Taxing churches
Replies
-
We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
Did I strike a nerve your response is so vile and filled with hate. Not very tolerant. I've seen you hold yourself up on so many other topics standing up for others beliefs and choices unless its Christianity then its a different story. You are no different. Just like the WestBoro Church filled with hate over someone's choices, how strange.
You do have that right to make belittling and derogatory statements. I didn't call the poster I was responding to ignorant but your inference that its a fairy tale and that we are silly suggests that all Christians are ignorant morons. So Im guessing since we have stooped to name calling that's your way of debating. you have nothing valid to offer so lets just make up lies and call names.
You dont know me or the church I frequent and you couldn't be further from the truth. The church I was a member of 2 years ago had about 15 total families in attendance. On a Sunday morning there would be maybe 40-50 people. I was actively involved in the administration. I know exactly how much money came in and where it went. I know exactly how much our pastor was making per week. I know how much money and time was spent giving to others. This Church, I'm sure it was solely there to rake in the cash.
Id love for you to come and protest my current church I'm sure you would see a response that you weren't quite expecting. The service would probably be halted so that we could go out and talk with you.
No one in my church is required to give money. Money isn't a requirement for getting into heaven. I could go to my church for the rest of my life and never give a dime. Id still go to heaven. It wouldn't be right of me to do that, but I could.
There is nothing rude about talking with people about things you believe in. I dont prohibit you from doing it and I dont even frown on it. Come protest! Its your right. I think its WestBoro Baptists right to do what they do....They are in extremely poor taste and its disgusting the reasoning they do it. But they have that right.
But if I stop you on the street and ask you if you have a few minutes to answer some questions and you say yes and I talk to you about Christianity and your eternity how is that rude of me? If you dont want to talk walk away. That's not rude of me that's ignorant of you for not knowing when you dont want to listen anymore. The same is true of politics. If I dont want to listen to your bleeding heart liberal drivel I leave the thread or I debate. I dont call my Lawyer and say....HE MADE ME LISTEN TO HIS LIES!!!
If you dont like whats on TV Brett turn the channel dont cry about it to your neighbor.
If you dont like the way the US constitution works Ill bet another country would love to have you.
There it is. You don't just want to be able to discuss your viewpoint/religious beliefs. You insist they be respected. Sorry, that's not part of the deal. Like I said, YES you have the right to these beliefs, you even have the right to express these beliefs to strangers on a Saturday morning by knocking on their door and handing out propaganda.
I never said religious believers were ignorant morons. You inferred that. You accuse me of name calling though I did no such thing. You say you're perfectly free to tell everyone your religious views but since I don't share those views my opinions are hate filled.
You're perfectly content to think of Zeus as a myth. Or that Mohammed was a false prophet. But let someone feel that way about your beliefs and they're the ones who are intolerant and hateful.
Like I said in my first post, yes you are free to believe as you'd like and even share that belief with others. But I do not have to like it, listen to it or respect it. THAT'S the part most religious believers don't seem to get.
You say it yourself. You have the right to stop strangers on the street and drone on about your religious beliefs to them, if they walk away they're ignorant (not how that word is used).
Believe whatever you'd like. You can even tell me about it. But I don't have to care. I am free to walk away. There are more than a few nuts yelling on corners here in the city about Lady Gaga being the *kitten* of Babylon and the end times coming soon. I laugh at them as I go about my day, actually contributing to society in a meaningful way while they quote their silly verses.0 -
Freedom OF religions *is* freedom FROM religion.
LoL no it isn't!!! you have no right to never be exposed to religion. You do have a choice though. Stay locked up in your spider hole.
And the fact that you would say that is out right offensive. Every person in the US has the right to practice their religion as they see fit and they also have the right to speak to others about it. They also have a right, and in christian religions, a duty to God to help those in need and support the local community as an outreach. You Do not have a right to never hear about someone else s religion
You have zero right to Isolate others because you dont want to be exposed to religion. Get Real
Yay, straw man arguments are fun! In no way did I mention isolating others. Actually yes, I do have a right to never be exposed to religion. Think of it is a null set. You can have a set of religious beliefs, one happens to be empty and the other happens to have something in it. Having no religion *is* taking a stance on religion, and I have a right to not have anyone else's religion forced on me.
You have no particular right to speak *to me* about anything. You have a right to freedom of speech. You have no particular right to be listened to by me or anyone else. Anyone's duties to a Christian God are irrelevant. Your call to witness and covert are only meant to be permitted, not aided by the law.
Oh look he took a logics class in high school *claps*
No you dont have a right to, never be exposed. Disagreeing doesn't make the statement untrue. No one is forcing it on you. If you were captured and tied up and forced to listen that's one thing. But no one can stop me from approaching you on the street and starting a conversation and the only thing you can do is walk away. OMG you were exposed start a SCOTUS case Quick!!! You have zero right to never be exposed. I have a right to speak to you about anything I want and in turn you have a right to walk away as soon as I open my mouth. But know you dont have a right to never be exposed. If I walk up to you and say, "Jesus Loves you." There is nothing you can do; NOTHING. I have the right to say that. If I consistently Harass you that's harassment not exposure to religion. ...and actually your attempt to prohibit anyone from speaking about a religion in public so you dont have to be exposed to it IS in fact Isolating them. You dont want to be exposed isolate yourself.If you think you can tax churches all you will find happening is that churches will disband and turn into smaller groups meeting in homes and when that happens the churches will only begin to grow and get stronger.
So? And really, no church is going to do that. And as far as pastors preaching about morality goes in a legal/governmental context, you seem to feel as if there's a greater connection to law and morality as there is or should be. QED if we look at your apparent views on freedom of religion.
