|
Post by phillymike on Dec 23, 2013 13:14:40 GMT -6
The time machine is up and running? Good Stuff!
|
|
loogs
1st Line Centre
Posts: 471
|
Post by loogs on Dec 23, 2013 13:22:49 GMT -6
I have to go and celebrate Christmas now, seeing as how it's baby Jebus's birthday and all but I've got one question for the Phil supporters...
Do you think Phil supports Blasphemey laws?....free speech my ass!
|
|
|
Post by The Unknown Poster on Dec 23, 2013 13:24:25 GMT -6
I missed the part where "we" invaded and destroyed the Taliban for saying the same thing as Phil Robertson regarding homosexuals, women and the infidels. I must have been pretty busy that month to miss that. Was that in August? I was pretty busy in August. In Phil's mind he has the right God. Who am I or anyone else to tell him different? I am As I have always said I truly fear for the individual who walks up to my children and tells them to believe in what they say or" burn in hell forever"... it's child abuse and in my kids life time it will become illegal to threaten children with eternal damnation for not believing in a sky god.In fact 50yrs from now people will look back at it as we do regarding slavery and womens rights "what were they thinking?"... *shaking head* this I promise. ps The last 2 wars the US entered were about oil, but sold as "we will free you from and get back at those religious fundamentalists for 911" ie the Taliban..... cause they have the wrong god. Your kids will be free to make thier own decisions about religion. It's not child abuse to express a religious opinion unless the child is being forced to listen to it (and even then I can't call it abuse in the sense beating or molesting is abuse). And while oil might have been on the list of motivations, it was not why the US went to war. But thats a different topic. (if you start a thread I will gladly participate...lol)
|
|
|
Post by phillymike on Dec 23, 2013 13:33:11 GMT -6
"I honestly cant remember the quote and I cant bother going through his sermons to find it, but he was more harsh about homosexuals." If you can't remember the quote, how can you honestly say it was more harsh? You can't remember it! Yet you are trying to install it to make your point? What are his remarks about blacks? What is being lost there? What about his quote: I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. Here is another one: I love all of humanity. Those quotes hold no bearing? Here is a quote that currently is erroneously being attributed to Phil Robertson, but I do think it's fitting in this situation. Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate. Rick Warren I read and listened to a lot. I believe he called homosexuals an "abomination" in one of his speeches. The point being *if* one takes the position that all he said was "its in the Bible as a sin", he does expand on that and clearly believes being homosexual is wrong which is no different from thinking being black is wrong or being a woman is wrong. His remarks about blacks were along the lines of they were happier before civil rights and that he worked with many blacks in the fields in the south years ago and they were all happy. Which when you understand the point he's making is indicative of some very deep-rooted racism. I know that to a degree, society gives a pass to some of the old southern folks who grew up in a different time but racism is racism, even if Phil is "a nice guy". You cant contribute to prejudice against a minority group *and* claim to love all of humanity. If he loved all of humanity, he would never say, imply or otherwise do anything that contributes to the victimization of people for their sexual orientation. And you certainly would detest that you comments were being used by the hate lobby. The far right Christians are using this to advance their agenda when they should be denouncing him for bringing ill repute to their legitimate beliefs. It is *not* a freedom of religion issue at all. The outcry is not an attack on religion because no one is saying he can't be a Christian or believe what he believes. it's the opposite - its homosexuals who are being attacked, regardless of how subtle and that is wrong. A lot of people agreed with Hitler. They were wrong. You "believe" he called homosexuals an abomination. His remarks about black "were along the lines of" You are not solidifying your debate peppering your views (because this is what it boils down to, it is your view, as he has his, and I have mine) with "I believe he called...", "were along the lines of..." "he can't be a Christian" His family, people that actually know him on a personal basis say the following: "Phil would never incite or encourage hate." Yet people who (i'm assuming) have never met Phil say that he is. I'll take his families word on his character and meaning over someone who's never met the man.
|
|
|
Post by phillymike on Dec 23, 2013 13:39:14 GMT -6
I have to go and celebrate Christmas now, seeing as how it's baby Jebus's birthday and all but I've got one question for the Phil supporters... Do you think Phil supports Blasphemey laws?....free speech my ass! I don't know if Phil supports Blasphemey laws. Merry Christmas to you loogs!!
