with a failed preist.
failed priest? you’re really grasping at straws here.
.
the point i was trying to make was that according to you constantine deferred to the christians because they were a force that could not be dealt in any other way. then you drew the parallel that the US has plenty of gangs and we cannot exterminate them… so, for your point to be valid obama would defer to the gangs in the same way that constantine did.
.
and we went from actual discourse back to failed insults… eh.
.
and i’m not sure what govenernament is, but here in the US we frown on having our government kill people based on their beliefs… that is as long as they are US citizens…
I misread the Obama deal… apologies.
Back to the thrust. And you don’t understand Constantine, form an historical perspective if you think that… Constantine wanted internal peace, and pretty much tax revenue.
The fact that you had street gangs in the name of a God killing each other, and reporting each other for ‘treason and sedition’ was just more than he wanted to have to deal with.
And you keep insisting Constantine was a Chrisitan. Not even the ROman Church say that any more… it was accounted as a ‘holy forgery’ in the 1850s.
To put this baldly
Constantine wanted peace inside the Empire
Only the Christians were kicking up a ruck, and that was mostly by fighitng each other.
So, he got the leaders round a table, and said
‘Either you sort this, or I will’
and left a man he liked, Eusebius, in charge of the proceedings while he watched
i think what you’re referring to as the “holy forgery” was the docuemnt that the papacy ‘acquired’ which was supposedly written on constantine’s death bed giving the RCC dominion over the whole empire…
.
i’ve never heard that the RCC disavowed constantine though… i know that the eastern orthodox church still considers him a saint… would you happen to have any references i can check out?
Nothing much in current print… I’d have to dive into my stacks to even get the publisher and author details…
Part of the ‘holy forgery is the idea that Constantine was voluntarily baptised on his bed… he was unconscious, and had only shown interest in his own Mithraic cult after Nicea until his death, other than building the occasional church, when he also would build a synagogue and a temple of Mithras (the order of thise three being unimportant)
Addendum – They don’t ‘disavow’ but they do admit his role as a ‘christian’ is over egged… the only reason he’s an EO saint is that he helped set up the church and had the requisite number of miracles…
i’ve heard the baptism one before… the bishop who baptized him (the name escapes me) was of questionable morals in the first place…
Not sure why this is being swallowed
So, I’ll try it in two parts…
Part the first.
Show me a clergy man of unquestioned morals… Hell, Peter almost certainly killed Ananais and Sapphia for non-payment of what amounted to protection money…
Part the second
The church (all of them) have a bit of dogma that means the sanctity of the person performing a sacrament is secondary to the performance thereof.
There’ll be about three or four versions of that in the morning…
Having said that, the bulk of ‘othodox’ Chrisitianity came about by killing everyone one who disagreed, from the formation of the Creed, forward to the late 20th century…
And the over inflated behemoth that the church became, usurped many of the locally practiced pagan rites, renamed them, and attached a “saint” name to them. It was a lot of political maneuvering, not “the spread of peace and love” that modern christians want to believe. For example, St. Brighid, a celtic saint, was the new face put on the Brighid goddess revered in Ireland. Not tomention attaching their resurrection “rebirth” tho the estrus(fertility rites, and moving xmas to the winter to usurp Yule/winter solstice celebrations, when in reality, jesus of Nazareth was likely born in spring. All saints/all souls corresponds with halloween/winter harvest/etc as it was a night of remembrance in some european cultures. The list is endless. Probably a good number of the “saints” were made up to gradually convert the wordview of a local deities or spirits. Lourdes is VERY likely one of these.
–
The whole thing was orchestrated very carefully and skillfully by those at the top and the missionaries they sent everywhere. It was quite ingenious but very sneaky.
With all due respect to the people up here with their lives and their accomplishments, I do honestly believe that if you believe in any of the gods, yes even the big christian one, you’re an idiot, at least in that area of your life.
That said, good advice is to never argue with an idiot, they have the home field advantage. In lieu of joining this thread, I offer this one youtube instead [link] (this guys stuff is really good).
I now return you to the previous scheduled program:
Whose god
ishas the bigger dick?My vote was for Neil Diamond…
No way, he’s overcompensating for something.
that was why he had to kick that hobo to death…
Great link!
You know, if Ghandi really understood the teachings of Christ, I really don’t think he would have liked him. Jesus claimed very blatantly that he WAS and IS the Son of God, but not only the Son of God, but God himself in human form. I don’t know, anyone who doesn’t believe that Jesus was God should be pretty pissed because that heresy. Or they wouldn’t think the man is completely crazy. Either that, or Jesus was something much much worse than any evil we’ve ever seen.
this is another reason why religion is the most ridiculous thing on earth.
Right up there with a flaccid penis.
Bwa ha ha! Whaaa???
Well, they do at least look ridiculous. And feel. For a little while. :p
Hey now Jesus never condemned a flaccid penis evahhh!
These guys are exactly as much Christians as the crazy explodey people are Muslim.
I suppose you could take that either way… which is exactly how I mean it.
I hereby announce the formation of the First Church of STFU. We’re open to everybody, of all religious, social, gender, political, and economic persuasions.
All that’s required is that you follow our First Commandment, and keep it Wholly:
1. “Thou shalt STFU.”
(With paraphrased thanks to Denis Leary.)
You really should read their theology… it’s pretty much consistent with what has been practised since Nicea
Since we all know Nicea was the be-all and end-all of religious knowledge. I don’t seem to recall Christ having any sort of say as to what was included in the Bible.
He got all the red lettering. What more could he want? ;P
funny, but not haha funny.
These people make me sick! I want to tell them “Actually God loves all the people that you say he hates! He’s not too keen on you, he doesn’t like ‘fake religious people’” They are the people that make other people not want anything to do with God.
The bible is pretty unequivocal on gay people… sorry
It’s pretty clear on eating fish, wearing fabrics that contain more than one type of material, shaving, etc., but I don’t see you b*tching about all that stuff. Weak sauce, “sir”.
That’s sorted out by Paul… so, what’s your point, other than making it clear you don’t know your bible?
So, it’s okay if Paul says “you can eat stuff and not shave!” but it’s also okay to ignore the fact that the Bible repeatedly instructs not to judge and that God’s love is complete and reaches to all people?
Depends how you cherry pick, now doesn’t it… you’re glossing the bits that tells you to kill people, hate people, how people who don’t believe as you do…
Considering how what you just described would practically describe the entire process the Bible went through from the original scriptures to the end result that we read today (granted the enormous amount of version)…he might as welll do so. The Bible has been translated, misinterpreted (sometimes on purposes), changed, etc. so much…its really hard to take any of it seriously.
*versions
*well
*purpose
>.>
“They are the people that make other people not want anything to do with God.”
.
I think you’re giving them too much credit here. I doubt that anyone decides to “not have anything to do with God” based on these asshats.
Every time I think of something to say here, I read on to find that someone else has said it for me. It’s nice, I can just sit back and watch everyone argue my points for me
haha. can you at least tell us which side you would be on?
I’m a cynical atheist…
Oh noes, that’s the worst kind. :/
There’s another kind?
Lol, nope. When you’re an atheist, you’re automatically assumed to be cynical. It makes sense, since, you know, you have a cold grave to look forward to when you die, instead of a respective afterlife.
Hm. Well, there are sublabels, I guess, but yeah – cynicism is probably in the credo.
I know one who isn’t. She’s quite an anomaly.
She also wears magnets though.
That explains it then….the positive polarity of the magnet is attraction all the negative cynicism…
magnets? to keep the bad spirits away? or to keep her chakras in line?