You cant tax a church that doesn't exist and yet the things taking place will continue to take place and in fact increase. Taxing the church will break them up and make the Church (the people) more prolific and stronger. Why wouldn't they do that? Thats the way the early church started and that is the way the church functions in nations that restrict religion. Privately held meetings in peoples homes. More to the point. Small churches will do it immediately cause they cant afford otherwise. Large churches are more in it for the profit but that is why they will disband because its less profitable.
Nearly all laws on the books legislate morality. That's the point...Here is this law its here to make you act appropriately according to society. Weather its my morality or your morality that's the question of whose morality is getting legislated. All laws are based on someones view of what is moral and right.
You only have the right to say something at me in public, without government interference. That's it. This isn't just about free speech regardless. Legislating morality (see prop 8) does, in fact, force religion on the masses for no justifiable reason. Feel free to read up secular humanism if you need more hints on how to be moral without being religious.
And your random assertions about what churches would do while being taxed are baseless, if for no other reason than we don't live in the past. The argument "Why wouldn't they do that?" doesn't exactly hold up. For instance, they might not do as you suggest because they don't feel that they need to. That's why. Thanks for the clap on logic class. Technically, it was freshman English, though. Perhaps you should go back to HS yourself.
My ability to wear noise cancelling head phones while religious zealots, falsely claiming to be Christians, blather on about Jesus's love without actually practicing it equates to me having the right to never be exposed to religion.
Be bitter if you like. It doesn't really matter. Since you seem to be fond of mocking people, try this out. Religious conservatives are losing ground, and I think I'll just sit back and continue to enjoy the show.
[/quote]
As for my right to speak at you thats all I was ever saying your ability to listen is not in my control. Do what you wish.
In my brief review of prop 8 which I was unfamiliar with, I'm assuming you mean California prop 8 and the Marriage protection proposition, I see no specific reference to religion at all. Your unrelated correlation that this particular piece of legislation is based on religious morality is obtuse. There are a whole slew of non-religious people that think its wrong too. You cant say, "Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious" That's not true at all. Just because other people in this country believe that homosexuality is immoral does not make them religious.Legislating morality (see prop 8) does, in fact, force religion on the masses for no justifiable reason. Feel free to read up secular humanism if you need more hints on how to be moral without being religious.
The most you could even speculate about is, "Prop 8 is supported by individuals who believe gay marriage to be immoral" Morality does not equal religion.
This Assertion isnt random its based on the assertion both you and Brett have made in that Religions are only out for Money...If what you say is true they they would do what makes the most sense. disband the organization and avoid paying the tax. Unless they are willing to pay the tax so they could continue to make Political statements. However I know this is not the case for most Churches that I have ever been involved with. They would in fact dissolve the organization. Congrats on passing Freshman english. Ill bet your teacher and parents were proud.And your random assertions about what churches would do while being taxed are baseless, if for no other reason than we don't live in the past. The argument "Why wouldn't they do that?" doesn't exactly hold up. For instance, they might not do as you suggest because they don't feel that they need to. That's why. Thanks for the clap on logic class. Technically, it was freshman English, though. Perhaps you should go back to HS yourself.My ability to wear noise cancelling head phones while religious zealots, falsely claiming to be Christians, blather on about Jesus's love without actually practicing it equates to me having the right to never be exposed to religion.
Falsely claiming to be Christians?? How can you know another mans heart? Only god knows. I would like to know what you think it means to be a christian and how you determine if someone is a false christian. Also how do you know a random person on the street doesn't practice the love Jesus teaches? your making Assumptions that you have no proof of in fact they are borderline the same types of assumptions that racists and homophobes make of the people they hate. Zero knowledge of the people and false statements made publicly to justify your own hate.
You cant proclaim that a random passerby on the street doesn't practice the love of Jesus Christ Or is falsely claiming being a Christian. SERIOUSLY?
I'm not mocking anyone. I believe you started the "Yay, Straw man logic" point which actually wasn't even accurate. I'm standing up to the mockery which spews from your mouth of Christianity. Additionally I'm not bitter. I dont hold any contempt in my heart toward you only sadness for the hate that you hold.0 -
Hmm ya it would be nice if you were a decent human being and were respectful of other peoples belief systems. But you at the very minimum should grant the person some respect. I didnt insist anything. Keep being who you are, disrespctful to religions.
There it is. You don't just want to be able to discuss your viewpoint/religious beliefs. You insist they be respected. Sorry, that's not part of the deal. Like I said, YES you have the right to these beliefs, you even have the right to express these beliefs to strangers on a Saturday morning by knocking on their door and handing out propaganda.
No you saidI never said religious believers were ignorant morons. You inferred that. You accuse me of name calling though I did no such thing. You say you're perfectly free to tell everyone your religious views but since I don't share those views my opinions are hate filled.
What were suggesting when you said these people wasted their time on fairy tales? What were you suggesting when you said the people were "silly"? I think it wasn't me that inferred I think you were pretty clear. Twist and veil it how you choose. your opinions are clear but dont put your statements back on me as my own. You made them stand up for them....wasted their time listening to fairy tales. Jesus never existed and if he did was probably a homosexual. The church you frequent exists mostly to collect money from silly people scared of dying. So they try to bribe their way into a paradise that was clearly dreamed up by someone not very bright.
Again more inaccuracies about me... do you have a secret book about thing you think I believe?You're perfectly content to think of Zeus as a myth. Or that Mohammed was a false prophet. But let someone feel that way about your beliefs and they're the ones who are intolerant and hateful.