|
|
|
Post by mysterypeters on Dec 23, 2013 13:58:15 GMT -6
"I honestly cant remember the quote and I cant bother going through his sermons to find it, but he was more harsh about homosexuals." If you can't remember the quote, how can you honestly say it was more harsh? You can't remember it! Yet you are trying to install it to make your point? What are his remarks about blacks? What is being lost there? What about his quote: I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. Here is another one: I love all of humanity. Those quotes hold no bearing? Here is a quote that currently is erroneously being attributed to Phil Robertson, but I do think it's fitting in this situation. Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate. Rick Warren I read and listened to a lot. I believe he called homosexuals an "abomination" in one of his speeches. The point being *if* one takes the position that all he said was "its in the Bible as a sin", he does expand on that and clearly believes being homosexual is wrong which is no different from thinking being black is wrong or being a woman is wrong. His remarks about blacks were along the lines of they were happier before civil rights and that he worked with many blacks in the fields in the south years ago and they were all happy. Which when you understand the point he's making is indicative of some very deep-rooted racism. I know that to a degree, society gives a pass to some of the old southern folks who grew up in a different time but racism is racism, even if Phil is "a nice guy". You cant contribute to prejudice against a minority group *and* claim to love all of humanity. If he loved all of humanity, he would never say, imply or otherwise do anything that contributes to the victimization of people for their sexual orientation. And you certainly would detest that you comments were being used by the hate lobby. The far right Christians are using this to advance their agenda when they should be denouncing him for bringing ill repute to their legitimate beliefs. It is *not* a freedom of religion issue at all. The outcry is not an attack on religion because no one is saying he can't be a Christian or believe what he believes. it's the opposite - its homosexuals who are being attacked, regardless of how subtle and that is wrong. A lot of people agreed with Hitler. They were wrong. Speaking of laws, looks like this thread has just proved Godwin's Law. I was expecting this to happen a lot earlier though.
|
|
|
Post by phillymike on Dec 23, 2013 14:34:02 GMT -6
A lot of people agreed with Hitler. They were wrong. Speaking of laws, looks like this thread has just proved Godwin's Law. I was expecting this to happen a lot earlier though. Classic!!! I just looked it up. That is priceless!!
|
|
|
Post by TheDeuce on Dec 23, 2013 14:34:08 GMT -6
I missed the part where "we" invaded and destroyed the Taliban for saying the same thing as Phil Robertson regarding homosexuals, women and the infidels. I must have been pretty busy that month to miss that. Was that in August? I was pretty busy in August. In Phil's mind he has the right God. Who am I or anyone else to tell him different? I am As I have always said I truly fear for the individual who walks up to my children and tells them to believe in what they say or" burn in hell forever"... it's child abuse and in my kids life time it will become illegal to threaten children with eternal damnation for not believing in a sky god.In fact 50yrs from now people will look back at it as we do regarding slavery and womens rights "what were they thinking?"... *shaking head* this I promise. ps The last 2 wars the US entered were about oil, but sold as "we will free you from and get back at those religious fundamentalists for 911" ie the Taliban..... cause they have the wrong god. People walk up to your children and tell them what to believe? Random strangers? Wow, let me know where this happened so I can avoid the place. Now excuse me while I send my kid off to the local public school where he'll be taught that it's "Happy Holidays" not "Merry Christmas", that there's no such thing as right and wrong, morality is relative, and that the teachings and beliefs that have sustained mankind for thousands of years are all to be set aside because in the last fifty years humanity has grown so much smarter. Glad I dodged the bullet of having someone else preach their beliefs to my kids. m.
|
|
|
Post by TheDeuce on Dec 23, 2013 14:40:05 GMT -6
When the Taliban say the same things regarding homosexuals , women and the infidels, we invade and destroy, so Phil just has the "right" god I assume? And when the Jets lost to Vancouver we rioted in the streets and burned police cars. (I assumed this was the thread where we make up fiction and present it as a 'fact') m.
|
|
|
Post by The Unknown Poster on Dec 23, 2013 14:40:19 GMT -6
I read and listened to a lot. I believe he called homosexuals an "abomination" in one of his speeches. The point being *if* one takes the position that all he said was "its in the Bible as a sin", he does expand on that and clearly believes being homosexual is wrong which is no different from thinking being black is wrong or being a woman is wrong. His remarks about blacks were along the lines of they were happier before civil rights and that he worked with many blacks in the fields in the south years ago and they were all happy. Which when you understand the point he's making is indicative of some very deep-rooted racism. I know that to a degree, society gives a pass to some of the old southern folks who grew up in a different time but racism is racism, even if Phil is "a nice guy". You cant contribute to prejudice against a minority group *and* claim to love all of humanity. If he loved all of humanity, he would never say, imply or otherwise do anything that contributes to the victimization of people for their sexual orientation. And you certainly would detest that you comments were being used by the hate lobby. The far right Christians are using this to advance their agenda when they should be denouncing him for bringing ill repute to their legitimate beliefs. It is *not* a freedom of religion issue at all. The outcry is not an attack on religion because no one is saying he can't be a Christian or believe what he believes. it's the opposite - its homosexuals who are being attacked, regardless of how subtle and that is wrong. A lot of people agreed with Hitler. They were wrong. You "believe" he called homosexuals an abomination. His remarks about black "were along the lines of" You are not solidifying your debate peppering your views (because this is what it boils down to, it is your view, as he has his, and I have mine) with "I believe he called...", "were along the lines of..." "he can't be a Christian" His family, people that actually know him on a personal basis say the following: "Phil would never incite or encourage hate." Yet people who (i'm assuming) have never met Phil say that he is. I'll take his families word on his character and meaning over someone who's never met the man. Im being careful because if I "quote" him and get it wrong, we will have six pages of how I was wrong and miss the point.
