| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/11/2010 11:18:47 AM · #5226 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
This is pretty fantastic and hugely needed in my opinion.
'A north London school which has developed lessons on gay historical figures who suffered persecution claims to have succeeded in "more or less eliminating homophobic bullying" in its classrooms and playgrounds over the last five years.' |
You don't need to teach being gay to eliminate homophobia. You need babies.
Fighting Bullying With Babies |
|
|
|
11/11/2010 11:34:01 AM · #5227 |
| A very interesting article. One wonders why that works in a school setting, when chances are many of the children have babies or younger siblings at home. Perhaps simply a different dynamic. |
|
|
|
11/11/2010 12:35:41 PM · #5228 |
DWTS article - FOX
Posting up an article that shows an evolution in some circles. To even consider the option of pairing 2 same sex partners - speaks volumes on where we were vs where we are headed. Of course the impact/reaction from the show overseas will likely determine if this becomes a reality in the US. I would think that some posters here would be in favor of same sex pairings.
Not sure how I feel about it - I mean who leads? Do both get to wear skimpy bare all costumes? Ok - I guess I'm for it. ;-) |
|
|
|
11/11/2010 12:49:58 PM · #5229 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
You don't need to teach being gay to eliminate homophobia. |
TEACH being gay? WTF? Do we also teach being female or teach being black? |
|
|
|
11/11/2010 12:58:28 PM · #5230 |
Originally posted by Flash:
To even consider the option of pairing 2 same sex partners - speaks volumes on where we were vs where we are headed. |
...or it speaks to hundreds of years of standard practice in dance lessons where the instructor and/or practice partners assume one role or the other. Heck, until the 17th century all acting roles were played by men, so Shakespeare's Juliet would have been a guy, and Queen Katherine would have been a queen indeed in Henry VIII when he spoke, "Alas, I am a woman, friendless, hopeless!" |
|
|
|
11/11/2010 01:06:37 PM · #5231 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Nullix:
You don't need to teach being gay to eliminate homophobia. |
TEACH being gay? WTF? Do we also teach being female or teach being black? |
You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!
-Oscar Hammerstein II, (from South Pacific) |
|
|
|
11/11/2010 02:42:25 PM · #5232 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
You don't need to teach being gay to eliminate homophobia. You need babies. |
I truly am puzzled by this comment. Where and how was this supposed to have happened?
Ray |
|
|
|
11/13/2010 08:47:18 PM · #5233 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
You don't need to teach being gay to eliminate homophobia. You need babies. |
I truly am puzzled by this comment. Where and how was this supposed to have happened? |
You'll have to read the articles in the original post. Otherwise, my comment makes no sense. |
|
|
|
11/13/2010 09:37:51 PM · #5234 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
You don't need to teach being gay to eliminate homophobia. You need babies. |
I truly am puzzled by this comment. Where and how was this supposed to have happened? |
You'll have to read the articles in the original post. Otherwise, my comment makes no sense. |
...and which one of the 5233 of these posts should I focus on?
Ray |
|
|
|
11/17/2010 12:02:42 PM · #5235 |
Germany - coffin options for...
Been to a funeral where the family applied many Harley emblems to the deceased's coffin - so why not this? |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 11:03:33 AM · #5236 |
Civil Unions passed in Illinois and the Catholic Bishop is pissed. After this, I'm not certain the Governor can call himself Catholic.
As for our Prop 8, judges are chosen and it doesn't look good for us supporters of it (of course, the bad arguments the proponents had doesn't help either). The hearings will start on Monday.
Christians have lived in these times before. Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 10:08:06 PM · #5237 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
(of course, the bad arguments the proponents had doesn't help either) |
Do you think they've suddenly came up with new ones?
Dude, they HAVE no good arguments.
What I'm shocked by here is that, even when the conservatives' best support of Prop 8 was an abject failure, you don't see how this applies to your own arguments when it so obviously does...
...because they use THE SAME ARGUMENTS.