I never said you had to respect the religion but dont respect me or anyone else because they voice their belief. The way it sounds is you would like everyone to just put there head down and be little hamsters on the wheel of life not speaking with anyone about anything.Like I said in my first post, yes you are free to believe as you'd like and even share that belief with others. But I do not have to like it, listen to it or respect it. THAT'S the part most religious believers don't seem to get.
Can you quote where I said this?You say it yourself. You have the right to stop strangers on the street and drone on about your religious beliefs to them, if they walk away they're ignorant (not how that word is used).Believe whatever you'd like. You can even tell me about it. But I don't have to care. I am free to walk away. There are more than a few nuts yelling on corners here in the city about Lady Gaga being the *kitten* of Babylon and the end times coming soon. I laugh at them as I go about my day, actually contributing to society in a meaningful way while they quote their silly verses.
Yup I agree you dont have to care and you dont have to listen. I love how you take this extreme thing like crazy street preachers and make all Christians fall in to that same category.0 -
In my brief review of prop 8 which I was unfamiliar with, I'm assuming you mean California prop 8 and the Marriage protection proposition, I see no specific reference to religion at all. Your unrelated correlation that this particular piece of legislation is based on religious morality is obtuse. There are a whole slew of non-religious people that think its wrong too. You cant say, "Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious" That's not true at all. Just because other people in this country believe that homosexuality is immoral does not make them religious.
The most you could even speculate about is, "Prop 8 is supported by individuals who believe gay marriage to be immoral" Morality does not equal religion.
Except that prop 8 was financially supported by the mormon church on the order millions of dollars. Thus religion played a financial role, even a significant financial role, in legislating morality. I would go so far as to assert that it violates one's right to marry, same-sex or otherwise, but that case hasn't been settled yet.
How the California state rule as it did on the issue of standing is beyond me, but that's neither here nor there. Standing may be irrelevant anyway, and it's certainly not all that relevant to this discussion. So treat that part of it as a rant if you like.
There is a correlation between prop 8 religious morality. It's undeniable.This Assertion isnt random its based on the assertion both you and Brett have made in that Religions are only out for Money...If what you say is true they they would do what makes the most sense. disband the organization and avoid paying the tax. Unless they are willing to pay the tax so they could continue to make Political statements. However I know this is not the case for most Churches that I have ever been involved with. They would in fact dissolve the organization. Congrats on passing Freshman english. Ill bet your teacher and parents were proud.
I've made no such assertion (that religions are in it for the money). You're confusing what you're inferring with what I've said.
My position is, and has always been this: if Churches want to play a role in governance, they get to pay piper. I also happen to think that if a Church is going to benefit from government services without paying taxes for it, they should at least be required to prove that they're giving back to the community. It would be flatly ridiculous to assume that all churches do by necessity.Falsely claiming to be Christians?? How can you know another mans heart? Only god knows. I would like to know what you think it means to be a christian and how you determine if someone is a false christian. Also how do you know a random person on the street doesn't practice the love Jesus teaches? your making Assumptions that you have no proof of in fact they are borderline the same types of assumptions that racists and homophobes make of the people they hate. Zero knowledge of the people and false statements made publicly to justify your own hate.
Let's also state that you have no idea to what Christians I'm talking about. I've "been exposed" to Christians who both believe in the death penalty and making abortion illegal. I'm sorry, but that's hypocritical. It's false. I would only think to judge a Christian by her or his own standards...of which there are apparently many and conflicting viewpoints even among Christians. That fact only strenghens my view.I'm not mocking anyone. I believe you started the "Yay, Straw man logic" point which actually wasn't even accurate. I'm standing up to the mockery which spews from your mouth of Christianity. Additionally I'm not bitter. I dont hold any contempt in my heart toward you only sadness for the hate that you hold.
Of course you did, and you're aware of that. You even bothered to "*clap*" at my mention of a straw man and proceeded to mock the reference. It was a straw man, by the way, the person I had quote, who had quote men, was arguing against a conlusion/statement that I had never made. It's tatic you, yourself, seem to employ with some regularity. Apart from being inflammatory, it's also fallacious.
For example, you said "You cant say, 'Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious'".
I never said that or even implied it. You argued against that statement as if I had made it when I hadn't. You employed a straw man. As a side note, there really isn't such a thing as "gay" marriage. The marriage between a man and a women is identical to a marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman--at least as far as the law is concerned.0 -
Hmm ya it would be nice if you were a decent human being and were respectful of other peoples belief systems. But you at the very minimum should grant the person some respect. I didnt insist anything. Keep being who you are, disrespctful to religions.
I am a decent human being, you can believe in talking snakes or not and I'll never believe that. Doesn't make me less of a decent person. It means I have a functioning brain.What were suggesting when you said these people wasted their time on fairy tales? What were you suggesting when you said the people were "silly"? I think it wasn't me that inferred I think you were pretty clear. Twist and veil it how you choose. your opinions are clear but dont put your statements back on me as my own. You made them stand up for them.
I am an atheist. I believe there is no truth to religious stories. People who don't want their beliefs to be called silly shouldn't have silly beliefs.
Again more inaccuracies about me... do you have a secret book about thing you think I believe?You're perfectly content to think of Zeus as a myth. Or that Mohammed was a false prophet. But let someone feel that way about your beliefs and they're the ones who are intolerant and hateful.
Sorry to be inaccurate about what I assumed you believe. So how long has Zeus been a real deity in your eyes? I'm interested because followers of Zeus are so very rare these days. Or maybe it's Allah you follow, since I was wrong about one of the two.