Circulation, relaxation, etc.
Considering it only takes a few millivolts to get a neuron to fire, and it’s all movement of ions, and there’s magnetic fields all over the place due to technology, it’s a wonder we’re not all having seizures.
I don’t think magnets help at all, but I argue on her behalf frequently.
some people can be affected by stray magnetic fields but they have to be highly modulated…
Moderate fields like those in steel buildings have shown to screw with lipid metabolism in rats. As far as anything else, it takes a few megaTesla to to have much effect (neurons, blood, etc) and in that case they screw up more than they help.
But I know enough about biomagnetics to present a cohesive pro-magnet argument when someone starts trashing her
she’s a great friend, and magnets are much less harmful than Christianity.
at least she’s not hooked on the healing powers of crystals…
More likely to work than prayer…
And to add to your comment, modulated magnetic field therapy is approved in Japan.
But if there’s anything we LOVE here, it’s rehashing the same points over and over in different posts (if we’re lucky the wording changes), so, please, butt in! (It’s a great way to learn rephrasing various points as well!)
.
PS: Why does “points” always come out as “opints” when you* type?
.
*) In my Danbala-centered world, this must happen to everyone, since it happens to me.
points nad other words as well…
ton ot mentoin gonasd.
(_!_) boobies
I’m sorry, did someone call for me?
Looks more like a buttcrack to me…
Shhhhhh, he getting on in years, most of the boobs he sees looks like that.
Ick ick ick!!!!
Don’t look down your nose! One day, your nipples will also point to the floor, and a sad, sad, day that will be.
*points to breastfed child*
*points to stomach*
Don’t worry, I still think it’s icky, even if they’re not exactly pointing at the floor yet.
Yeah, I’m not an overwhelming fan of my own either, large breasts are just never going to be perky unless they’re fake. That’s my life is okay indicator: At least they’re not pointing to the floor yet!
There is a bottom, then I said ‘boobies’… what’s so hard to understand here people?
My mistake, thought you were attempting to label your artwork.
Thank God for this caption.
ami doin it rite?
This, this, a million times THIS.
These guys (WBC) also protested at the VTech funerals. But not one of the people involved was gay. O.o Psychotic b@st@rds is right.
These idiots were protesting at the funerals of people killed in the crash of Continental Flight 3407 this weekend.
God hated them too…otherwise they’d not be dead…
doesn’t the fact that they are dead mean that they were loved by God?
dying = going to heaven…
No it just means God hates Continental Airlines.
But then again, who doesn’t?
lol. very true…
Apparently not… but God shows his in love in such strange ways…
Remember the 1001 miracles on 9-11? People not getting to work on time, having to take shirts back to the shop and all those other banal things that showed ‘god was with them’ that day…
God must have hated this guy [link]. The guys ‘sin’ was he’d turned up early to set up the tables for a breakfast conference in the top floor restaurant…
God hates waiters who do a good job, it seems…
and God loves smokers… one of my friends had an interview that morning in tower 1 and he went out for a cigarette before hand… and watched the plane hit from ground level… lucky bastard.
What’s all this? FANTASTIC flame war.
Anyone who says “God” and follows it with “hates” can take their anthropomorphic, juvenile viewpoint of “God” and shut it.
ok, i thank you for showing this about the evil people in the world, but these are not actual christians, and if im wrong, i wil be very diddapointed by baptists
not a real ghandi quote. Just some clever trendy christian basher, passed along by other christian bashers
Story for you asshole:
Mahatma Gandhi is one of the most respected leaders of modern history. A Hindu, Ghandi nevertheless admired Jesus and often quoted from the Sermon on the Mount. Once when the missionary E. Stanley Jones met with Ghandi he asked him, “Mr. Ghandi, though you quote the words of Christ often, why is that you appear to so adamantly reject becoming his follower?”
Ghandi replied, “Oh, I don’t reject your Christ. I love your Christ. It’s just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
Apparently Ghandi’s rejection of Christianity grew out of an incident that happened when he was a young man practising law in South Africa. He had become attracted to the Christian faith, had studied the Bible and the teachings of Jesus, and was seriously exploring becoming a Christian. And so he decided to attend a church service. As he came up the steps of the large church where he intended to go, a white South African elder of the church barred his way at the door. “Where do you think you’re going, kaffir?” the man asked Ghandi in a belligerent tone of voice.
Ghandi replied, “I’d like to attend worship here.”
The church elder snarled at him, “There’s no room for k*ff*rs in this church. Get out of here or I’ll have my assistants throw you down the steps.”
From that moment, Ghandi said, he decided to adopt what good he found in Christianity, but would never again consider becoming a Christian if it meant being part of the church.
So, seems that the ‘Billy Graham of India’ is a ‘clever trendy christian basher’(sic)… I’m sure he’d be pleased to know you think so…
Ghandi’s words ring true unfortunately. As a christian, I am embarrassed by them. Because many people will take this picture and label us all.
As a Chrsitian, you’re a sock puppeting loon… just in case you thought we’d not noticed… so, you’re quite an advert …
*sigh* I hate it when people like this give Chritstians a bad name. God does not hate anyone.
No, but God is supposed to be consistent and some thing are an abomination, and tbh, he was a pretty nasty SOB for more than half of the book, and did kill a couple of people for not paying Peter… so, I think maybe your assertion is more wishful thinking…
But did God ever say he (assuming that God has a gender) did it out of hate? It being anything you said…I mean, after all, an insane person can kill someone without hating them, or even having one feeling or another about them. Not to say that the God of which we speak is insane…just pointing it out.
The God of the Abrahamic cults is almost certainly insane…
Haha…perhaps. If you subscribe to the thought that insanity is doing something over and over again, expecting different results, then you are right. Said God expected humans to act differently despite the fact he didn’t actually change anything about us…yeah…doesn’t make much sense.
I admit it – I haven’t read all 500+ comments on this thread. But I have to give you mine.
I live in Omaha, which is way to close to Wichita where those folks live. They show up here often. Our local news shows never mention them. The just say “the Patriot Guard will be attending” whatever funeral or other event the Church of Hate will be at. The Patriot Guard are the motorcyle guys who park between the mourners and the idiots and rev their engines to drown out the idiot.
Nebraska passed a law that limits the actions of the idiots. Everbody has the right to be an idiot in public, but those guys are so bad they even offended the ACLU, so the ACLU helped write the law. It defines a crime “disturbing a funeral”, and bans protesting within a certain number of feet of a funeral home or funeral from shortly before the funeral starts until a while after it ends. I don’t know the numbers, but the time is long enough that the early arrivals and late leavers aren’t forced to deal with the idiots. And the distance is large enough that the Patriot Riders can get between the mourners and the idiots, drowing out the yelling. Last I heard several other states were working to pass similar laws.
They came to Wichita State where I go to school last Tuesday. Very few of them (around 7 or so) showed up while about 300 students showed up to go against them. These people are just terrible, Fred Phelps should die.
My gosh, you’re all missing the point of my caption…
What was that supposed to be, my good sir?
I glad you all have your views on this, but I didn’t mean it to spark a debate.
What I meant by this was three things:
1. People take a religion and make it work for themselves most of the time.
2. Many people only act like there religion tells them to when it’s convenient.
and 3…that guy that had the sign ‘thank god for dead soldiers’…should be killed in the most inimaginable, unhuman way possible!
^.^ Very good intentions, mon cher, but unfortunately those things spark debates. Plus, the picture concerns religion…you just cannot not expect controversy about that.