I think you've just admitted your rationales are weak, if only indirectly. Thank you!
-----
Oh and nice with the extremely tacky coffins there, Flash. It's so great seeing yet another irrelevant link here that makes gay people seem icky. This has nothing to do with gay rights. Why did you link it again? |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 10:12:43 PM · #5238 |
Wrong thread (I'm an idiot).
Well since I ventured back in here I might as well ask -- why does repealing prop 8 cause Christians to need to go into hiding? Is it really that much of a threat to you? Are there angry mobs just waiting to defile your churches? I'd really like to see how Christianity is the victim here.
Message edited by author 2010-12-03 22:29:14. |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 10:12:56 AM · #5239 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Christians have lived in these times before. Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Taking into consideration the way you treat certain elements of our society, jail would seem something that should be given consideration to.
Ray
Message edited by author 2010-12-04 10:13:22. |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 10:19:01 AM · #5240 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Christians have lived in these times before. Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Taking into consideration the way you treat certain elements of our society, jail would seem something that should be given consideration to. |
+1
|
|
|
|
12/04/2010 12:41:56 PM · #5241 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Christians have lived in these times before. Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Taking into consideration the way you treat certain elements of our society, jail would seem something that should be given consideration to.
Ray |
Wow... that's pretty low Ray. That's all I'm going to say about it. |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 03:49:26 PM · #5242 |
Originally posted by johnnyphoto:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Christians have lived in these times before. Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Taking into consideration the way you treat certain elements of our society, jail would seem something that should be given consideration to.
Ray |
Wow... that's pretty low Ray. That's all I'm going to say about it. |
I will work on the assumption you think I am wrong, hence your comment. Trust me, you might be better sitting on the sidelines on this one.
Ray |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 04:01:57 PM · #5243 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by johnnyphoto:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Christians have lived in these times before. Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Taking into consideration the way you treat certain elements of our society, jail would seem something that should be given consideration to.
Ray |
Wow... that's pretty low Ray. That's all I'm going to say about it. |
I will work on the assumption you think I am wrong, hence your comment. Trust me, you might be better sitting on the sidelines on this one.
Ray |
Double wow... |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 06:25:42 PM · #5244 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
it doesn't look good for us supporters of it (of course, the bad arguments the proponents had doesn't help either). |
There was a good argument? Appeals to emotion and authority are fantastic marketing tools for the multi-million dollar voting campaigns used to get Prop 8 passed, but they're useless in an evidence-based court of law. You've been challenged before to explain how gay marriage has any material affect on the marriages of others, and you've yet to deliver. Don't blame the litigators now for failing to substantiate a baseless claim. |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 06:58:20 PM · #5245 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Matthew 6:5-6: "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men....when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret...."
Seems like that was supposed to be the idea all along. True faith ought to be private, not a public proclamation, at least thats what I read. |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 08:31:14 PM · #5246 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Matthew 6:5-6: "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men....when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret...."
Seems like that was supposed to be the idea all along. True faith ought to be private, not a public proclamation, at least thats what I read. |
This is a complete failure to interpret the passage correctly on at least two levels. First, prayer and faith are not the same. Second, you're ignoring the context of the passage.
Message edited by author 2010-12-04 20:32:11. |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 09:00:12 PM · #5247 |
Nullix should be burning with shame for turning the tables in this thread and declaring religionists to be the class that's being discriminated against. What's the matter, your history of venal intolerance is no longer allowed a blanket pass? Your corpse-strewn legacy is finally being shown up for what it is, an empty canon filled with loathing for humanity?
By the way, how dare you play the martyr, when the institutionalized intolerance of the church, which has leaked like noxious poison into the highest halls of power, is alone responsible for so much suffering regarding all aspects of human sexuality. How dare you, when the disease of insular faith makes it okay for legions to hate with impunity, and disguise that hate as love, in some twisted Orwellian nightmare of doublespeak. Kids kill themselves over this shit. The faithful have blood on their hands.