I thought you said you were a Christian? Because IF you are a Christian you simply must believe there is no truth to the greek gods and that the prophet Mohammed was a false preacher. Please enlighten me, but I know it can't be more than one of these options as they are exclusive of each other.I never said you had to respect the religion but dont respect me or anyone else because they voice their belief. The way it sounds is you would like everyone to just put there head down and be little hamsters on the wheel of life not speaking with anyone about anything.
I can respect someone for having the courage to voice their belief. But, again, I don't have to respect that belief. Everyone has beliefs. A lot of them are dumb. Racists have beliefs and pedophiles have beliefs.. they're not getting any respect from me. I tend to respect ideas I agree with. Not ones I think are patently wrong. Everyone is like this.
What I want is everyone to understand that. You can have any belief you'd like. I do not, under any circumstances, have to respect it. If it's a good and true belief it'll stand on it's own regardless of my opinion on the matter.Yup I agree you dont have to care and you dont have to listen. I love how you take this extreme thing like crazy street preachers and make all Christians fall in to that same category.
You are the one who said you have the right to go up to strangers on the street and begin preaching at them. Why WOULDN'T I compare that to a crazy street preacher?0 -
Sorry im only responding to this because you didnt really respond you only spun the rest and didnt actually answer my questionOf course you did, and you're aware of that. You even bothered to "*clap*" at my mention of a straw man and proceeded to mock the reference. It was a straw man, by the way, the person I had quote, who had quote men, was arguing against a conlusion/statement that I had never made. It's tatic you, yourself, seem to employ with some regularity. Apart from being inflammatory, it's also fallacious.
For example, you said "You cant say, 'Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious'".
I never said that or even implied it. You argued against that statement as if I had made it when I hadn't. You employed a straw man. As a side note, there really isn't such a thing as "gay" marriage. The marriage between a man and a women is identical to a marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman--at least as far as the law is concerned.
Your right I was mocking you :blushing:
It wasnt a straw man. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man - A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position
You said
From - used as a function word to indicate physical separation or an act or condition of removal, abstention, exclusion, release, subtraction, or differentiation <protection from the sun> <relief from anxiety>Freedom OF religions *is* freedom FROM religion.
I said
You arent granted Exclusion from religion by way of the constitution.]LoL no it isn't!!! you have no right to never be exposed to religion
The constitution says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Those are mandates to the Federal government not mandates to the citizenry. And even if they were they still wouldn't apply as Im not preventing you from practicing nor am I forcing the government to make you practice. So my response to you was in direct response to your statement No straw man tactic was used at all in the quote you called a straw man.
you cant call something a straw man tactic just because the word From was replaced with the word exclude. That is by definition the words meaning as you can see. I didn't misrepresent anything you said. Nor was anything I said false in my response.
This statement was made after you called it a straw man not before. And I was Paraphrasing what you said. Lets compare.For example, you said "You cant say, 'Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious'".
You said, "legislating morality forces religion on masses..." which actually is a straw man tactic to what I said. When applied to your example you are claiming that prop 8 is legislation that imposes religion on the masses. I didn't say this you did. You are saying that the legislation is forcing religion based on heavy support from a religious group and that's entirely false. you are making an inaccurate claim like, 'Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious'" That's the implication you set forth.. Legislating morality (see prop 8) does, in fact, force religion on the masses for no justifiable reason. Feel free to read up secular humanism if you need more hints on how to be moral without being religious.
Gay is a descriptor in "gay marriage" the same way that Virginia is a descriptor for Virginia Drivers license. If I didn't say Virginia then you wouldn't know I was referring to that specific states license. you woudl just assume it was a drivers license. It maybe a CDL or a motorcycle or a Alaskan teen permit. you dont know unless I use the describing word.
The reason the descriptor is necessary is because weather you agree or disagree its still illegal in many states. And the general consensus is Marriage is between a man and woman. Most opinion polls side with Man/woman not same sex. and as far as the law is concerned even in my state Iowa where its technically still illegal Its being perpetrated as legal. the law on the books still reads Marriage shall be between a man and a women. The court ruled that it was wrong but the law has not yet been revised so its technically still illegal. They have a case precedent but case precedent isn't law its only a ruling that's another argument entirely.0 -
I am an atheist. I believe there is no truth to religious stories. People who don't want their beliefs to be called silly shouldn't have silly beliefs.What were suggesting when you said these people wasted their time on fairy tales? What were you suggesting when you said the people were "silly"? I think it wasn't me that inferred I think you were pretty clear. Twist and veil it how you choose. your opinions are clear but dont put your statements back on me as my own. You made them stand up for them.
[\quote]
Like I said...
Again more inaccuracies about me... do you have a secret book about thing you think I believe? [/quote]You're perfectly content to think of Zeus as a myth. Or that Mohammed was a false prophet. But let someone feel that way about your beliefs and they're the ones who are intolerant and hateful.
Sorry to be inaccurate about what I assumed you believe. So how long has Zeus been a real deity in your eyes? I'm interested because followers of Zeus are so very rare these days. Or maybe it's Allah you follow, since I was wrong about one of the two.
I thought you said you were a Christian? Because IF you are a Christian you simply must believe there is no truth to the greek gods and that the prophet Mohammed was a false preacher. Please enlighten me, but I know it can't be more than one of these options as they are exclusive of each other.
[/quote]
I am a Christian. That doesn't mean I dont think these other deities or what ever dont exist. My belief is that God the father of Jesus Christ is the one true God. He is King of Kings all other deities and demons and demigod will one day bow before him weather they like it or not. I'm not claiming any deities dont exist Nor am I claiming that Mohammed wasn't a prophet. He may have been.