Dude, you gotta love a country where this guy quotes Gandhi!
Go America!
Dear Lord, I hate this movement. These bigots tried to show up at a military funeral at my church and to use those signs. The members of my church were furious that these people would stoop so low, even harassing other Christians. Every church I know has distanced themselves far, far away from these people. I can’t judge their faith, but I am certain that they must be some kind of homophobic, hate-filled cult. They must be worshiping Zeus or satan because the Christian God expects his people to side with the oppressed and down-trodden.
Zeus never had a problem with Gay people, and Satan has always been God’s product tester (ref Book of Job…) The God of the Christians is really just a jerk… Always reminds me of that Twilight Zone where everyone had to think happy thoughts around Johnny….
I’m not quite sure on what basis you’re judging that…
Which part? there are numerous judgements there…
1)God is a jerk who behaves more like a small child at times
2) Zeus had no problem with Gay people
3) Satan was God’s product tester
Zeus was bi-curious himself, and perhaps a pedophile as well, what with his love of Ganymede.
I love God. I love Jesus. I love this post. It’s not that hard. Christians and many other other organized religions have used God or whatever diety to justify wrongdoings that said diety would not have approved of. Taking the Bible as the irrefutable, completely perfect Word of God is crazy. Man wrote the Bible, man translated the Bible, and man interprets the Bible. I like to interpret it the way that says that God loves everybody and the Jesus died for all our sins. No matter who we are. These people interpret it their way, and I’m going to hope they’re wrong.
“Taking the Bible as the irrefutable, completely perfect Word of God is crazy. Man wrote the Bible, man translated the Bible, and man interprets the Bible.”
…Thank you! You made my night. ^_^ It was devastating to learn that the Bible was not the embodiment of truth in my younger years, but that is not to say that I have given up on a faith.
It’s like (and I was trying to reply to Fester higher up the page on this very matter, but it wouldn’t work) the gay debate. Now people can point me to Leviticus and say “see? see here where it says it’s an abomination?” And I can reply, yes I see that, but man wrote that down and interpreted it as God’s will/judgment. There is also a part of Leviticus that says that moneylenders *have* to be in the temple, and I’m pretty sure JC went nuts and started flipping tables over that one. I prefer to focus on the homosexual-friendly side of things (Ruth & Naomi “cling” just like Adam & Eve, and no one will ever convince me that David & Jonathan aren’t the best gay love story ever).
It all boils down to interpretation, and I am neither conceited nor foolish enough to say “My interpretation is right and yours is wrong.” My interpretation is what I believe and yours is what you believe and we just need to get over it. As Bart Simpson once said “The little stupid differences are nothing next to the big stupid similarities”. Although, for the people in this picture, I suspect that may not be the case.
I’ve been told, but ‘Liberal’ Christians, that once an abomination, always one…
I think they’re idiots, but I find the whole story idiotic. Did as a kid, not changed much other than I now can point out the history of it as idiotic…
Stars don’t move, people don’t go to where their father was born for taxation, virgins give birth in stories of gods across the world… don’t make any of them likely it was other than the old fashioned way…
Four hours on the cross was a pretty pitiful showing for the sins of mankind, especially as the average for a man treated in pretty much the same way (save the crown of thorns) was 48 hours. The real hard men could last a week.
You want a nasty, humiliating death, try ‘The Boats’ (wiki has an entry)
Wasn’t He beaten to within an inch of His life, moreso than other crucifixion victims? You’d probably know the procedure of the actual death better than I, but from what I recall, the horrific beating wasn’t normal.
Possibly, but how much of that was added for literary dramatic flair in the centuries over which it was transcribed many times?
No clue. That’s why I’m asking the resident Anti-Bible-Thumper who has done the exhaustive research he deems necessary to disprove religion
Based on Roman reports of others, no, there was nothing usual in that sort of scourging…. The report on Simon of Gitta is interesting in that, after 5 days, he escaped, then led a minor revolt in Persia a few years later…
You have to drive the nails through the wrists, right? It would stand to reason that if they either nicked the arteries in the arms or drove right through them that it would take significantly less time than four days to a week to die. Romans weren’t exactly known for their precision in torture. Drive the nails, if we hit an artery, oh well, if not, well the guy will get his eyes pecked out by crows. It’s a win-win.
Usually it was just nerve damage… even then the shock stops you from bleeding, and the fact the arms are above the head also staunch the bleed…
-
If you have a point, you’re not making it very well, other than a notable lack of anatomy and physiology in response to trauma…
My point is that every crucifixion was different, so why should this one follow the exact template of all the others? You’re insistent that Jesus (if He existed at all) was a man, and a girly man at that, so why couldn’t a weird genetic anomaly be at fault for His early death? Why not a form of shock? I’m sure that more than one person died in less than a day from being crucified.
This also ignores the issue that a)punctured arteries would probably bleed out pretty quick whether he was in shock or not, and b) I’d imagine after being tortured for 12+ hours (real torture, Fester, with whips and thorn bushes wrapped around his head, then made to carry the own device of his execution for miles before being nailed down, not being chained in uncomfortable positions naked or having dogs bark at you) he wouldn’t be near as hardy at that point as someone who was just nailed to a tree.
12 hours? where does this 12 hours come from? You’ve been watching Mel Gibson films again…
Average was two days… 4 hours is well off average.
Seems the ‘son of god’/god in human form was something of a weakling…
I didn’t know he was trying to set a record. O.o
The argument that the crucifixion was some form atonement for man’s sins is based on it being ‘the worst death ever’, when really, it wasn’t… it was a pretty tame crucifixion by the standards of the time… the punishment involved a lot of scourging, carrying the cross up to the place it was to be erected, then nailed up
it was to put other people off doing whatever – commonly it was sedition, murder of a Roman or theft… but it never did…
Yeah, you’re right, being crucified wasn’t that bad. It’s not like a new word was invented solely to describe the sheer amount of pain that one experienced during the event (excruciating)
Not to imply that I agree with UF, but I do see his point. As far as crucifixion goes, I can think of far worse ways to die. However, I also agree with you in that being crucified is still a completely awful way to go. I can’t imagine being nailed up by my hands and feet to a relatively large cross that I carried after being scourged until my skin was ripped off…just to wait for death from either blood loss or suffocation. Definitely not a pleasant afternoon.
Wrists… the Shroud of Turin is pretty accurate, and was
validated by Japanese experiments during WW2… basically
you drive the nail trough the radius and ulna, otherwise it
rips through… The feet nail isn’t so critical, since that’s a
steadying joint to the boards, not a full on weight bearing
one…
-
Etymology lesson – excruciate is from the Latin cruciatio – meaning to torment
crucify is from old French, and mean to ‘fasten to a cross’ from the Latin crux “cross” + figere “fasten”
You were saying, Vagabond?
To quote etymonline.com’s entry for the word “excruciate”:
1570, from L. excruciatus, pp. of excruciare “to torture, torment,” from ex- “out, thoroughly” + cruciare “cause pain or anguish to,” lit. “crucify,” from crux (gen. crucis) “cross.”
So… excruciate seems to come literally from the word crucify, which comes from the cross and is used to describe immense torture and pain… as the kind your feel on the cross…
… is what I think I was saying, there, mr Fester.
Opinions differ, it seems… but yes, you are correct it does appear to have a common root after all, based on that. However ‘crux’ also meant to ‘bend’ or ‘deform’, so there is, shall we say, the historical filter to take into account, since the word didn’t enter usage until the late 1500s…
It was still a crappy crucifixion for the sins of the world to have been expunged for all time upon…
Happy now?