Message edited by author 2010-12-04 21:00:55. |
|
|
|
12/04/2010 09:51:55 PM · #5248 |
Originally posted by johnnyphoto:
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Maybe us Christians will have to go back into the closet. |
Matthew 6:5-6: "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men....when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret...."
Seems like that was supposed to be the idea all along. True faith ought to be private, not a public proclamation, at least thats what I read. |
This is a complete failure to interpret the passage correctly on at least two levels. First, prayer and faith are not the same. Second, you're ignoring the context of the passage. |
On the contrary... Brennan nailed the interpretation. The failure is yours. |
|
|
|
12/05/2010 12:20:26 AM · #5249 |
Originally posted by johnnyphoto:
This is a complete failure to interpret the passage correctly on at least two levels. First, prayer and faith are not the same. Second, you're ignoring the context of the passage. |
Correct my context of Matthew 6 where you see the flaw. He is comparing ideal faith with that as practiced by the Pharisees , who make a great show of their faith in public. Matthew tells us to be charitable without show, to pray in private, to fast without being obvious about it, to not gather treasures on earth, and to not focus on the here and now.
In short that faith ought not to be flung in the face of others, and that public display of faith is not seen as true worship in God's eyes.
Then Matthew 7 talks about not judging others, that is worth a read all on its own.
When we invoke God's name in the pledge of allegiance or espouse our faith on our currency, we have strayed far from the teachings of the early church. Do you suppose the Pharisees had a National Day of Prayer? I would think so.
Message edited by author 2010-12-05 00:45:43. |
|
|
|
12/05/2010 02:18:03 AM · #5250 |
Ha! You claim that he nailed it based on some bullet point arguments from a religious tolerance website. That website doesn't even scratch the surface on what the Bible has to say about prayer. You're going to have to do a little more research than that to convince me that Brennan's interpretation is the right one.
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Correct my context of Matthew 6 where you see the flaw. He is comparing ideal faith with that as practiced by the Pharisees , who make a great show of their faith in public. Matthew tells us to be charitable without show, to pray in private, to fast without being obvious about it, to not gather treasures on earth, and to not focus on the here and now.
In short that faith ought not to be flung in the face of others, and that public display of faith is not seen as true worship in God's eyes.
Then Matthew 7 talks about not judging others, that is worth a read all on its own.
When we invoke God's name in the pledge of allegiance or espouse our faith on our currency, we have strayed far from the teachings of the early church. Do you suppose the Pharisees had a National Day of Prayer? I would think so. |
You're statement was: "True faith ought to be private, not a public proclamation, at least thats what I read." I critiqued your interpretation because I believe that true faith should be expressed both publicly and privately, and there are a number of Bible passages that support this. You're interpretation is wrong because it's too general. You're missing the specific point of the teaching. Jesus is not teaching that the act of publicly displaying one's faith is wrong, but that the attitude behind that action is wrong. Clearly, Jesus would not tell his disciples to "make disciples of all nations" if their faith was supposed to be kept a secret. Jesus was teaching against wrong attitude. He said "Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them" (Matt. 6:1). Look at the words I put in bold. Jesus doesn't say "never practice your faith before other", but he puts the restriction "in order to be seen" on it. The same point is repeated in verse two. "sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others" (Matt. 6:2). Again, there is a restriction. Jesus is not putting a universal ban on public displays of faith, but he is condemning public displays of faith when they are performed selfishly for one's own benefit. When a person gives to a another person, it should be done out of charity, kindness, and selflessness. When an act of faith is flaunted, the person performing the faith act is seeking approval or praise from others. This person, Jesus says, has "received their reward" (v. 2). The same point is made for a third time in verse 5, and a fourth time in verse 7. Don't do it to be seen, don't do it to be heard, don't do it to get praise.
Maybe I'm just being overly critical of you're interpretation but I think it is very wrong to say that faith should only be expressed in private, which is what you're statement appeared to communicate.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 04:26:31 PM EDT.