So you think its acceptable to flush the Koran? Or urinate on a nativity? I just want to be clarify where your tolerance starts and stopsI never said you had to respect the religion but dont respect me or anyone else because they voice their belief. The way it sounds is you would like everyone to just put there head down and be little hamsters on the wheel of life not speaking with anyone about anything.
I can respect someone for having the courage to voice their belief. But, again, I don't have to respect that belief. Everyone has beliefs. A lot of them are dumb. Racists have beliefs and pedophiles have beliefs.. they're not getting any respect from me. I tend to respect ideas I agree with. Not ones I think are patently wrong. Everyone is like this.Yup I agree you dont have to care and you dont have to listen. I love how you take this extreme thing like crazy street preachers and make all Christians fall in to that same category.
You are the one who said you have the right to go up to strangers on the street and begin preaching at them. Why WOULDN'T I compare that to a crazy street preacher?
Funny thing is I have never in any of the things Ive posted said anything about approaching people and preaching to them...Or even knocking on a door and bothering you in your home. I have only ever spoken of asking you questions or asking if you had a moment to talk. So why are you suggesting I said those things when I didn't?
Edited to fix a "quote tag"0 -
We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
I like how you basically say you hate people who generalize their feelings about certain groups of people, but then you go do it yourself.
Also, heads up--to compare the Qur'an and the Bible in the terms of "book-burning," you need to realize that to Muslims, the Qur'an is, literally, the word of God. The Bible, to Christians, is not. It's pretty common knowledge that the Bible was written and created by men, whereas the Qur'an is, to Muslims, the literal word of God.0 -
I am a Christian. That doesn't mean I dont think these other deities or what ever dont exist. My belief is that God the father of Jesus Christ is the one true God. He is King of Kings all other deities and demons and demigod will one day bow before him weather they like it or not. I'm not claiming any deities dont exist Nor am I claiming that Mohammed wasn't a prophet. He may have been.
Could you please just answer the question? Does Zeus exist or not? Zeus is the father of the gods. He can't really exist as well as the God of the Christian bible. It's one or the other (or more realistically, neither). Listen I know tolerance and respect is big to believers but are we really in such a place that we can't even deny the existence of long ignored gods?
I'll go first to show you how easy it is. Zeus is not real. We've seen the top of Mt. Olympus and he ain't there. If I am wrong he is free to strike me down with a lightning bolt. Yet for some reason I'm not worried.So you think its acceptable to flush the Koran? Or urinate on a nativity? I just want to be clarify where your tolerance starts and stops
Yes, though I think it's a really bad thing to do to your plumbing. The Koran is a book. A nativity is a display. "They're symbols and I leave symbols to the symbol-minded." I mean it's rude to urinate on anything besides a toilet. But that's probably clogged with Koran's at this point...Funny thing is I have never in any of the things Ive posted said anything about approaching people and preaching to them...Or even knocking on a door and bothering you in your home. I have only ever spoken of asking you questions or asking if you had a moment to talk. So why are you suggesting I said those things when I didn't?
Ok you didn't say you wanted to preach at them. You said you wanted to stop them on the street and ask questions regarding their religion. I know you said something in there along the lines of preaching or sharing your views, I have to look back to be exact. But really you're just splitting hairs anyway. What point are you trying to make? My advice is to not stop people on the street for any reason besides important safety concerns. I live in a city. If someone on the street is asking you for something the smartest and safest thing you can do for yourself is to ignore them and walk away, quickly.0 -
So you think its acceptable to flush the Koran? Or urinate on a nativity? I just want to be clarify where your tolerance starts and stops
So it's all or nothing, huh? If someone doesn't respect something, then they want to see it completely eradicated? Or in your example, they want to piss on it?0 -
you cant call something a straw man tactic just because the word From was replaced with the word exclude. That is by definition the words meaning as you can see. I didn't misrepresent anything you said. Nor was anything I said false in my response.
My straw man was in reference to the implication that I was advocating isolation when, in fact, I hadn't. I can understand your confusion as I didn't state it specifically.This statement was made after you called it a straw man not before. And I was Paraphrasing what you said. Lets compare.
I'm confused. The time in which I identify it as a straw man is kind of irrelevant. Timing is really only important with regard to what the statements are responding to. I quoted you. Your statement, that I quoted, was in response to something I said. That something I said, didn't imply what you seemed to think it did. Thus straw man, but let's move on.You said, "legislating morality forces religion on masses..." which actually is a straw man tactic to what I said. When applied to your example you are claiming that prop 8 is legislation that imposes religion on the masses. I didn't say this you did. You are saying that the legislation is forcing religion based on heavy support from a religious group and that's entirely false. you are making an inaccurate claim like, 'Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious'" That's the implication you set forth.
For "legislating morality..." to be a straw man, I would need to indicate that you've said, previous to that quote, that prop 8 wasn't religously based. I don't believe I did so because I don't believe you said any such thing previous to that point. I built no straw man as such. There was no straw to build it with.
So when you say "which is actually a straw man tactic to what I said." Could you be more specific? I ask because I think you're incorrect.You are saying that the legislation is forcing religion based on heavy support from a religious group and that's entirely false.
Prop 8 was drafted specifically for and heavily funded by religious-based organizations. Suggesting that prop 8 wasn't religiously based would be like suggesting that Focus on the Family isn't religiously based. In fact, there is no rational reason to limit marriage to a man-woman gender combination. Such a reason, one that's rational, just doesn't exist. There is no reason to prevent people of the same gender from marrying except to promote an irrational value, frequently religious (as is the case with prop 8).
