If it happened to them... it can happen to anyone.

10/29/2012 04:08:01 PM · #76

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

By your same reasoning, you, as a white man, should be cast in the same light as the KKK and other white supremacists, after all, you're all the same color, right? from the same country. bound by the same laws, right?

Your government tax thing is just bullshit. You could donate to any number of tax exempt secular charities that would have the same kind of parties, mission trips etc. You just have to look. But then you wouldn't have this bullshit argument to fall back on.

Not quite, since I was BORN a white man, and have no choice in the matter. Which is quite different from joining a group through choice.

Now, if I decided to join the KKK, then yes, you would be right for holding me responsible for their actions as a group. The difference here isn't hard to see, and I'm sure I don't need to elaborate.

As far as the tax thing, I would be very interested to hear what groups you are aware of, all of the ones I've found pretty much require you to be religious.

So, someone like yourself who's all for prejudicial lumping together of people to make them easier to despise is willing to make that sort of distinction for themselves to avoid being cast in the same light as a hate group, but you're not willing to do the same for others. Got it.

As a matter of a fact, in high school I spent a few months hanging out with a bunch of skinheads, they were fun guys and we had a blast - the whole thing came crashing down one night when I disagreed with a bit of rhetoric and set about proving why it was pure crap.

I was rewarded with a bottle to the skull by one of the guys I had pissed off, while sitting down and from behind, might I add. That was the last night I associated myself with them, and was yet another important lesson in the dangers of rhetoric and group following behaviors. So, if you'd like to blame me for that, you're quite welcome to, as I personally feel it was a darn shameful group of people for me to associate with.

Today, nearly 20 years later, I still feel bad for having had anything to do with them at all, and realize that it was a really bad decision, but I've made a very long list of mistakes in my life, and I'm not really sure that this even ranks anywhere near the top, so I try not to worry about it too much.

The point here is that I made my mistake, saw who I was in with, and cut my losses. I paid a price for disagreeing with the group, and learned a few lessons that were really valuable in the process.

Your rhetoric disgusts me Spork. You honestly think I'm "all for prejudical lumping together of people to make them easier to despise" huh? Not only is this a shitty retort that doesn't even address my post, it's actually a personal attack AND fails to actually pass any sort of a bull-shit test.

Let's just say if you keep that up, I won't be disagreeing politely with you.

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 16:11:15.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

10/29/2012 04:09:33 PM · #77

Originally posted by Cory:

Of course, I've been personally persecuted by Christians, so I have a bit of a hard time separating people from their religion, since it is a choice they make, and are actively supporting the church and all that it stands for. (Really guys, your most prominent mark is actually a representation of a horrible torture and execution device... That just seriously creeps me out). And of course, you avoided the only real problem I have with anyone - once they start to tell me how to live my life, then we have issues.

First, if you have a hard time separating people from their religion because of persecution against yourself than you really shouldn't comment on one's ability, or lack of, to separate their views from their religion, it's hypocritical.

Second, the "Cross" represents anything but a torture device. It represents what Christ accomplished or transcended. Your statement makes it clear that your are either ignorant to this fact or looking to stir someone up.

Third, the bible tells them to spread the word, can't blame them for doing so.

You have made many, many good points in this thread, however you are failing to practice them yourself.

edit: Im not trying to take a jab at you, only that I think you are overlooking your objectiveness on the matter.

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 16:16:27.

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

10/29/2012 04:20:10 PM · #78

Originally posted by Cory:

Not quite, since I was BORN a white man, and have no choice in the matter. Which is quite different from joining a group through choice.

There is the nut of the argument, both of this tangent, and of the legal case that sparked this debate.

If you are born a particular way, no one is allowed to discriminate against you legally.

If you choose dress or behave in a particular way, you can be discriminated against.

No shoes, no shirt, no service. Gentlemen must wear a tie and jacket before being seated. Check all firearms at the door. Patrons who can not control their voice will be asked to leave.

Imagine that you are asked if you would be willing to shoot the following weddings: A biker wedding. A nudist wedding. A rapper's wedding. A white supremacy wedding. A gay wedding. A wedding of an octogenarian and a teenager. A wedding of a man to a horse. Your fathers fourth marriage, to a woman you can't stand.