|
|
|
Post by The Unknown Poster on Dec 23, 2013 14:43:43 GMT -6
I read and listened to a lot. I believe he called homosexuals an "abomination" in one of his speeches. The point being *if* one takes the position that all he said was "its in the Bible as a sin", he does expand on that and clearly believes being homosexual is wrong which is no different from thinking being black is wrong or being a woman is wrong. His remarks about blacks were along the lines of they were happier before civil rights and that he worked with many blacks in the fields in the south years ago and they were all happy. Which when you understand the point he's making is indicative of some very deep-rooted racism. I know that to a degree, society gives a pass to some of the old southern folks who grew up in a different time but racism is racism, even if Phil is "a nice guy". You cant contribute to prejudice against a minority group *and* claim to love all of humanity. If he loved all of humanity, he would never say, imply or otherwise do anything that contributes to the victimization of people for their sexual orientation. And you certainly would detest that you comments were being used by the hate lobby. The far right Christians are using this to advance their agenda when they should be denouncing him for bringing ill repute to their legitimate beliefs. It is *not* a freedom of religion issue at all. The outcry is not an attack on religion because no one is saying he can't be a Christian or believe what he believes. it's the opposite - its homosexuals who are being attacked, regardless of how subtle and that is wrong. A lot of people agreed with Hitler. They were wrong. Speaking of laws, looks like this thread has just proved Godwin's Law. I was expecting this to happen a lot earlier though. Yeah except it would be far more interecting if the topic didnt involve prejudice. The law was actually an effort to restrain hyperbole and make people think logically about the issue in question. Since I made no effort to compare Phil to Hitler, the law doesn't actually apply. But nice try.
|
|
|
Post by The Unknown Poster on Dec 23, 2013 14:50:38 GMT -6
I am As I have always said I truly fear for the individual who walks up to my children and tells them to believe in what they say or" burn in hell forever"... it's child abuse and in my kids life time it will become illegal to threaten children with eternal damnation for not believing in a sky god.In fact 50yrs from now people will look back at it as we do regarding slavery and womens rights "what were they thinking?"... *shaking head* this I promise. ps The last 2 wars the US entered were about oil, but sold as "we will free you from and get back at those religious fundamentalists for 911" ie the Taliban..... cause they have the wrong god. People walk up to your children and tell them what to believe? Random strangers? Wow, let me know where this happened so I can avoid the place. Now excuse me while I send my kid off to the local public school where he'll be taught that it's "Happy Holidays" not "Merry Christmas", that there's no such thing as right and wrong, morality is relative, and that the teachings and beliefs that have sustained mankind for thousands of years are all to be set aside because in the last fifty years humanity has grown so much smarter. Glad I dodged the bullet of having someone else preach their beliefs to my kids. m. I agree with your point. I remember when I was in school and we said the Lord's Prayer every single day. Occasionally there would be a student who would stand quietly because they did not share the same beliefs. We didn't condemn that person or their actions as a sin. it's okay to be different. It generally surprises me when a store clerk or others in public wish me a Merry Christmas. I have friends of various religous backgrounds who do the same. I asked a Muslim friend about Christmas and she basically just shrugged and said they do "Christmas" in the sense that they get together with family and give gifts, despite the Christian part of it. I have a Jewish friend who's wife's family is not Jewish so his kids take part in both and no one gets into a fight. Far too many wars and deaths have happened in the name of "God".
|
|
|
Post by jetsorbust on Dec 23, 2013 15:10:47 GMT -6
Speaking of laws, looks like this thread has just proved Godwin's Law. I was expecting this to happen a lot earlier though. Classic!!! I just looked it up. That is priceless!! You know who else probably thought he could dictate how every thread on the internet would unfold?? That pompous ass Hitler!
|
|
|
Post by mysterypeters on Dec 23, 2013 15:11:40 GMT -6
Speaking of laws, looks like this thread has just proved Godwin's Law. I was expecting this to happen a lot earlier though. Yeah except it would be far more interecting if the topic didnt involve prejudice. The law was actually an effort to restrain hyperbole and make people think logically about the issue in question. Since I made no effort to compare Phil to Hitler, the law doesn't actually apply. But nice try. Godwin's Law applies to any online discussion. "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." All I was doing was pointing out that the comparison was made. The fact that you made the comparison it does not invalidate the points you made,so I don't know why the catty, "nice try" was necessary.
|
|
|
Post by The Unknown Poster on Dec 23, 2013 17:30:03 GMT -6
"Godwin said that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."
Not cattiness. Just pointing out that Godwins intent was to show the commonality of hyperbole in online debates. Hitler gets referenced because he's easily identifiable as an incredibly evil person with hatred who convinced a lot of other people to accept his opinion (and/or attracted like-minded people). I wasn't trying to exaggerate but rather show that just because some people "see his point" does not diminish the wrongness of Phil's opinion.
|
|