And finally, your comparison of my statement, "the legislation is forcing religion based on heavy support from a religious group" and "'Religions are against gay marriage therefore all Prop 8 supporters are religious'"" is..well...poor. They are substantively different statements. One, the one you seem to think I said, is a logical fallacy in and of itself. What I actually said is a supported statement that you don't happen to agree with to the extent that you called it false--without bothering to state why, I might add.
Now...onto.And the general consensus is Marriage is between a man and woman. Most opinion polls side with Man/woman not same sex
Don't be so sure
and as far as the law is concerned even in my state Iowa where its technically still illegal Its being perpetrated as legal. the law on the books still reads Marriage shall be between a man and a women. The court ruled that it was wrong but the law has not yet been revised so its technically still illegal. They have a case precedent but case precedent isn't law its only a ruling that's another argument entirely.
It's funny how there are still sodomy laws on state books and that lawrence v texas invalidated them completely to the point of being uneforcable, isn't it?
But hey, I got married in Iowa. Thanks for your tax dollars, and making it possible. Much appreciated. Soon, I'll be married in WA.Sorry im only responding to this because you didnt really respond you only spun the rest and didn't actually answer my question
I don't know. it kind of sounds like a cop out, but I'm more than willing to hear your explanation of this.0 -
To me, the Old Testament is the Divinely inspired Word of God, the Gospels are the Word of God (Jesus, who is one person of the Trinity of God), and the remaining New Testament supports the Gospels. I view it as completely sacred as do most Christians I know.We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
I like how you basically say you hate people who generalize their feelings about certain groups of people, but then you go do it yourself.
Also, heads up--to compare the Qur'an and the Bible in the terms of "book-burning," you need to realize that to Muslims, the Qur'an is, literally, the word of God. The Bible, to Christians, is not. It's pretty common knowledge that the Bible was written and created by men, whereas the Qur'an is, to Muslims, the literal word of God.0 -
To me, the Old Testament is the Divinely inspired Word of God, the Gospels are the Word of God (Jesus, who is one person of the Trinity of God), and the remaining New Testament supports the Gospels. I view it as completely sacred as do most Christians I know.
Ok maybe this is a good chance for me to express what I keep saying...
I understand that. They are sacred to YOU. Other things are sacred to other people. Cows are sacred to Hindus.
So while you may think I'm a monster for chucking a bible in the trash (not that I would mind you) someone else thinks you're a monster for eating a hamburger.
So we can all try to respect each other's beliefs, at which point we end up living in a bubble so as not to offend anyone or anything. OR we can say "I respect your right to believe however you want. I ask only that you give me the same courtesy." That means sometimes you're going to have to live with people saying things you think are disrespectful to your chosen belief system.
What is NOT an option is "Well the Holy Bible is sacred because that's clearly the word of God. Anything else you can just ignore. Respect MINE, but no one else really matters."0 -
To me, the Old Testament is the Divinely inspired Word of God, the Gospels are the Word of God (Jesus, who is one person of the Trinity of God), and the remaining New Testament supports the Gospels. I view it as completely sacred as do most Christians I know.We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
I like how you basically say you hate people who generalize their feelings about certain groups of people, but then you go do it yourself.
Also, heads up--to compare the Qur'an and the Bible in the terms of "book-burning," you need to realize that to Muslims, the Qur'an is, literally, the word of God. The Bible, to Christians, is not. It's pretty common knowledge that the Bible was written and created by men, whereas the Qur'an is, to Muslims, the literal word of God.
Keyword: inspired. The Qur'an is, to Muslims, THE literal word of God. Not inspired by, not written by a bunch of people, but THE literal word of God. Through my own personal research, and from how my professor has described it, I've taken that as basically, it's supposed to be exactly what God says. I don't know nearly as much about the Bible, but I've always read and heard that it was written by multiple men, and a quick Google search tells me that authorship of the bible is still debated. I'm curious though, when you say "the Gospels are the Word of God," do you mean to compare it to the Qur'an, in that it is supposed to be his divine words? Or that men wrote it, through their own interpretation?0 -
What is NOT an option is "Well the Holy Bible is sacred because that's clearly the word of God. Anything else you can just ignore. Respect MINE, but no one else really matters."
^Exactly.0 -
But if I stop you on the street and ask you if you have a few minutes to answer some questions and you say yes and I talk to you about Christianity and your eternity how is that rude of me?
The fact that you have to even ask "is it rude?" speaks volumes.
I don't disagree that there is a constitutional right to do it, but IMO, religious proselytizing --by ANY religious follower, christian or not--is an offense against the dignity of man. Each person has the ability to make up their own mind about what religious belief, if any, they choose to follow. For you or any other religious believer to presume for a nanosecond that you are qualified, in any way, to comment about "my eternity" is insufferably arrogant.0 -
We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
I like how you basically say you hate people who generalize their feelings about certain groups of people, but then you go do it yourself.
Also, heads up--to compare the Qur'an and the Bible in the terms of "book-burning," you need to realize that to Muslims, the Qur'an is, literally, the word of God. The Bible, to Christians, is not. It's pretty common knowledge that the Bible was written and created by men, whereas the Qur'an is, to Muslims, the literal word of God.
To me, the argument is much simpler than that. The christian argument expressed in this thread and elsewhere frequently pleads persecution using the traditional false equivalency tactic: "what about the muslims--liberals don't make fun of them". The fact in that, in this country, muslims still make up a tiny minority of people. There is no "in Allah We Trust" on our money, nobody sings "God Bless Mecca" at our baseball games. Christianity gets the attention because it is the elephant in the room, it is the dominant religion, the dominant cultural influence in our society. And it is christians who are trying to force their religious beliefs on others (not all christians fall into that category, let me be clear-- but those who DO try to force religion into government, public places, etc ARE christian).