One of them has to make you think, "Wow, I really would be uncomfortable in that group, and my images would be worse than if someone else, who would be more at ease in that group, did them; I would like to take a pass." However if it is deemed that the thing that makes you uncomfortable is an inborn trait rather than a chosen behavior, then you can not legally discriminate against that group, you have to take the job no matter how much the behavior bugs you because it is a result of how they were born.

Where that line is at any point in time, is not at all clear to me.

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS

10/29/2012 04:25:59 PM · #79

Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Cory:

Of course, I've been personally persecuted by Christians, so I have a bit of a hard time separating people from their religion, since it is a choice they make, and are actively supporting the church and all that it stands for. (Really guys, your most prominent mark is actually a representation of a horrible torture and execution device... That just seriously creeps me out). And of course, you avoided the only real problem I have with anyone - once they start to tell me how to live my life, then we have issues.

First, if you have a time separating people from their religion because of persecution against yourself than you really shouldn't comment on one's ability, or lack of, to separate their views from their religion, it's hypocritical.

Ok, Mike, I suppose the blacks are just being hypocritical for not being able to seperate members of the KKK from their group membership.. After all, the new KKK isn't even about hate anymore, they're just protecting themselves from the "race war"... Besides, don't you know, they claim to be a good group of guys with strong Christian values.

Originally posted by mike_311:

Second, the "Cross" represents anything but a torture device. It represents what Christ accomplished or transcended. Your statement makes it clear that your are either ignorant to this fact or looking to stir someone up.

Wikipedia seems to disagree with you. I trust Wikipedia over you.

Originally posted by Wikipedia:

The Christian cross, seen as a representation of the instrument of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, is the best-known religious symbol of Christianity.

Originally posted by mike_311:

Third, the bible tells them to spread the word, can't blame them for doing so.

The bible also tells you to kill people for various acts(not the best link, but I'm being lazy). I suppose we can't blame them for that either.

Originally posted by mike_311:

You have made many, many good points in this thread, however you are failing to practice them yourself.

I see, clearly I don't want to continue in this manner, if you are correct... I'm afraid I couldn't find what you're talking about though, so I wonder if you would be so kind as to point this failing out to me? As I am indeed apparently quite blind to the reality of my situation.

ETA: Just read your "not taking a jab at me" ETA comment. Right on man, I did read it that way at first, so please don't take my response too seriously, although I am being serious.

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 16:28:57.

HCvE

Fujifilm X-T1

10/29/2012 04:27:55 PM · #80

free choice to believe what you want, to marry who you want, who you want to work for...

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 16:29:21.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

10/29/2012 04:29:38 PM · #81

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

By your same reasoning, you, as a white man, should be cast in the same light as the KKK and other white supremacists, after all, you're all the same color, right? from the same country. bound by the same laws, right?

Your government tax thing is just bullshit. You could donate to any number of tax exempt secular charities that would have the same kind of parties, mission trips etc. You just have to look. But then you wouldn't have this bullshit argument to fall back on.

Not quite, since I was BORN a white man, and have no choice in the matter. Which is quite different from joining a group through choice.

Now, if I decided to join the KKK, then yes, you would be right for holding me responsible for their actions as a group. The difference here isn't hard to see, and I'm sure I don't need to elaborate.

As far as the tax thing, I would be very interested to hear what groups you are aware of, all of the ones I've found pretty much require you to be religious.

So, someone like yourself who's all for prejudicial lumping together of people to make them easier to despise is willing to make that sort of distinction for themselves to avoid being cast in the same light as a hate group, but you're not willing to do the same for others. Got it.

As a matter of a fact, in high school I spent a few months hanging out with a bunch of skinheads, they were fun guys and we had a blast - the whole thing came crashing down one night when I disagreed with a bit of rhetoric and set about proving why it was pure crap.

I was rewarded with a bottle to the skull by one of the guys I had pissed off, while sitting down and from behind, might I add. That was the last night I associated myself with them, and was yet another important lesson in the dangers of rhetoric and group following behaviors. So, if you'd like to blame me for that, you're quite welcome to, as I personally feel it was a darn shameful group of people for me to associate with.

Today, nearly 20 years later, I still feel bad for having had anything to do with them at all, and realize that it was a really bad decision, but I've made a very long list of mistakes in my life, and I'm not really sure that this even ranks anywhere near the top, so I try not to worry about it too much.