I understand your point, but I’m not sure that the point of the crucifixion was “worst death ever”. I think it was more about the symbolic sacrifice. So much of what’s in the Bible is symbolism as it is. And, as I said, that’s my belief and my interpretation and you are certainly welcome to your own.
Oh, I heard sermons where it was ‘the worst death imaginable’, or ‘it was worse than a normal crucifixion’, neither of which are true… It seems to be a common exegetical device to explain that it was a sacrifice for all time, yadda yadda…
Lol…how would you of done the crucifixion to make it make up for all of “man’s sins?” Just out of curiosity. =P
Ah nonsense from the sock puppet… go die…
No, I really was curious. Your cynical mind, me thinks, could come up with a pretty horrific way to die. Imagine you are killing me, if it helps.
Knife in behind the voice box, sharply move out through the flesh. Quick, silent and mostly painless… you also don’t get piss down your leg…
Why on earth would I care to inflict pain, unnecessarily… you think I’m the God of the bible or something?
Ask DeathWurmNexus, he excels in baroque, painful, and impractical…
I never implied that you did care to inflict pain…just that you could come up with an effective way of doing so. Besides, a sock has none of those things, my good sir. The most effective way to kill them is to put it in a dryer and lose them.
As I was summoned, I shall comply and give my insight.
If I was to make a sacrifice especially horrific, I would… Well I actually approve of the lashing he received because it had shards of sharp sheep bone in the tails thus digging more into the flesh. The crown of thorns was a nice touch. If they wanted to really mess with him, they could have made shallow carving on his skin detailing whatever laws they wanted to show.
If you don’t make the wounds bleed, you just aggravate the skin and that stings to all hell. Then once they got him to the cross, they could make sure he was properly clean like a “king” should look by cleaning him up with seawater, letting the salt content do its job.
Then go through with all the crucifying and stabbing, etc.
/additions
Ah, see? A reasonably horrific death. Not too hard.
Gandhi is probably one of the greatest human beings in the world. His words are spoken from truth and not from hatred unlike other people, that is why I myself is a Buddhist and find this man the greatest soul to walk the earth
I think the overarching thing here is that “the christians” say that the hate spewing is not what Jesus is actually about. I agree with them, but I can completely see why so many reject Christ because of many said christians. Except for Uncle Fester, he obviously has an ax to grind.
and if you’re a loud enough idiot on the subject, I’ll plant aforementioned ax in your head…
TBH, there are better religions on offer, and you don’t have a list of people to dislike in them…
Yeah, the only people I’ve ever met who hate religion as much as you were either fondled by priests or raised by fundamentalist southern Baptist ministers. Given your knowledge on the subject, I’d lean towards the latter (obviously not southern Baptist, but some sort of equivalent).
Of course, those people are the atheist versions of born-again Christians. Almost as annoying, too.
Wrong on all counts… I just dislike the idiocy that religion seems to bring to otherwise nominally sane people…
To call me an idiot when I’ve basically taken your side just proves that you’re on a biased hate spree, not simply fighting for something you truly believe in. Even if it wasn’t a priest playing with your junk, somebody has offended you and you’re mad at religion.
The Ax to grind was a swipe… I get you the shaft stroke of
responding to it, and no you’re whining… you really can’t please
some folks…
The child abuse allegations are always a good touch for angering the opposition, altohugh I tend to go for the target being an abuser rather than the abused, but a noble try at trolling there… you need to be more subtle… possibly set it up over a few posts. As it is, you’ve confirmed you’re simply an idiot who was looking for a reaction, which I gave you, and now you’re whining… ah well…
Interesting – Gandhi was a Hindu, yet his teachings inspired you to Buddhism? That’s not really the best advert for the efficacy of his teachings.
Oh man….I’m not even going to start on this one. Arguing with Christians is like talking to a wall; they won’t hear to a word of it. All I’m going to say is that everyone on this forum should watch the movie ‘Religulous’. That is all.
Yes talking to “the christians” is like talking to a wall,
but “In Bill Maher we trust” is completely different.
Sorry, this is unfair.
It is these bad “christians” that always get the attention.
I know some amazing people that are Christian.
I am also Christian. The more active I have been
in my church and the more I follow the teachings of
Christ, the more true happiness I have.
I’ve tried life without church and it is easier, but
I don’t feel true happiness.
(to correct everyone’s comments Christ’s real greatest suffering
was for the sins of the world in the Garden of Gethsemane not
on the cross)
Good job he had the naked youth with him to take his mind off it…
one more thing. Read the bible
before condemning it.
I suggest the King James version. It is the
lest fooled around with English version.
The ‘least fooled around with is the KJV’… there speaks a man on crack…
Great response, next time be a little more mature.
A comment like, “there speaks a man on crack” is
weak with no counter point.
I know the better version would be Hebrew,
but I’d rather make it easier on myself.
The only Hebrew is the Torah… the rest seems to have been an Aramaic oral tradition translated into Greek mostly post AD70, then transcribed by Amateurs and Special Interest Groups until the 1st Ecumenical Council, the Vulgate then became the standard at Trentino in the 1500s, although the Greek was knopwn to be better. The KJV was heavily edited in translation, using an unholy mix of the Vulgate and some poor Greek… the Tyndale Bible was actually a better version of the Gospels…
So, you’re on crack, or an idiot…
actually the Tyndale was too.
It was also a mix of Vulgate Hebrew and Greek portions.
The thing with the Tyndale version is it was sorta sloppy.
It is still unclear if Wyclif’s translations were used in it.
The KJV was done by 47 scholars.
Obviously the Hebrew version is better, but like I said,
I’m not about to learn Hebrew.
There isn’t a Hebrew one, you moron… and the KJV’s 47 scholars were far from accurate. It’s always interesting that such an anti-intellectual religion as Christianity cites ‘scholarship’ as a last resort.
The KJV was written with two purposes in mind –
1) To promote the Anglican communion over the Roman one
2) Support the role of the Monarch in the Anglican Communion.
-
So, you’re still an idiot… for a ‘good’ translation I’d suggest the
Jerusalem bible read in conjuntion with the Lamsa one, not
because the Lamsa on is *that* wonderful, but it is one of the
few decent English translations of the Coptic/Alexandrian bibles, that paid more note of the common use of Greek in Aramaic (NOT HEBREW, YOU MUPPET) translation in late antiquity. For ancillary reading, the Pre-Nicene Testament by Rev. R.M. Price (translator and editor) is interesting.
-
KJV least massed with… bollocks…
actually there is a Hebrew bible.
So keep the idiotic comments to your self.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Bible
Nice flip flop technique. First you say the Tyndale is
best and now you say other wise.
Stop trying to make everyone miserable just
because you are unhappy.
actually there is a Hebrew bible.
So keep the idiotic comments to your self.
(wiki Hebrew Bible)
Nice flip flop technique. First you say the Tyndale is
best and now you say otherwise.
Stop trying to make everyone miserable just
because you are unhappy.
It’s the OT (Tanakh used by the Church) only with a few bits of Apocrypha, so not what you’re pushing it as, and of limited interest to Christians who are not theologians… so I’d say that you’ve not really kept “The Stupid” down to a dull roar…
-
Where did I say that the Tyndale was bad, btw? I suggested further ‘better’ translations the KJV, yes, but I like more than one type of Ice cream too… I suppose that makes me ‘flip-flop’ on liking Vanilla…
I still like Tyndale (and the dialect version of ‘Wycliffe’ quite hypnotic, read by candlelight aloud… Great theatre!)