It is a false syllogism to assume that the absence of "equal time" criticism against muslims is evidence of approval--or evidence of selective negativity towards christians. If there is any so-called "support" of muslims by "liberals", it is the support of their constitutional right as American citizens to practice their beliefs and to not suffer official discrimination solely because of those beliefs. I don't have to approve of those beliefs--just like I don't approve of many christian beliefs--to support everyone's right to practice those beliefs.0 -
We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
I like how you basically say you hate people who generalize their feelings about certain groups of people, but then you go do it yourself.
Also, heads up--to compare the Qur'an and the Bible in the terms of "book-burning," you need to realize that to Muslims, the Qur'an is, literally, the word of God. The Bible, to Christians, is not. It's pretty common knowledge that the Bible was written and created by men, whereas the Qur'an is, to Muslims, the literal word of God.
To me, the argument is much simpler than that. The christian argument expressed in this thread and elsewhere frequently pleads persecution using the traditional false equivalency tactic: "what about the muslims--liberals don't make fun of them". The fact in that, in this country, muslims still make up a tiny minority of people. There is no "in Allah We Trust" on our money, nobody sings "God Bless Mecca" at our baseball games. Christianity gets the attention because it is the elephant in the room, it is the dominant religion, the dominant cultural influence in our society. And it is christians who are trying to force their religious beliefs on others (not all christians fall into that category, let me be clear-- but those who DO try to force religion into government, public places, etc ARE christian).
It is a false syllogism to assume that the absence of "equal time" criticism against muslims is evidence of approval--or evidence of selective negativity towards christians. If there is any so-called "support" of muslims by "liberals", it is the support of their constitutional right as American citizens to practice their beliefs and to not suffer official discrimination solely because of those beliefs. I don't have to approve of those beliefs--just like I don't approve of many christian beliefs--to support everyone's right to practice those beliefs.
Well said. 0 -
We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
I like how you basically say you hate people who generalize their feelings about certain groups of people, but then you go do it yourself.
Also, heads up--to compare the Qur'an and the Bible in the terms of "book-burning," you need to realize that to Muslims, the Qur'an is, literally, the word of God. The Bible, to Christians, is not. It's pretty common knowledge that the Bible was written and created by men, whereas the Qur'an is, to Muslims, the literal word of God.
To me, the argument is much simpler than that. The christian argument expressed in this thread and elsewhere frequently pleads persecution using the traditional false equivalency tactic: "what about the muslims--liberals don't make fun of them". The fact in that, in this country, muslims still make up a tiny minority of people. There is no "in Allah We Trust" on our money, nobody sings "God Bless Mecca" at our baseball games. Christianity gets the attention because it is the elephant in the room, it is the dominant religion, the dominant cultural influence in our society. And it is christians who are trying to force their religious beliefs on others (not all christians fall into that category, let me be clear-- but those who DO try to force religion into government, public places, etc ARE christian).
It is a false syllogism to assume that the absence of "equal time" criticism against muslims is evidence of approval--or evidence of selective negativity towards christians. If there is any so-called "support" of muslims by "liberals", it is the support of their constitutional right as American citizens to practice their beliefs and to not suffer official discrimination solely because of those beliefs. I don't have to approve of those beliefs--just like I don't approve of many christian beliefs--to support everyone's right to practice those beliefs.
True that!0 -
Thank you! I wanted to address that and got sidetracked then didn't return to the thread.We feel the same way about the ever so open, tolerant, and free thinking liberals and atheists. "We are accepting and supportive of everyone"... lies. "Oh dont make fun of the Islam that's a sacred religion"....But its OK to piss on a nativity scene and call it art. "The Koran is sacred"....but burn this bible. If Christians started chopping heads when people ran their mouths about Christianity they might get the respect Islam does.
I like how you basically say you hate people who generalize their feelings about certain groups of people, but then you go do it yourself.
Also, heads up--to compare the Qur'an and the Bible in the terms of "book-burning," you need to realize that to Muslims, the Qur'an is, literally, the word of God. The Bible, to Christians, is not. It's pretty common knowledge that the Bible was written and created by men, whereas the Qur'an is, to Muslims, the literal word of God.
To me, the argument is much simpler than that. The christian argument expressed in this thread and elsewhere frequently pleads persecution using the traditional false equivalency tactic: "what about the muslims--liberals don't make fun of them". The fact in that, in this country, muslims still make up a tiny minority of people. There is no "in Allah We Trust" on our money, nobody sings "God Bless Mecca" at our baseball games. Christianity gets the attention because it is the elephant in the room, it is the dominant religion, the dominant cultural influence in our society. And it is christians who are trying to force their religious beliefs on others (not all christians fall into that category, let me be clear-- but those who DO try to force religion into government, public places, etc ARE christian).
It is a false syllogism to assume that the absence of "equal time" criticism against muslims is evidence of approval--or evidence of selective negativity towards christians. If there is any so-called "support" of muslims by "liberals", it is the support of their constitutional right as American citizens to practice their beliefs and to not suffer official discrimination solely because of those beliefs. I don't have to approve of those beliefs--just like I don't approve of many christian beliefs--to support everyone's right to practice those beliefs.
