| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/29/2012 10:14:23 PM · #5776 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
... when we know religious marriages existed at the very least two thousand years before secular was even a concept. |
There wasn't even any "secular" into "religious" came into being, sheesh. Absent religion, EVERYthing is secular. |
|
|
|
07/29/2012 11:19:47 PM · #5777 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I actually came back only to poke Shannon about his style of berating someone (the comment about the milk and meat). |
You said it was Exodus rather than Leviticus– a straw man that does not affect the point.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
He is doing something illegal. If he was, then we need to say this and marvel that he hasn't yet been brought to justice |
He did, and settled the case out of court.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
He is doing something improper... He is doing what he judges to be proper and that's really the only thing anybody can do in relativistic moral systems. |
Ditto the Westboro Baptists. Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's not hatred and bigotry. |
|
|
|
07/29/2012 11:56:02 PM · #5778 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Then it quickly changed to defending Cathy's first amendment rights (one doesn't even have to agree with him to do this).
|
When was this even an issue? Even the KKK has their amendment rights. That's not the issue at all.
Spread hate all you want, just don't say anything bad about factory farming or you'll find yourself in big trouble. Protect racists and bigots but don't you dare say a word about mad cow! |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 12:19:25 AM · #5779 |
Monica, it was apparently an issue in Boston and Chicago.
Hey, and Shannon mentions Westboro and uses "bigot" in the same post. A rant forum gold star for you buddy! And we need to be careful about the accusation of doing something illegal. Settling out of court, as any doctor will tell you, does not mean you were guilty. It's possible, but no certainty. Plus, the case has very little to do with gay rights and I even went on record to say I felt it was a bit dodgy myself.
|
|
|
|
07/30/2012 01:15:15 AM · #5780 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Shannon mentions Westboro and uses "bigot" in the same post. A rant forum gold star for you buddy! |
The comparison is valid. Both are doing what they judge to be proper, and clearly the public can rebuke their bigotry even if no laws are broken.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Settling out of court, as any doctor will tell you, does not mean you were guilty. It's possible, but no certainty. Plus, the case has very little to do with gay rights and I even went on record to say I felt it was a bit dodgy myself. |
Attention any doctor: firing a Muslim employee the day after refusing to pray to Jesus in a company training session, just one week after a performance evaluation praised the guy as a great manager, is "doing something illegal." Settling out of court before being found guilty does not make it less so. While the case did not involve gays, it is discrimination on the same religious basis. Do you really think a manager announcing a same-sex engagement at a company training session would be treated any differently? |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 11:52:08 AM · #5781 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Shannon mentions Westboro and uses "bigot" in the same post. A rant forum gold star for you buddy! |
The comparison is valid. Both are doing what they judge to be proper, and clearly the public can rebuke their bigotry even if no laws are broken. |
You are correct in this Shannon. But you guys seem to fail to understand the polarity of our country on this issue. While I suspect the opposition to the dozens of members at Westboro (recall they represent 0.0000001% of Christian adherents) has to approach 98%+ (and I'm probably being generous) the opposition to gay marriage in the latest poll I happened to see (I believe in March) was 48%. If being against gay marriage is the only qualification for hatemongering and bigotry, then you are declaring half of the population of your country to be so. If I really thought half my country qualified under those adjectives, I'd be seeking to move. I think we need to move away from these adjectives as being as inflammatory as anything Cathy has said. One can be against gay marriage without hating gays or being bigoted.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Settling out of court, as any doctor will tell you, does not mean you were guilty. It's possible, but no certainty. Plus, the case has very little to do with gay rights and I even went on record to say I felt it was a bit dodgy myself. |
Originally posted by Shannon:
Attention any doctor: firing a Muslim employee the day after refusing to pray to Jesus in a company training session, just one week after a performance evaluation praised the guy as a great manager, is "doing something illegal." Settling out of court before being found guilty does not make it less so. While the case did not involve gays, it is discrimination on the same religious basis. Do you really think a manager announcing a same-sex engagement at a company training session would be treated any differently? |
I don't know. He obviously has gay employees or this wouldn't have been an issue in the first place. I never heard they were fired or anything like that. I only heard their partners were not invited on the retreat (like, I'm assuming, the live-in girlfriends). Still waiting for a link about this issue. |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 12:33:58 PM · #5782 |
| I don't have any statistics or references but I would guess that at one point in our country's past 48% of the population opposed interracial marriages. I would wager a not statistically insignificant percentage still does. |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 12:45:46 PM · #5783 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If being against gay marriage is the only qualification for hatemongering and bigotry, then you are declaring half of the population of your country to be so. |
Merely disagreeing with the harmless beliefs and freedoms of others is not discrimination. Actively working to vilify and deny those beliefs and freedoms is the very definition of discrimination. It's judging others when you you have no business doing so. It's hate, bigotry and prejudice on a neon sign with flashing lights. It's also unconstitutional. Standing up for your beliefs does not extend to, "We don't serve your kind here." This is not a popularity contest, and whatever fraction of the population fought against racial equality 60 or so years ago and refused to serve blacks, whether 1% or 99%, was also practicing discrimination, hate and bigotry... or was that Christian love?