-
And I’m far from miserable, but you Christians see hell bent on spreading some form of intellect limiting disease for the longest time.
least*
So, how many are they? 50-60? Man that’s clever work getting that much attention.
bah this pic says it all doesnt it? All the christians i know are loving caring people (as are the non christians i hasten to add
) and would never in thier lives dream of doing something like this. Yeah ok so they may not think that gay marriage or whatever is right but they wouldnt attack someone for it and that stands for the vast majority of christians. People can believe what they like as long as they arent attacking other people because they dont believe the same.
The people in the picture are part of the small minority that twists thier holy text to justify their horrible actions. its not fair on people who follow the religion in a peacefull and loving manner which as i said before is the vast majority.
ok small rant over lol
Expect a comment from those that will disregard what you just said and will just generalize you to be in the same group as those in the picture. It’s sad, I realize, but I believe it will happen if it hasn’t already.
Why do you make that whining noise?
Why? |Shrugs| I don’t really know, besides that I am just sitting here, waiting for a lab exam…bored. Though, you imply that that was directed at you, or so I assume. In which case, …I suppose it could be. After all, you do have a point that these people are technically Christians. But you weren’t the only one to say so.
No, I didn’t take overly personally… I just wondered why you were whining about it?
Well, I mean, it seems a little unfair, the generalization based on label, granted of course, I do believe they all have the same over-reaching label (i.e. Christians) just that that label doesn’t assume that the label holder acts according to those that likewise hold the label. My neutral stance, or, you know, the one I think I have been taking, has had a minor breech, and for that I apologize.
and I think it’s a continuum…unless they actually say they think ‘XYZ is bollocks’ then, since they adopt the label, I think it’s safe to assume they think ‘XYZ’ dropped from God’s lips to their ear…
A valid point…
So, voting down someone equality isn’t an ‘attack’… I see…
You are simple an anti-Christ.
A true liberal would allow people
to the freedom of religion without
scolding or persecuting them.
No, I’m not a liberal, so you got that right…
You some sort of Jesus Freak?
Jesus Freak? because I’m defending
my religion?
You are against Christ, so by definition you are an Anti-Christ.
You’re defending your imaginary friend while telling me my politics… I get to call you a freak…
This is America. You don’t like
the freedom of religion, LEAVE.
He’s English.
And I would sooner remove my own eyes with a heated teaspoon than visit your hag ridden third world hell…
hag ridden? c’mon fest… there are some hot women in america… especially compared to the chicks i saw last time i was in london… haha…
You know what I mean… *prod*
I about cried, I laughed so hard at this.
Why is freedom such a
laughable thing?
(south park: you don’t like it you can
GET OUT)maybe that’s why it’s funny.
I think it was more the delivery than the content…
Although having said that there are far funnier
comments you’ve made… the KJV was a hoot!
It was the idea of telling Uncle Fester of all people to leave America if he didn’t like it. Before I even saw anyone’s response I laughed at the potential.
Brad, what-Jane-said, and FYI, this is not America,
this is the internet.
Get your fool head back in some books! Geez!
You are the one needing some
education. A website is registered.
And when it is registered, the person
that registered it is liable for the content
thereof. This is an American made website.
I think you need some education on Law.
Even the internet has jurisdictions. That is
why torrent site exist, because of the legal
jurisdiction.
Brad, there is a difference between where a
website is registered and the identity of it
*as a nation.* Some of the best contributors
on PK are from Australia, Sweden, England,
France and other countries.
In summary, PK =/= Uh-mur-ika, you
mouth-breathing mooncalf!
Brad, the man with the imaginary friend,
presuming to ‘educate’ people in
jurisprudence, when actually, he is such an
ill form’d , and ill inform’d, worshipper and
apologist of devils and depsot kings, that
I’d not hope he can use a toilet properly…
If it wasn’t so pathetic, it would be risible…
As an after thought… the last person who called me ‘Anti-Christ’ died in a freak accident involving a glazier’s lorry…
How, in all the seven hundred some odd comments generated by this lol (and yes, I did bother to read them all) have you all failed to miss the “Thank God for LED’s” poster??
Why they are so enamored with light-emitting diodes is beyond me, but surely I’m not the only one who found it funny!
I’m glad you saw that too! But no, most of this was just a flame war about something or another…
The flame war is half the fun though, I’ve been hard pressed to keep from butting in on it.
That would have been funny if it’d said “LEDs”, yes.
you’re right I think it says “IEDs”
like the bomb.
It does.
Yeah. And God hates the U.S.A but isn’t that woman wearing an American flag on her trousers?
They thrive on contradictions though…
It’s not all that contradictory. She might view herself as a patriot who loves the US, but thinks that some US policies are wrong, and therefore warning her beloved country that God hates it.
Haha, I love your logic. ^_^
It’s a favourite hobby of mine, trying to think of ways to make some sense out of behaviour that appears totally incongruous.
.
When asked about their intelligence and smartness, a vast majority of people will say they are above average. I think it is because much of what other people do, say and think appears to be utterly stupid, since you don’t have all the background.
In… it’s probably trapped in her minge
ew.
There’s an image to eat a pork pie to… no?
I’m a vegetarian…..
the grey meat and jelly… hmmmm…
I still hold that due to the caption placement it _could_ say LED’s, and therefore I’m not a complete idiot.
I certainly did not intend to imply that you are.
Sorry, that depreciating humor rather than offense…. while it may be cute, a smiley just doesn’t cut it when the humor is meant to be wry ^_^ (case in point)
that *was* depreciating humor
Apparently 11pm is too late for me to type.
you’re two hours east of me?
Which bit of the Former Soviet Union?
The bit that was never Soviet, Finland.
Jesus, but that must be cold and dark…
Somewhat, but you get used to it. We’ve only had a few -25 days this winter, and the dark is getting less every day. Winter is just a bit darker, colder, and longer than I was used to. I still miss stars in the summer, though…
Whereabouts in Finland are you? Not trying to track you down, just curious.
Oulu, where are you in Sweden?
Ah okay. I have no connections to that area of Finland.
I live in Göteborg.
My family lived there for a year _before_ I
was born, which means my swedish sucks
(prata lite svenska, förlåt). I’ve got cousins
in the Stockholm area, and some swedish-
speaking ones in Turku and Helsinki.
I somehow prefer Starfade’s world, where people stand on street corners announcing god’s love of semi-conduting and lasing materials…
It makes life so much more entertaining, and the thought will make it easier to sit through my biology didactics classes wherein someone will inevitably get offended by textbooks having evolution in them (and sadly, I live in Europe, where this isn’t supposed to happen).
IED = Improvised Explosive Device.
ie. one of the most common causes of death for American Soldiers in Iraq.
While you are right, I still say mine makes for a more amusing poster. I’m having fun attempting to think of reasons Fundies would be so thankful for LED’s.
heh, well it helps to conserve electricity (LEDs use a lot less electricity than conventional lightbulbs) so they have more to spend on large sign printers.
hahahaha, it looks like that with the caption, but if you look at the actual picture, it says “THANK GOD FOR IED’S,” not LED’s. i’m not sure what IED’s are (maybe they just misspelled AIDS), but it would be hilarious if it did say LED’s!
“i’m not sure what IED’s are (maybe they just misspelled AIDS)”
….As much as I want to, I’m not even going to touch this one.
Hey… I’m pretty sure these people are Anti-Christian protesters… not extremist christians. “Thank God for IEDs”? Yeah, I’m not thinking that’s promotional. Meaning 90% of the comments in this thread (aside from the amusing ones about the frozen hard drive) are completely misguided and useless.