If Muslims tried to do what Christians have done and tried to do in this country the Christians would be the first ones in line screaming that religion has no place in government - Muslim religion anyhow. They seem to conveniently forget that separation of church and state doesn't have an * that says (*except for Christianity). Everything that Christians have done and tried to do and claimed is perfectly acceptable should be equally acceptable to them if it's the Muslim religion. Should Muslims get to define marriage? Or put "In Allah we trust" on currency or have kids saying "One nation, under Allah, indivisible..."? I have never, ever been woken up by someone knocking at my door wanting to know if I've found Mohammad. I guarantee you that if Muslims were trying to make laws based off the Bible and have their religion influencing politics and the lives of everyone regardless of religion then those who get irked at Christians doing it would be equally irked at Muslims.0 -
Ok im not going to quote because its all to long. Bringing up someone pissing on a nativity is silly. Yes you will find people in every walk of life that take things too far. But you are painting all athiest by the same brush. Do I think its ok to piss on a nativity ,yes and no. If an athiest goes out an buys his own nativity then proceeds to piss on it yeah thats fine I dont see the point but I dont have a problem with it. If they go to someones house and pisses on their nativity then yeah thats a problem. You keep talking about the intolerance of athiests against christians,then you talk about how we are judging all by the actions of a few "crazy" christians so you are doing the same thing. I volunteer at a church run food pantry,when they pray I dont stop working and tell them how silly they are. But at the same time when I had a sticker on my car that said "athiest" grown *kitten* adults spit on my car,approched me and asked me when my 4 year old was presant how i will feel when god kills her to punish me for being an atheist. I have had my car keyed,and people follow me home. So should I judge all by those actions? Thats what your doing. Can I also say I have never once had the urge to spit on someones car or tell them how stupid i think they are when they have a christian bumper sticker,yet every time i drove my car somewhere EVERY SINGLE TIME it happened to me,i finally had to remove it because I was concerened for the saftey of my children0
-
I"m so sorry that you were treated so terribly. Yes, there are crazies in every group and we should all be cautious to not stereotype based on the actions of a few. One of our good friends is an atheist and he is one of the kindest, honest men we know. Now, if I could on work on not getting upset at my fellow Catholics who are so openly against the faith they proudly proclaim, especially those I call family.Ok im not going to quote because its all to long. Bringing up someone pissing on a nativity is silly. Yes you will find people in every walk of life that take things too far. But you are painting all athiest by the same brush. Do I think its ok to piss on a nativity ,yes and no. If an athiest goes out an buys his own nativity then proceeds to piss on it yeah thats fine I dont see the point but I dont have a problem with it. If they go to someones house and pisses on their nativity then yeah thats a problem. You keep talking about the intolerance of athiests against christians,then you talk about how we are judging all by the actions of a few "crazy" christians so you are doing the same thing. I volunteer at a church run food pantry,when they pray I dont stop working and tell them how silly they are. But at the same time when I had a sticker on my car that said "athiest" grown *kitten* adults spit on my car,approched me and asked me when my 4 year old was presant how i will feel when god kills her to punish me for being an atheist. I have had my car keyed,and people follow me home. So should I judge all by those actions? Thats what your doing. Can I also say I have never once had the urge to spit on someones car or tell them how stupid i think they are when they have a christian bumper sticker,yet every time i drove my car somewhere EVERY SINGLE TIME it happened to me,i finally had to remove it because I was concerened for the saftey of my children 0 -
[/quote]"To me, the Old Testament is the Divinely inspired Word of God, the Gospels are the Word of God (Jesus, who is one person of the Trinity of God), and the remaining New Testament supports the Gospels. I view it as completely sacred as do most Christians I know."
[/quote]
How about reading this annotated version of the KJ bible? http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
You can view the entire bible sorted by what it says in various categories like:
Absurdity
Injustice
Cruelty and Violence
Intolerance
Good Stuff
Contradictions
Family Values
Women
Science and History
Interpretation
Sex
Prophecy
Language
Homosexuality
Once you've looked at the bible this way. Please come back and let us know how divinely inspired it appears to you and why you think it's a good model on which to base your life.0 -
I am a ministry candidate in the Methodist Church. We are a local church with a congregation of about 60 people. On any given Sunday we might have 25-40 of those members in attendance. Just wanted to say where I came from before I voiced my opinion.
Two things - Pat Robertson and the like are NOT what the church and Christianity represents. At all. Trust me. That guy and all the people like him give Christians a bad reputation. The Bible clearly states that there will be TONS of these kinds of "false prophets" to lead people astray. This guy exemplifies it.
Secondly, the taxation of churches would not only all but destroy the ability for small town churches to function, but eliminate the good works that are done at this level. And believe me, small churches do a lot of good in these small communities. Stripping religious organizations of their tax exempt status is a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution. That document is the only thing we have as human beings that secure our rights and liberties.
Do some leaders of the church take advantage of this? Yep, some do. (Corruption can be found ANYWHERE!) Do other churches depend on their tax exempt status for survival? Yep, most do. But you can't punish everybody for something that a few people do.
I don't listen to anyone who says "Oh THEY'RE not REAL Christians!" I don't care if you're talking about Pat Robertson or the Westboro Baptists. "If every Christian someone else said wasn't a Christian dissappeared, there would be no more Christians."
There's another church out there right now pointing to your ministry and saying it's a pack of lies and false prophets.
The "Oh they're not REAL (insert your preferred group name here)" is an example of the No True Scotsman logical fallacy. I see it come out of religious mouths all the time. Sigh.......0 -
The "Oh they're not REAL (insert your preferred group name here)" is an example of the No True Scotsman logical fallacy. I see it come out of religious mouths all the time. Sigh.......
0 -
I don't want the church to have any say in the government, so no taxing. I really think we need to keep the two as separate as possible. I don't want people telling me what to do based on their religious views, likewise, I don't want the government telling me how/who to worship.0
-
Great read. I actually forgot that it was about taxes! MassiveDelta put up a good fight but eventually his/her arguments fell to the same demons that plague all religious argument... Logic and reason.0
This discussion has been closed.