bleeding heart Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 As part of the Christian mythos about Satan, there is no better example of the way a Satanic figure works than that. Yeah, and in fact, part of the genius of Christianity and other faiths is this sort of self-reflexivity--unfortunately misread or at least under-applied--in which the faithful are warned that they can be fooled by their own faith into committing evil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefferiah Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 (edited) But if it a political opinion, what is the reasoning behind it? It doesn't need to have reasoning. I agree with Ron Paul on the matter that you cannot legislate morality. So as far as I am concerned, gay marriage does not affect me. If gay marriage is currently illegal in some places then making it legal is a political issue. So whether you believe it should be or not (whether your belief is based on religion or something you read in a fortune cookie) it is a political belief. I don't know what this has to do with Sarah Palin. I never said that objection to my beliefs is persecution. You are carrying out an argument with me that you must have had with someone else. Edited August 9, 2012 by jefferiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefferiah Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 (edited) I never faintly hinted at what opinions anyone should be "allowed" to have. That's not even a debate. I fully realize that. I even said as much in my post, or at least tried to communicate that I understand you were not saying anything with respect to what beliefs people are allowed to have. But a belief does not have to be rational to be political. It is political by virtue of the fact that whether or not gay marriage is legal or not is a matter of policy. People are allowed to have political opinions, legitimate or not. Not that you disagree with that. You have already said you have no argument. But just pointing out that in that respect it is political. Edited August 9, 2012 by jefferiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 (edited) It doesn't need to have reasoning. I agree with Ron Paul on the matter that you cannot legislate morality. So as far as I am concerned, gay marriage does not affect me. If gay marriage is currently illegal in some places then making it legal is a political issue. Those who believe it should be legal, and those who oppose it, both are working explicitly and absolutely from moral positions. Ron Paul's libertarianism is itself a moral position, predicated on the moral good of individual liberty. I don't see how you can atomize matters in such a way. So whether you believe it should be or not (whether your belief is based on religion or something you read in a fortune cookie) it is a political belief. Again: political beleifs have reasons behind them. I'm only askiung what they could conceivably be, as divorced from religious belief. I don't know what this has to do with Sarah Palin. I never said that objection to my beliefs is persecution. You are carrying out an argument with me that you must have had with someone else. When you said that "people are allowed to have political opinions," this was a response to me. I was only pointing out that what opinions people are "allowed" to have is not any kind of issue for me. Your later remarks suggest to me that I misread you, however. It is political by virtue of the fact that whether or not gay marriage is legal or not is a matter of policy. Sure, I get that. But I don't see how it isn't a religious issue too, only because I see no areligious objections to it. Edited August 9, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefferiah Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Again: political beleifs have reasons behind them. I disagree. But that is no problem. For me, I would define a political belief as any belief on a matter of policy. Whether you believe it because of your religious convictions or whatever, if it effects policy, then it is a political belief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefferiah Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 (edited) When you said that "people are allowed to have political opinions," this was a response to me. I was only pointing out that what opinions people are "allowed" to have is not any kind of issue for me. Your later remarks suggest to me that I misread you, however. Well, to be fair, I did not articulate it very well. Sure, I get that. But I don't see how it isn't a religious issue too, only because I see no areligious objections to it. Of course it is. People can have political opinions shaped by their religious conscience. Edited August 9, 2012 by jefferiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Well, to be fair, I did not articulate it very well. No, not a problem. It's good when posters can be civil enough to avoid going around uselessly on some little point...on which they don't even really disagree! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Look I was always ok with the "ground zero mosque" it wasn't me who wasn't ok with it. I am fine with religion doing their own things. Although when you force those beliefs on others it isn't o. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 (edited) The bannings sounds very unconstitutional. Shady is so last month on this, deliberately I suspect in order to get his silly little man agenda across. The Boston Mayor has repeatedly said he was wrong and cannot do what he hoped as it is unconstitutional Of course one can never expect shady to be honest about this. Edited August 9, 2012 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 The Boston Mayor has repeatedly said he was wrong and cannot do what he hoped as it is unconstitutional Ouch. That's gotta hurt the "poor little Chick-Fil-A's" defenders. Time to find a new boogeyman, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 No, we cannot legislate it. We can only try....by praying for our government authorities to do the right things according to God. More like according to people who translated the Bible, which was written by human beings, not God. And for us Christians to stand firmly on our ground. If you think there aren't any Christians who support equal rights - ie: marriage - for gays, think again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Identical thread... I will ask the mods to merge this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Ouch. That's gotta hurt the "poor little Chick-Fil-A's" defenders. Time to find a new boogeyman, I guess. It does take the wind out of their sail but give them time, they'll invent another one shortly. As for the idiot who got fired for dissing at the clerk, glad he got his comeuppance,and