The point here is that I made my mistake, saw who I was in with, and cut my losses. I paid a price for disagreeing with the group, and learned a few lessons that were really valuable in the process.

Your rhetoric disgusts me Spork. You honestly think I'm "all for prejudical lumping together of people to make them easier to despise" huh? Not only is this a shitty retort that doesn't even address my post, it's actually a personal attack AND fails to actually pass any sort of a bull-shit test.

Let's just say if you keep that up, I won't be disagreeing politely with you.

I'm quaking in my boots here.

You may not like it, but it's exactly what you're doing. You're lumping anyone of religious faith in with the most heinous religious extremists. Because of his faith, you equated Marko with the Westboro Baptists, in fact, you said he was worse. Based on your skin color, I simply equated you with white supremacists using your same reasoning.

You're willing to say "I'm not like those other white guys who hate other races." and tell a story about it, then turn around and say that same reasoning doesn't apply to people over their religion. Then when people of faith say, "I'm not like those extremists" you tell them that they are just as bad, if not worse. If they are, then you're every bit the racist that the neo-Nazi skinheads are.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

10/29/2012 04:30:22 PM · #82

so the question begs, is one BORN homosexual?

lots of folks think its a choice. In the end it only matters where the courts rule, and the position of many is to make sure judges who get to rule are of a certain mindset.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

10/29/2012 04:32:00 PM · #83

Originally posted by dacrazyrn:

Originally posted by mike_311:
here is the problem, you are allowed to feel how ever you want and you are allowed to practice your beliefs as you see fit, as yourself and in your home. the minute you offer a service to the public, you are not, repeat not, allowed to discriminate against any client base, if you do you can be sued.

Funny. I can open carry (and conceal carry) a gun in Colorado. It is the law and a Constitutional right. BUT, if I go into a store or restaurant carrying and they don't like it, they can refuse ME service and ask ME to leave. Interesting how this parallels the OP. Can I sue?!?

Not on the basis of antidiscrimination statutes, because they are "discriminating" based on what you choose to do, not who you are. You might be able to sue in Federal Court on the basis of Federal supremacy, but as a (suspected) states'-rights supporter, I'm not sure if you'd consider that an ethical option.

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

10/29/2012 04:32:05 PM · #84

Originally posted by BrennanOB:

Originally posted by Cory:
Not quite, since I was BORN a white man, and have no choice in the matter. Which is quite different from joining a group through choice.

There is the nut of the argument, both of this tangent, and of the legal case that sparked this debate.

If you are born a particular way, no one is allowed to discriminate against you legally.

If you choose dress or behave in a particular way, you can be discriminated against.

No shoes, no shirt, no service. Gentlemen must wear a tie and jacket before being seated. Check all firearms at the door. Patrons who can not control their voice will be asked to leave.

Imagine that you are asked if you would be willing to shoot the following weddings: A biker wedding. A nudist wedding. A rapper's wedding. A white supremacy wedding. A gay wedding. A wedding of an octogenarian and a teenager. A wedding of a man to a horse. Your fathers fourth marriage, to a woman you can't stand.

One of them has to make you think, "Wow, I really would be uncomfortable in that group, and my images would be worse than if someone else, who would be more at ease in that group, did them; I would like to take a pass." However if it is deemed that the thing that makes you uncomfortable is an inborn trait rather than a chosen behavior, then you can not legally discriminate against that group, you have to take the job no matter how much the behavior bugs you because it is a result of how they were born.

Where that line is at any point in time, is not at all clear to me.

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

10/29/2012 04:38:48 PM · #85

Originally posted by mike_311:

It doesn't matter what "lots of folks" think. Science isn't based on popular opinion. The idea that "it's a choice" is pretty silly, since if it really were a choice, how many people do you think would choose to face overt discrimination on a regular basis?

10/29/2012 04:40:34 PM · #86

Originally posted by Spork99:

Jeeze dude. Learn to read, your comprehension level clearly isn't sufficient to grasp the concept that I said the dedication to their fanaticism was more genuine and therefore somewhat more respectable (I specifically stated that I was NOT saying he was worse, and specifically stated that he is known to me to be a good guy)

Originally posted by Cory:

See my "Have your cake and eat it too" comment from earlier. You have to take the good with the bad, and I think the Westboro folks are at least somewhat respectable in that they don't seem to hedge at all out of fear of reprisal. Don't get me wrong though, those folks are f-ing nutjobs, and I'm not calling you worse than them in any way, I just have a certain level of respect for their whole-hearted and honest dedication to their insanity.