In my reality The Marx Brothers still do live shows… so what ever keeps you sane, or at least justifying it all…
Please send tickets! God hates the Marx Brothers…. or was that the Jonas Brothers?
Of course you’re right, ummm. Comparing these people to anybody other than the insane is utterly ridiculous. Of course, why let the facts get in the way of Fester’s insane bias.
Yeah, it’s definitely the Jonas Brothers. God digs the elephant joke.
Actually the way you seem the feel the need to god after a dissenting voice, with ever more vitriol and violence pretty much proves my point on the ‘moderate’ you claim to be, God-boy
So please, keep it up…
Thank God the freaks at Westboro Baptist Church aren’t Christians… It pisses me off that idiots like those people reflect any part of Christianity, and it makes me sick to think that they call themselves Christians.
No follower of Christ would agree with any part of what Fred Phelps does. The point of Christianity is to love God and love other people, there’s no room for hate in that.
amen
Tell the people who voted ‘Yes’ to limit the legal equality of others, based only on the say so of a book about a failed Jewish Anarcho-Communist… That’s not ‘hate’?
OK, this apparently needs to be said-marriage isn’t a legal right. If you’re an anti-religious fundamentalist like Fester, it’s purely a social construct to ensure the legitimacy of children. Of course, if you have religious beliefs, it’s also supremely offensive to overturn the marriage laws of a state in the name of a social agenda.
Now, if you want to make the argument that married people have rights that unmarried cohabitators, I’ll play that game. But I think you should change the civil union laws to make them the legal equivalent of marriage rather than trample on the religious beliefs of other people. Of course, this whole debate isn’t about rights so much as it is remaking culture into what social “progressives” want.
And again, you simply show that you’re a bigoted retard with an imaginary friend to justify what passes for a culture… Social conservatives are such repressive beasts… The world is fine *their* way and god help the dissenter…
Repressive? Ha! Says the jackass who runs around calling everyone who disagrees with him every name under the sun. I’m about as far from a bigot as you can get, jackass. Just because I disagree with you doesn’t make me a retard or a bigot. I don’t recall supporting job discrimination, or saying gay people shouldn’t be able to adopt, or that they should all be rounded up and put into camps. I said there’s no reason to fundamentally alter the culture, and even offered an alternate solution that would make any thinking person perfectly happy. Of course, I know thinking is kinda low on your priority list when you get into one of your “hate everyone who doesn’t think like you” rants, so I’ll let it go this time. You realize every time you open your mouth you make everyone else who thinks like you look like a bunch of intolerant assholes, right?
Strange, I thought exactly the same thing of you… and now, you’ve proved me right…
Always gratifying for people to lay down in their coffin and pull the lid over them…
Yeah…I’m not entirely sure what you’re smoking, but you could make a fortune selling it in Berkeley. Please, Fester, explain to me what I’ve said that was so intolerant. And try to come up with something substantive, please. I know we’ve really reached the point in this thread where you just kinda spout vitriol without anything behind it, but try to humor me, k?
Marriage isn’t a legal right? You’re saying it’s a privelidge only given to straight people, then… which is discriminatory. ‘Marriage’ as a religious union has no place in the state. ‘Marriage’ as a state union has no business saying “Whoops! You both have a penis! You can’t be legally married!”
I’ll say it again, but slower.
Marriage is a function that gives legitimacy to children. Most (probably all) countries have added laws that attach different legal qualities to marriage. But marriage has been around for thousands of years as is. Not even the Greeks and Romans saw fit to tinker around with that, and they were big on homosexuality. So, if you are of the opinion that rights are being denied to people because they can’t get married, change the laws so that civil unions are the legal equivalent of marriage. Here, allow me to demonstrate.
Bill HR XX
Stupid ridiculously flowery name cuz why the hell not.
Civil unions confer all the rights, responsibilities, and obligations of legal marriage
Woah…a sentence. It would accomplish the same purpose (inferring rights) while not pissing off a majority of the country. Hell, Democrat House, Democrat Senate, Democrat President. It could happen tomorrow.
Right, but the legalisation of illegal drugs wouldn’t be a cultural change for the sake of change, since you want to spilff without risking having a cops finger up you bum before the end of the evening…
So, bit of a weak argument there…
-
BTW, The Greeks, Romans and the Medieval church all had sacraments foe same sex weddings…
Are you prepared to argue, then, Fester, that people don’t do illegal drugs now? I know you live on the other side of the pond, but here in CA marijuana is the #1 cash crop, and the US has now elected two presidents who have openly admitted to smoking dope, so I’m obviously not the only one who thinks so.
Have to take your word for it on the sacraments. Which Medieval church?
Are you prepared to argue that gay people don’t have stable monogamous relationships despite them being recognised by neither church nor sate?
Seems the tyranny of the majority and ‘tradition’ is the best argument you have, little boy… I’m sure you’d have gone down a storm in the civil rights days……. they can ride the same buses, WTF they complaining about? and we sometimes hang a few when we get drunk at weekends… it’s all in good fun and nuthin’ personal…
Of course not, that would be silly. Which is why I’ve offered the potential alternate solutions I have. Although, someone else pointed out that homosexuals have three times the relationships over their lifetime.
Call me crazy, but I’m not really sure “murder” and “civil unions” really fall into the same class. And your continued insistence on branding the majority with the sins of the minority grow tiresome. Uh-oh, I used the “s” word. Hopefully your wrath is not great.
and you’re really butt hurt about those filthy Democrats winning aren’t you?
Only in the sense that the amount of voter fraud that took place calls the election into question. Honestly, I didn’t much like McCain, and am a little glad he didn’t win.
You mean the Voter fraud that ACORN reported, like it was supposed to?
Or the undetected voter fraud that seems to be the way of American elections since before JFK’s landslide that old Joe bought from the mob, and nobody actually knows the scale of, since you’d be digging up Presidents to impeach them then hurl their remains in the Potomac?
If by “reported” you mean “was caught engaging in,” then yes. When you have early registration and same day voting, it becomes impossible to weed out bad ballots after the fact.
But yeah, that voter fraud, too. It’s absurd that people aren’t more excited about it. Not much of a democracy when one person doesn’t actually equal one vote, is it? Course, we’re a republic, but they both become an oligarchy after voter fraud.
And as I say, a long and noble tradition in the US… and no, I mean they did precisely what they were supposed to do… you’re making the dishonesty assertions… The system was flawed, but they still did the job of reporting it.I beleive the flaw was known, but no one really cared until it counted against the person they wanted to win…
If someone you’d wanted in had got in that way, you’d not moan… Suck it boy! That is America… happy we’ve discussed your hobby horse now God boy?
Robert, your knowledge of the alleged voter fraud
is not impressive, except for its lack.
1. Early registration /= fraud. Honi soit qui mal y
pense, as Unc would say.
2. Same-Day voting /= fraud, and, even if it did,
you have offered no numbers to prove that the
difference would have affected the outcome. If you
take into account the tremendous margin between
the two candidates, you have an uphill climb there.
Again, honi soit qui mal y pense.
3. “But yeah, that voter fraud, too.” The reason
people aren’t riled about it is that, try as you might,
you can’t make “voter fraud” out of ACORN. I
suspect you have never checked into the details,
or else you would know that the fraud involved
voter registration, not actual voting, and the
fraud was brought to the attention of the authori-
ties BY ACORN, which, in accordance with the LAW,
tagged the questionable registration forms, and
turned them in to the authorities as such. The
fraud was perpetrated by $8/hour workers who
were lazy, not by ACORN. Anyway, read an article
or two about ACORN outside of the right-wing
blogosphere, and you’ll understand why “people
aren’t more excited about it,” and no criminal
charges are pending, with the possible exception
of those against some lazy $8/hour employees.