You're out on a limb that does not support the weight of your arguments. If a Muslim gas station owner refused to serve you for being Christian or a Hispanic restaurant manager tossed you out for being white, I don't buy for an instant that you'd be commending them. If the same owners served you, but donated their profits (your own money) to a group trying to block your ability to attend church or shop at Hispanic-owned businesses, you'd be frothing at the mouth. Stop trying to justify bigotry or pretend it's anything other than what it is.
Message edited by author 2012-07-30 13:42:20. |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 02:09:59 PM · #5784 |
| I have too many disagreements with your post to bother. It isn't anything new either. I understand your position Shannon, I just think it is misguidedinmany ares. Let's save our virtual breath. I register your disagreement with Cathy's position and will not expect you to go buy a chicken sandwich on August 1st. |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 03:13:18 PM · #5785 |
| Forget the ACLU -- if you want a chicken sandwich, AAA recommends you come to my neighborhood and get one (or two or three) at Bakesale Betty's ... I can attest that the line down the sidewalk can be upwards of 50 people on Saturdays ... |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 06:12:51 PM · #5786 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
... the opposition to gay marriage in the latest poll I happened to see (I believe in March) was 48%. If being against gay marriage is the only qualification for hate mongering and bigotry, then you are declaring half of the population of your country to be so. If I really thought half my country qualified under those adjectives, I'd be seeking to move. |
Actually Doc, no one is advocating that in the least. You are the only one associating this activity with hate mongering. The actions attributable to the owner of these restaurants far exceed being merely against gay marriages, and therein lies the problem.
You might want to re-read the comments made by Shannon in this instance, nowhere is he suggesting what you are advancing here.
Oh, no chicken for me either on that day, but that will be easy for me since we don't have any of those restaurants in this area. Could it be because we have so many Atheists in Canada. :O)
Ray
|
|
|
|
07/30/2012 06:30:12 PM · #5787 |
| That just makes no sense Ray. You are basically saying, "you can be against gay marriage as long as you shut up about it". The man has spoken his opinion and donated money to advocate his position. Is this what you consider to "far exceed being merely against gay marriage"? I'm still waiting for the action that makes this guy so bad. Speaking out and advocation are such fundamental aspects of democracy. I would never be caught dead saying, "you can support gay marriage, but you'd better not let us know that's your position and you really better not do anything to advance that position". I'll take Voltaire's position with defending to the death your right to speak and all that... |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 07:08:14 PM · #5788 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
That just makes no sense Ray. You are basically saying, "you can be against gay marriage as long as you shut up about it". The man has spoken his opinion and donated money to advocate his position. Is this what you consider to "far exceed being merely against gay marriage"? I'm still waiting for the action that makes this guy so bad. Speaking out and advocation are such fundamental aspects of democracy. I would never be caught dead saying, "you can support gay marriage, but you'd better not let us know that's your position and you really better not do anything to advance that position". I'll take Voltaire's position with defending to the death your right to speak and all that... |
Please keep ignoring just how above and beyond his horrendous statements were and how he funded a known hate group that ACTIVELY SPREADS LIES about homosexuals. It's really fun to explain these things over and over again.
|
|
|
|
07/30/2012 07:23:41 PM · #5789 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
That just makes no sense Ray. You are basically saying, "you can be against gay marriage as long as you shut up about it". The man has spoken his opinion and donated money to advocate his position. Is this what you consider to "far exceed being merely against gay marriage"? I'm still waiting for the action that makes this guy so bad. Speaking out and advocation are such fundamental aspects of democracy. |
Nobody is suggesting Cathy can't hold a belief, speak out or advocate his position. The Westboro Baptists do it all the time <-- I'll keep repeating this until you get it. The public is also free to repudiate religiously inspired hatred and bigotry by shunning those organizations, which is what they're doing.
Since you chose to ignore this the first time: Does believing in Christianity make it OK to speak out against allowing people to practice other religions and donate money to ban mosques and synagogues? Is it not OK for people to protest when those actions seek to trample their freedoms? Is it not the minimum responsibility of a country built on a foundation of liberty and tolerance to confront its polar opposite and spurn those who would oppress basic equality? The KKK is free to speak out and advocate their position, and we are free to be disgusted by it and distance ourselves from their bigotry.
"Of all religions, the Christian should of course inspire the most tolerance, but until now Christians have been the most intolerant of all men." -Voltaire |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 07:46:01 PM · #5790 |
|
|
|
07/30/2012 09:21:47 PM · #5791 |
I don't know what you expect from Jason. These issues target the blind spots in his worldview. It is why he goes silent every time simeone compares today's inequality to yesteryear's. He can't see how they are based on the same justifications used today. Had he been born earlier he would have been against interacial marriages, civil rights, universal suffage, etc etc. That's what worldviews like his produces and continues to produce.
Message edited by author 2012-07-30 21:25:41.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2012 06:13:54 AM · #5792 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Hint. |
Like.......+1
|
|
|
|
07/31/2012 10:40:23 AM · #5793 |
Seems this country won't tolerate Christians anymore. So much for freedom of religion, but we've be persecuted before. It was just easier in this country.