to think he was the CFO of a company and just pissed away $100G's + .Idiots like this (on either spectrum) deserve what they get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Identical thread... I will ask the mods to merge this. ...and ask members not to start identical threads... of which they are already participating in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 If you think there aren't any Christians who support equal rights - ie: marriage - for gays, think again. Indeed. I'm very good friends with a Baptist minister. She's both a feminist and supporter of equal rights for homosexuals. Not all of them are as delusional as the zealots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 It would appear, Betsy, that the percentage of "dead churches" and "false preachers" accounts for the overwhelming majority of them. Maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 (edited) When the day comes where some pro-homosexual, anti-Christian man stocks up on hand guns and assault rifles and heads on down to the Westboro Baptist Church in Florida, opening fire and killing the Phelps clan, and then, AND THEN, some atheist, lets call her Patricia Robertson, goes on her TV program viewed by millions of people every week, and says that this is what Christians deserve as a logical end result of the old phrase "and eye for an eye" found in the Old Testament, well, then I will feel like we have reached true equality. Why would you feel we've reached "true equality" if a looney blows up Westboro Baptist Church, and Pat Robertson says this is what Christians deserve? Do you mean, the looney terrorist bomber is matched by the looney Patricia Robertson? Your message is unclear. Care to explain? Edited August 10, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 (edited) Yep. Or: "Why can't our Christian children bully the gays? Sooo unfair." Christians are not bullying gays. In fact, if you really analyze it....it's the other way around. Gay Rights is being abused by radical gays/secularist....going after Christian churches (I'd like to see them try it on Muslim Mosques). The video provided by MSJ and Shady actually shows a gay supporter bullying a hapless employee of Chick Fil A. He actually hoped the group of students will do a "sit-in" and that means disrupting the establishment that's running a business. FORCING others to accept your views....is bullying. There's a big difference when one (Chick Fil A) confirms his belief and exercise his freedom to express that belief. It's quite another when one (exhibit A-guy in the video) actually goes out of his way to harrass anyone for expressing their views. That is saying, "you shut up or else." Actually, that kind of bullying is starting to show up in school. A Christian teen was bullied. Remember the Jesus T-Shirt incident that happened a few months ago? Nove Scotia, I think? Perhaps, the firm stance of Chick Fil A is a sample reaction to all the bullyings that's being perpetrated to Christianity. When Christians dig in and firmly stand their ground. Edited August 10, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Actually, that kind of bullying is starting to show up in school. A Christian teen was bullied. Remember the Jesus T-Shirt incident that happened a few months ago? Nove Scotia, I think? ya actually it was the christian teen doing the bullying the other students complained asking the school principle to stop him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 But we're not talking about "having a political belief" translates into persecuting anyone; it's when one uses that "political" [sic...actually, religious] belief to interfere with equal rights....that's the issue. Well then, your problem should not be with religion. It should be with the constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I never faintly hinted at what opinions anyone should be "allowed" to have. That's not even a debate. Christ, we're back yet again to Sarah Palin intimating that hostility to her opinions is repressing her "freedom of speech." (This is the kind of assessment made by those who have no concept of what "freedom of speech" is.) But if it a political opinion, what is the reasoning behind it? From a religious perspective, a person can toss around some Biblical quotes, express their belief that God Himself has made it clear, and so that's the genesis of their opposition. But "politically," what is the reasoning? Even the most wrongheaded and odious political beliefs have reasons, whatever their worth. A thinking person doesn't support or excoriate the welfare state...just because. The White Nationalists, jaw-droppingly ridiculous as they are, can tell you exactly why races need to be separated by national/geographical boundaries. Socialists and Randians can argue at length, and with genuine philosophical knowledge, about their respective visions for political economy. So what's the "political" objection to same-sex marriage, besides "it's our word"? What do you think about the behaviour of that man in the video harrassing the employee? Do you think that's okay? Do you support a crowd of gay supporters coming to Chick Fil A to do a sit-in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I know it wasn't me that was asked but..... What do you think about the behaviour of that man in the video harrassing the employee? Do you think that's okay? I'd say that guy was an asshat. Pure and simple. Do you support a crowd of gay supporters coming to Chick Fil A to do a sit-in? Sure why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Ouch. That's gotta hurt the "poor little Chick-Fil-A's" defenders. Time to find a new boogeyman, I guess. But the point has already been made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Why would you feel we've reached "true equality" if a looney blows up Westboro Baptist Church, and Pat Robertson says this is what Christians deserve? Do you mean the looney terrorist bomber is matched by the looney Patricia Robertson? Your message is unclear. Care to explain? Bleeding heart understood. Kimmy's probably aware enough to understand it. I'm not going to explain it to the likes of you, you Christian! In a free country I have that option. ---- Is that a better example of us moving towards equality or should I provide more examples? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 (edited) Bleeding heart understood. Kimmy's probably aware enough to understand it. I'm not going to explain it to the likes of you, you Christian! In a free country I have that option. ---- Is that a better example of us moving towards equality or should I provide more examples? You won't explain....because you can't explain! Okay, I'm not going to force you..... Edited August 10, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.