At least learn the frickin’ difference between
“voter fraud” and “voter registration fraud.”
As I’ve pointed out before, this isn’t the first time that ACORN has been nailed for fraudulent registrations, and somehow I doubt it will be the
last. And I disagree-I bet if the fraudulent ballots were registered by The Heritage Foundation or the Young Republicans, lawsuits would have flown like you would not believe. Yeah, Fester, I hate the voter fraud over hear-drives me frackin’ crazy. And, although I know you were being sarcastic, yes, Fester, thanks.
And, rho, when you register someone to vote and they can vote on the same day, it doesn’t matter if you catch the fraudulent registration a month later, there’s no way to find those ballots ever again. Which is why this early voting BS needs to be gotten rid of. It’ll never happen, of course-I can hear the screams of “disenfranchisement” already.
I don’t really understand the “legitimacy” thing… is a child not really a child unless he/she is born to a married couple? Are they not worth as much?
For the record, I think state marriages should be abolished and replaced with civil unions – leave the marriage thing to the religious.
It’s about inheritance…
Most of that crap was abolished a few decades ago…
You asked about ‘legitimacy’… that’s where it comes from… not my fualt it’s now bull crap…
*nods* I meant that currently his argument has no ground because legitimacy doesn’t do anything except devalue children based on their parents’ actions.
I’m a social retard, hope you’ll excuse the lack of clarity
Sorry, after a while it all blurs into one brawl… Imagine the bit where John Wayne and Robert Mitchum realise they’re about to punch each other’s lights out…
I hope breaking that chair over your head didn’t do too much damage…
I’m fine, I’ve got a hard skull – I feel bad for the chair though.
It had pegged joints… I was impressed!
Well, when the government will pay for your bastards, legitimacy is less of an issue, to be sure.
I’m not really opposed to that solution, actually. It would also solve the problem. Course, that’ll still piss people off, but not nearly as many.
Ah, right… more fiscal strawman crap…
Coming from the master of straw men, I really can’t take that too seriously. And are you prepared to argue the statement was factually untrue? Income redistribution in the US is 60%. If we cut that in half, we could double education and emergency services and still have a ton of money left over.
No, you’re the one who keeps piling the straw on and then getting pissed when I say that’s nothing to do with this… you’re simply a silly little boy …
Hippies? You realise those people make you look like a drunken libertine left winger on lsd and weed?
You some sort of head injury case? Need the metal plate loosening a bit?
Reminds me of:
Mat 7:16-23 KJVR Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? (17) Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. (18) A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. (19) Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. (20) Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. (21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. (22) 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? (23) And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Yes, I can see that would be the case… it’s another get out clause for being able to denounce other sects… Origen and Irenaeus did their work well in selecting the documents for their version of the Canon…
Not all rednecks are bigots.
Not all bigots are rednecks.
The people in the photo, however, are both.
and several commentators on here… with a sprinkling of emotional cripples, idiots and apologists who dislike having it pointed out that they take the label, they take the baggage…
Does that mean you accept the 40 million martyrs at the hands of atheists during the 20th century?
I pissed in Fred Phelps gas tank one time. no lie. i wish i had done more but frankly it was the only thing i had on me. i should start carrying around vandalizing supplies just in case i see him again
Sugar or transmission fluid are great. Destroy the engine.
[LINK] Snopes on sugar in gas tank.
Hmm, some of my best friends are homosexual, I’m married to a soldier, and I’m rather impartial to the USA. I’m also a Christian. Wonder what those sign holders would think of me?
a roman candle…
Wow…way to go Westburough Baptist Church; you make Christians AND Kansas look like asses (Church located in Topeka)
And people think us Catholics are hateful extremists (we’re not)
I’d beg to differ, bearing in mind just how little taste you collectively show in what you cover up, the insane approach to contraception, ad nauseam… Not to mention the current stance about Gay people, women’s rights etc.
Now the question is – who made the 1337th comment?
Since Catholics aren’t Christians in the eyes of these asswipes, i can proudly say the same as another – i follow Christ the best i can; i’m only human.
This photo is disgraceful. No Bible-believing, Jesus loving Christian would ever do that. I am a Christian young woman at a Christian university, and I was always taught to lover the sinner, hate the sin. You can’t say these things to people and expect to win them to Christ. One of my friends is as gay as a rainbow, and he knows where I stand on homosexuality. I was also taught that the lives that our soldiers offer freely is to keep us safe and to assure our freedom. If you can’t accept the freedoms that these soldiers are giving us by there sacrifice, then you need to leave the country.
The Bible is the most well-known piece of FAN FICTION in history.
whats your proof that the bible is fiction?
this picture frustrates me. its these kind of christians that make a bad name for other christians. God does not hate. God dosent even hate satan himself. hate is a human emotion we cant change but we can learn to supress it. why people dont learn to supress their hate puzzles me, because their only making their own life worse. plus, their not only making their own life worse, but their making other peoples life wose by passing on their emotions through hateful expressions and violence. dont think that just because these people are being compete idiots mean that all other christians are complete idiots too.
It seems to me that the bulk of comments in this thread are along the lines of “Oh no, those ‘false’ Christians are making us REAL Christians look bad!”. Nobody’s is as much of a hurry to disagree with the actual POINTS that the WBC are making.
“Don’t judge us by their actions” is quite different to “We reject their beliefs.” I just wonder about your priorities, ‘true’ Christians.
It saddens me when a website that mocks the intolerance of others is itself revealed to be so intolerant. Not that I in any way support the hateful words of those here depicted, but when every picture involving a Christian (be it Catholic or Protestant; no Orthodox on here so far) is used exclusively to call them evil, and every Buddhist picture is used for a “laughing with you” type joke…
The hypocrisy bothers me.
If we’re going to preach tolerance and mutual understanding we should bloody practice it, even towards those we disagree with.
Christians tend to be meaner than Buddhists, what can I say?
Westboro Baptist Church is NOT A CHURCH; it is a CULT of hate-mongering idiots who do evil in the name of a God who loves EVERYONE and cannot hate because it is impossible for a God who IS INHERENTLY DEFINED AS LOVE to hate. This group of what I loosely term “people” are NOT Christians.
Ignorance is such a scary thing.
Thank you Gandhi.
Amen! That’s all I’m going to say.
All religions have something to say. Shame so few of the religious are listening.
I have your bad throat, you SOB (good to have you back BTW)
I saw most boobies in the period 15-19… happy times…
No he is old. Did he not say he was 50 or something?
1) No, I’m quite happy to be corrected… I expanded on the breadth of meaning since it was of passim interest… I was checking that it had been worth dragging yourself back from your important life to correct me… so, are you happy now?
2) Quite how the de-cerebrated creatures of Haiti have a claim to this, I’m unsure, but you’re the Zombie follower,not me.
3) So God sacrificed to god to appease God since it was God’s law… I see.
THis makes sense how?
4) According to the myth, he got better from the whole dying thing. If he’d stayed dead I’d have been more impressed, but no, he got better. So, rubbishy outing on the cross for 4 hours, then he gets better? feh!