Originally posted by mbrutus2009:

Cory, I don't sit here and bash your lack of religion. In fact, I respect it as I should. In fact, I feel like you have every right to think my religion is "silly" but it doesn't mean you should vocalize yourself about it in a harmful way.

And you call Christians harmful? It hurts when people bash my religion, that's a fact.

Originally posted by Cory:

Ahh, perhaps YOU don't Marko, you're a really good guy. But you're in with a group, and as a part of that group you must accept responsibility for the actions of that group, since you are a member of that group by choice, not by nature. Therefore you are absolutely fair game my friend. (and I do mean that, you are a friend Marko, don't lose sight of that, I may despise the organization that you are a part of, but I do not despise you.)

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

10/29/2012 04:42:54 PM · #87

Originally posted by HCvE:

free choice to believe what you want, to marry who you want, who you want to work for...

THIS is the best thing said here yet today.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

10/29/2012 04:45:26 PM · #88

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

I'm quaking in my boots here.

You may not like it, but it's exactly what you're doing. You're lumping anyone of religious faith in with the most heinous religious extremists. Because of his faith, you equated Marko with the Westboro Baptists, in fact, you said he was worse. Based on your skin color, I simply equated you with white supremacists using your same reasoning.

You're willing to say "I'm not like those other white guys who hate other races." and tell a story about it, then turn around and say that same reasoning doesn't apply to people over their religion. Then when people of faith say, "I'm not like those extremists" you tell them that they are just as bad, if not worse. If they are, then you're every bit the racist that the neo-Nazi skinheads are.

Jeeze dude. Learn to read, your comprehension level clearly isn't sufficient to grasp the concept that I said the dedication to their fanaticism was more genuine and therefore somewhat more respectable (I specifically stated that I was NOT saying he was worse, and specifically stated that he is known to me to be a good guy)

Doesn't change how you cast people of faith in with the extremists, but excuse yourself from similar condemnation.

PuppyDogMom

Canon EOS R6

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/29/2012 04:52:00 PM · #89

Can I butt in or is this a private argument?

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS

10/29/2012 04:54:42 PM · #90

Butt in i say. Nothing private here.

HCvE

Fujifilm X-T1

10/29/2012 04:55:00 PM · #91

Unless you become a member of the kkk you can never be held responsible for their actions and even then just partly unless you 'pull the trigger'. Just like not every colored person is a black panther [just an example, not putting these on the same line]... see what i mean?

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

10/29/2012 04:55:58 PM · #92

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Cory:

Of course, I've been personally persecuted by Christians, so I have a bit of a hard time separating people from their religion, since it is a choice they make, and are actively supporting the church and all that it stands for. (Really guys, your most prominent mark is actually a representation of a horrible torture and execution device... That just seriously creeps me out). And of course, you avoided the only real problem I have with anyone - once they start to tell me how to live my life, then we have issues.

First, if you have a time separating people from their religion because of persecution against yourself than you really shouldn't comment on one's ability, or lack of, to separate their views from their religion, it's hypocritical.

Ok, Mike, I suppose the blacks are just being hypocritical for not being able to seperate members of the KKK from their group membership.. After all, the new KKK isn't even about hate anymore, they're just protecting themselves from the "race war"... Besides, don't you know, they claim to be a good group of guys with strong Christian values.

Originally posted by mike_311:

Second, the "Cross" represents anything but a torture device. It represents what Christ accomplished or transcended. Your statement makes it clear that your are either ignorant to this fact or looking to stir someone up.

Wikipedia seems to disagree with you. I trust Wikipedia over you.

Originally posted by Wikipedia:
The Christian cross, seen as a representation of the instrument of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, is the best-known religious symbol of Christianity.

Originally posted by mike_311:

Third, the bible tells them to spread the word, can't blame them for doing so.

The bible also tells you to kill people for various acts(not the best link, but I'm being lazy). I suppose we can't blame them for that either.

Originally posted by mike_311:

You have made many, many good points in this thread, however you are failing to practice them yourself.

I see, clearly I don't want to continue in this manner, if you are correct... I'm afraid I couldn't find what you're talking about though, so I wonder if you would be so kind as to point this failing out to me? As I am indeed apparently quite blind to the reality of my situation.