Lakewood Cake Shop Refuses Wedding Cake To Gay Couple |
|
|
|
07/31/2012 11:13:09 AM · #5794 |
No, it's bigotry, hate-mongering, hatred, ignorance, & fear disguised as faith that we don't feel like tolerating any more.
That kind of behavior is hardly Christian.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2012 11:28:33 AM · #5795 |
Let me see if I have this straight:
1. The owner of a cake shop refuses to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. He's exercising what he perceives to be his right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. He doesn't "believe" in the institution of gay marriage and he refuses to serve this couple for this reason. Some might say this is reasonable, some might say it's unreasonable; for the sake of argument, let's just say that's OK, he shouldn't have to sell cakes to gay couples.
2. The community, or a significant portion of it anyway, is reacting to this man's position by saying "Fine! Let's not buy cakes from this man at all; he doesn't like us/our friends very much."
My question for you, Mr. Nullix; if the first is acceptable, and it obviously is for you, then why isn't the second equally acceptable? How does it even remotely relate to the historical persecution of Christians?
R. |
|
|
|
07/31/2012 12:01:24 PM · #5796 |
I already linked to that case 10 posts back, along with this comment:
Originally posted by scalvert:
If a Muslim gas station owner refused to serve you for being Christian or a Hispanic restaurant manager tossed you out for being white, I don't buy for an instant that you'd be commending them. If the same owners served you, but donated their profits (your own money) to a group trying to block your ability to attend church or shop at Hispanic-owned businesses, you'd be frothing at the mouth. Stop trying to justify bigotry or pretend it's anything other than what it is. |
As with your claim, rebuking discrimination in these examples would not be restrictions on freedom of religion or persecution of Muslims or Hispanics. Believing in something is not a license for bigotry.
Message edited by author 2012-07-31 12:04:44. |
|
|
|
07/31/2012 01:26:51 PM · #5797 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I know I'm guilty of a little hyperbole with this statement, and I know it's just a hard-core fringe of the Church that's doing this, but geeze louise... When you make these arguments, you're like an enabler of unmitigated bullcrap, Jason. These people do NOT represent what you believe; they're irrational zealots with an entirely unacceptable agenda. But it's like because they self-identify as "Christian" (and what would the Lord really think of their beliefs and behaviors? Have you asked yourself that?) you feel a compulsion to whitewash their nonsense for the rest of us. |
Wow, this seems so familiar somehow... as if I pointed it out myself a few posts ago.
Yanko asks what I want from DrAchoo.
I'm happy to explain. I want to use Jason as an example of the unthinking nature of prejudice and bigotry. By pointing out his blatant favoritism, distortion of facts, and interference running for his fellow Christians, even when their behavior is acutely disagreeable, I hope to show how hostility towards people like me is propagated and legitimized.
Again and again DrAchoo has downplayed the statements of many of his fellow Christians, and maintained that there are legitimate arguments for his opinion that I don't deserve the rights he's happy to partake of himself, because his culture tells him this. Yet, whenever his culture is asked to justify those opinions... we almost always get statements indistinguishable from Cathy's apart from tone. See: every gay marriage trial so far.
Again, this relatively new 'soft' anti-gay stance he professes is merely the trailing edge of the debate from a side that is losing moral ground as it's bigotry is exposed for what it is. 100 years ago gays were possessed by the devil. 50 years ago we were mentally ill. Today we're just intrinsically disordered. Tomorrow we'll be normal, and a lot of people are going to twist in shame at what society has been putting us through for millennia, all because of bald-faced bigotry... listening to the lies of one's peers over the truth of the other.
It's disappointing to me how frantically he searches around to find any way to excuse Cathy's statements, or assert that we should ignore them. First there was denial Cathy even did anything unreasonable. Then he equated undeniable antagonism with inoffensive support. Then he suggested that regardless of whether it was objectionable or not, we shouldn't care because Free Speech, and besides sometimes liberals say mean things too. At no point has he acknowledged that words like these cause harm... perhaps he just doesn't see how problematic it is to suggest that certain individuals threaten entire societies by calling down the wrath of an angry god.
This folks, is prejudice. Culturally instilled, uncritical, seeking to protect itself. |
|
|
|
07/31/2012 01:28:40 PM · #5798 |
|
|
|
07/31/2012 02:27:57 PM · #5799 |
It's like the twilight zone. You show us night and tell us it's day. Let's try this rewording this so it's grounded in reality:
Seems this country won't tolerate discrimination any more. So much for freedom of bigotry, but we've be set right before. It was just easier in this country.
Hmmm that's better. Yes, it WAS easier to discriminate before. Now you just can't get away with what you used to, not like the good ole days aye?
Message edited by author 2012-07-31 14:28:30. |
|
|
|
07/31/2012 02:39:18 PM · #5800 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
It's like the twilight zone. You show us night and tell us it's day. Let's try this rewording this so it's grounded in reality |
You do realize that you're responding to an intentional representation of Afred E. Neuman, right? "His face has often appeared in political cartoons as a shorthand for unquestioning stupidity."
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." - Voltaire |
|
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: 08/03/2025 06:53:36 PM EDT.