5) No, since I don’t see there’s a debt to pay anywhere. People are people for better or worse…
6) My death will be singularly unpleasant and
protracted, you’ll be pleased to hear. My
genetics are such that I chose not to breed,
since it would add nothing to the species, other
than children with the sword of Damocles
hanging over their heads, and a Grandstand
view of their final descent in to madness, loss of
control of body function and motor control, while
plagued with monstrous hallucinations until
someone has the nerve to shoot them up with
morphine until they die… ?I made my peace with
that end a long time ago, but I’d not hand it on
to an innocent. There, that’ll have put a spring in
your step, safe in the knowldge that I have
God’s wrath upon me
6) Erm, no.
What did I say about the whole suspension of disbelief. You’re the kind of person who goes the the movies and loudly points out every tiny inaccuracy, aren’t you?
_
From an author’s standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. You’d better understand it if you though about the big picture for a while; but be careful not to hurt yourself.
_
Yep, I love your pain. Sorry for the delay in reply, I was busy eating my first born son. See, if you’re looking for pity, you’ve come to the wrong place (and I know you’re looking for pity because you took it upon yourself to share a wealth of personal information when it was not necessary, nor acceptable). I don’t care what degenerative disease you’re struggling with, all I care about is that you’re spending your life in a blatant attempt to make other people miserable, which is only accented by the fact that you refuse to be respectful of the dead, an act that require absolutely nothing more than basic human decency; a trait I’m beginning to doubt you posses.
Why on earth would I want your pity, I was
trying to give you a hard on…, at least a
smile of Schadenfreude, safe in the
knowledge that, above all else I’d got mine…
You can enjoy the thought while you whack
off… Handy hint sooner or later, we all get
ours…
BTW, why was my comment ‘unacceptable to you?
You said
Thus bringing the nature of my probable death to the fore. I could only assume you wanted the details for your masturbatory delight, so I indulged you…
-
Meanwhile,
Basically the people who died were ratted out
by the winners… and give it time, we’ll have Asthmatics Running for Cash on TV before long…
As a comment on your martyr fixation: you
should be Roman Catholic… they have the
whole ‘bits of dead people’ fetish.
-
And quite why my opinion ‘spreads misery’
more than yours is all in your pointed head,
Schlitze. You seem need the God not hurt
people… I’d say my acid tongue was a lot
less of a problem than your self admitted
Psychotic temper, only held in check by
believing in some invisible, punishing, god…
It was unacceptable because your only motivation for sharing personal information was to infer that I enjoy your suffering on some deep sadistic, sexual level. Now I have debated with you here, but at every moment treated you with at least basic human courtesy. I have addressed you as mister in all of ouy correspondence, and you return that by inferring that I pleasure myself to the thought of your suffering.
_
I suggested you might be beat to death based on your attitude. People who act like you tend to piss a lot of people off, and not everyone is as level-minded as I am. So as some honest advice, you should probably learn some self defense for the day someone decides you’ve done enough talking.
_
Now, since you seem quite incapable of carrying on a civil conversation, I’m gonna go ahead and move on.
You religionists do whine so, especially when you’ve been outed for the hypocrites you are…
-
Don’t leave ass marks on the door… they’re the devil to shift…
kthxbai!
Oh Jings… Apologies to those posters who don’t think 50 is old…
I don’t think 50 is all that bad, my parents are well over and they’re still running around with full heads of dark hair going on hikes and playing trivia games in bars with their friends. Hell, I almost dated a guy in his early 40s, but then I’m getting up near 30 myself. I’m sure it sounds old to someone who’s 17.
I’m not going to share my speculations if you haven’t picked up on it yourself, but I wouldn’t pass him off as an ancient just yet.
Further investigation reveals that “Uncle Fester” neglected to tell us about his birthday on the… 16th?
Happy late birthday, buttface. 
See, this is what happens when a bored student has a strange challenge and internet access… *goes back to stalking her ex*
Sorry to hear that but you knew the risk when you paid for your time…
People don’t age the same way now…
I’ve decided to die when I retire so I never have to watch daytime TV… Apparently that’s exactly what my Papa (who died a year after retirement) said….
I’d rather spend my retirement travelling and having fun, like my grandparents di before my grandmother decided to be a lump…
Once I become a miserable, lonely old woman I’ll probably euthanise myself.
I plan on living long enough to be an embarrassment to my grandchildren.
I’ve always thought having time to do some traveling would be good, too, Aed!
Ah, the argument of persecuted majority… the defence since Diocletian’s time…
You really should try a new script… It always rings hollow…
Just because you choose not to see you’re an idiot doens’t mean it’s not apprent.
Your name should be Robert Fidei Defensor… although it’s the idiotic defending the indefensible… you just plug away with ‘they’re not ALL bar stewards!’ defence… when while ever they follow the dogma, they’re exactly what I say…
Like I said Robert, you need to get out more! Try exploring the PNW – there is a church in Seattle that uses Phelps as their training manual. There is a United Methodist Church in Spokane that, while not as vocal, follows similar tenets. There are churches all over N. Idaho that makes Phelps and his bunch of crack-pots look and sound down-right liberal, and the same for parts of Montana & Utah.
For that matter of fact, try listening to the evangelical southern Baptist preachers on tv for a few days. (I seem to remember one of those tolerant, loving preachers claiming how 9-11 was the Christian G*d’s punishment on us because we allowed that gays were human too, or some such thing)
Or if you really want to walk on the wild side, go to a white supremist (sp?) rally – they sure claim to be Christians.
I hope you never do run into these sorts of people, but do some research – they do exist, and in more communities than you can probably imagine.
This is the last time I’m even gonna respond to this assinine comment.
As was pointed out by another of our fellow PKers earlier, this isn’t the world. This is the internet. And on PK, I’m no more the majority than purple Lithuanians are than Arkansas, so you saying it over and over again doesn’t make it true.
And it’s more “the actually persecuted.” We live in a society where you don’t need to be the majority to persecute someone, you just have to be loud and obnoxious enough to cow everyone else.
Oh God! It that were but true…
And I love the implication that you’re some how not ‘cowed’ by follwoing me around telling me what a nasty man I am… You really are a sad, empty child.
As I say, the Christian has played the ‘persecution’ card all the way donw its history… it still does, while voting down other people’s equality,and spreading ignorance with more virulence than tuberculosis…
You can’t be persecuted, you won, you moron…
“supremacist”
Oh, I know that those people are out there. My argument is that they’re in the minority. In fact, I’m of the opinion that the most vocal, obnoxious members of any group, be they gay, baptist, squirrel farmers, or what have you, are in the minority. I’ve seen hate, but when there’s a 24-hour “news” cycle that feeds off of conflict and anger, I can only take it with a grain of salt. More importantly, I am not that way, and it infuriates me when anyone paints in broad brush strokes to satisfy their pre-existing belief structure. As for white supremacists claiming to be Christian, I’m pretty sure I’ve never seen the passage “Love thy neighbor as yourself-unless he’s got a different skin tone. In that case, hang that spook!” Just sayin’.
Minority?
Ever been to the bible belt?
With the White supremacy thing. I have heard it argued before that dark skin is the mark of Cain, and there’s a passage about not tolerating those that have the mark of cain. If there isn’t fine, i didn’t bother to find the passage for this, my point is they just have other way of looking at the same text.
Lived in northern Texas for a year. Still never saw anything approaching this level of hate. And I would add that everyone’s a majority somewhere.
I’ve heard that argument, but obviously anyone who’s using that as an excuse hasn’t read this:
14Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
15And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
I think the real point to this particular thread of discussion, though, si that anyone will take anything and twist it anyway in order to justify themselves.