ETA: Just read your "not taking a jab at me" ETA comment. Right on man, I did read it that way at first, so please don't take my response too seriously, although I am being serious.

1. ok, for one Blacks have been extremely persecuted throughout history and sorry but i'd be a bit skeptical too.

2. as a former practicing Christian i'm pretty confidant what the Cross stands for. Its a symbol Cory. it represents that Christ, god's own son, died and the suffering that he willingly endured to cleanse man from his sins.

3. anything in the bible can be taken literally, the church tends to pick and choose what is acceptable at any time, and right now spreading the word is still acceptable, killing is not.

4. like i said, you are doing a very good job at pointing out the fallacy of Christianity, however you despise the subject and its coming across in your choice of words.

Denielle

Canon EOS-7D Mark II

10/29/2012 04:59:07 PM · #93

can't believe this is STILL in business of photography. just pointing that out.

10/29/2012 05:00:47 PM · #94

Originally posted by Ann:

Originally posted by mike_311:
so the question begs, is one BORN homosexual?

lots of folks think its a choice. In the end it only matters where the courts rule, and the position of many is to make sure judges who get to rule are of a certain mindset.

It doesn't matter what "lots of folks" think. Science isn't based on popular opinion. The idea that "it's a choice" is pretty silly, since if it really were a choice, how many people do you think would choose to face overt discrimination on a regular basis?

oh but it does matter, greatly. if you don't think so, just take a look at the political races going on and the lobby groups pouring money behind their candidates.

what actually is true is irrelevant until its proven or even better accepted.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/29/2012 05:01:42 PM · #95

I'm with Mike on the symbolism of the Cross thing. It's an old symbol, just like the Christ archetype is an old one and has lots of elements that predate Christianity by many many years. The Jesus Christ story/myth is one of the parts of Christianity i like a lot really. He comes across as one of the good guys and his teachings seem sound.

PuppyDogMom

Canon EOS R6

10/29/2012 05:05:12 PM · #96

OK...here's my butt in...

If you associate with a group, you represent the group. Period. Cory gave an excellent example of that.

If you believe that the group you belong to is right about everything and you and your group feel that everyone else should believe as you do, then you're insufferable...IMHO. And you are dangerously wrong.

Agreeing to disagree is not disagreeable.

What works for me might not work for you and that's ok with me.

And NO, being gay is not a choice.

And, if you offer a service, you cannot discriminate. The pizza delivery guy has to go into any neighborhood whether he/she wants to or not.

Just sayin'...

HCvE

Fujifilm X-T1

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS

10/29/2012 05:09:42 PM · #97

True about the predating christ archetype rooum, was an old story in a new jacket. The cross tho was a roman torture device and if jesus was crucified, he was just one of many during those days. Christians just made the device a symbol.

MinsoPhoto

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

10/29/2012 05:15:10 PM · #98

Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Ann:

Originally posted by mike_311:
so the question begs, is one BORN homosexual?

lots of folks think its a choice. In the end it only matters where the courts rule, and the position of many is to make sure judges who get to rule are of a certain mindset.

It doesn't matter what "lots of folks" think. Science isn't based on popular opinion. The idea that "it's a choice" is pretty silly, since if it really were a choice, how many people do you think would choose to face overt discrimination on a regular basis?

oh but it does matter, greatly. if you don't think so, just take a look at the political races going on and the lobby groups pouring money behind their candidates.

what actually is true is irrelevant until its proven or even better accepted.

It seems that only people who aren't gay believe that it is choice.

10/29/2012 05:23:09 PM · #99

Originally posted by PuppyDogMom:

OK...here's my butt in...

If you associate with a group, you represent the group.

My problem with that is that there are huge differences and branches within the major religions. There is a huge difference between Westbro and a Anglican vicar in a small village in Kent say. And there is a huge difference between the Taliban or Al Quada and my Muslim friends i used to live with when i lived in Egypt for a while. These major religions are so huge and old that it is fully possible to cherry pick what you want/need out of them. The horrible idiots and bigots might cherry pick the stuff that back up their prejudices. The few Christian friends i have are fascinating in their approach to their religion and are not homophobic or racist or sexist in any way. They've chosen the bits that work for them and do not identify at all with the likes of the burn in hell for your sins brigade.