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

10/29/2012 08:29:58 PM · #151

Originally posted by BrennanOB:

If you take it as a minimum response then an eye-for-eye and tooth-for-tooth would lead to a world of the blind and toothless.

Heh... You make an error in assuming the numbers on each side are equal. I would strongly suspect there are about 100 good people, and another 899 good, but easily mislead, people for every 1 truly rotten person.

The problem is that currently there seem to be quite a few of those rotten persons leading around lots of the easily mislead.

I know great people who are from a variety of places, and are of a variety of religions.

My entire point here is that it's up to you to control those who claim to be in the same group as you, stop them using your group's name, or change the name and affiliation of your group.

In essence: Evil triumphs when good men do nothing, don't be the good men doing nothing - stop the abuse of that which you love, or soon the organization will lose all credibility with a significant number of people.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

10/29/2012 08:30:24 PM · #152

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Cory:

Here, we protect Westboro, and give them tax cuts, I would prefer it if we denounced them as a church, and relabeled them as a hate group - until that happens, then they are Christians.

I'm not quite sure I understand. The line of people denouncing them is out the door and wrapped around the building twice. Westboro is an isolated island of like a hundred people.

And yet they still get a tax break.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

10/29/2012 08:33:28 PM · #153

Originally posted by Spork99:

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.

1. It's not remotely the same thing. You're born white, the choice to be a Neo-Nazi or a member of the KKK shows specific intent.

2. Like it or not, if you're a Christian, maintain that homosexuality is a mortal sin and against God's will, and want to keep it "In the closet where it belongs" by refusing professional services, et al, then yes, you're on the same page as Westboro, just maybe not foaming at the mouth in your approach.

PLEASE explain how this is fallacious.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

10/29/2012 08:45:06 PM · #154

Originally posted by vawendy:

There's so much I want to say, but I think I really need to ignore this thread. There are people that I used to like and respect who are likening me to some of the worst extremists because I happen to be Christian who actually has no problem with gay marriage, who believes in the big bang, and who still believes there's a God. I'm sorry you think so little of me.

Just out of curiosity, would you say that this is a common Christian theme, though?

Or is your predilection towards sense and reason the exception rather than the rule? Is the leader of your church, minister, pastor, aware of your feelings? Is he, or she, on the same page as you?

I'm sorry, but having been around Christians more often during my search for faith than any other religion, I find them as a whole to be a lot less Christian than what they preach.

I have met very few Christians in my 57 years that I would say fit the description so often bandied about called a "Good Christian".

What's funny is that one of the men in my lifetime whom I admire and respect both as a human being and a good Christian is my boss.....and I didn't have a clue as to either when he hired me.

As an interesting aside, he's a liberal Mennonite, which until I met him, I didn't think you could use those words in the same sentence, especially living in south-central Pennsylvania.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

10/29/2012 08:45:12 PM · #155

Originally posted by HCvE:

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.

Yah......pretty much like Christians getting on their high horse about gay marriage disrupting the institution of marriage......despite the fact that marriage had been ar5ound for at least a week or so before Christianity......

Just sayin'

10/29/2012 08:53:32 PM · #156

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by vawendy:
There's so much I want to say, but I think I really need to ignore this thread.

Seriously, though. This place felt like it was a nice little family. If I read any more of this thread, I'm not sure that it will be the same again. I have not seen such bigotry and intolerance shown in other threads as I have in this one. If this is the way that a number of people feel about people who have different skin, sex, beliefs than yourself, there's less hope than I thought for the world. I always saw this (with some exceptions :), as a crowd that skews the bell curve a bit towards the more intelligent side than the normal facebook, honey boo boo type crowd.

Just out of curiosity, would you say that this is a common Christian theme, though?

Wendy I don't want to make you hate me more, but darn it, I have to say it... This is another big thing that bothers me about religious folks, is that they often see it as much easier to simply ignore the dissenters, rather than really listening to what is being said and trying to understand it. That's the only theme I see there that I would call a common Christian theme.

You basically just said that you wouldn't even read the entire thread before you judged it. That's pretty darn sad my friend. (or ex-friend perhaps if you mean what you've said..)

And yet, you dare to call someone, perhaps me, bigoted and intolerant, hopeless and the "facebook, honey boo boo type crowd". You're doing a better job of proving my point than I am I'm afraid.

It's just really bad form Wendy, you honestly do yourself (and all Christians by association) a disservice by not striving to understand and reading the entire thread so that you might develop a full understanding of what has been said before judging the entirety of DPC based upon what is said here by a few of us. After all, that's not only exactly what I'm advocating that seems to offend you so badly, but it's also willful ignorance, which in my book is a horrible sin. (although, I actually think you are justified in holding DPC as a whole responsible for not ostracizing me and the others if what we are doing and saying is truly wrong.)

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 20:56:49.

10/29/2012 08:56:46 PM · #157

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:
To add something Cory, you claim to be non religious, which is your choice and I'm not knocking that but based on your reasoning I can lump you in with the same group of radical Atheists who would eradicate those who believe in a god especially Christians. Or the radical groups overseas that think all Christians should be killed and are persecuted daily. We really have no persecution here but in certain parts of the world it is very real. Should I lump you in with those groups? I don't think so.

Actually. You should, it's fair, as I share a great deal of similarity with them.

My real response is that they are out of line, and I would like to do something about them, clearly it's not ok to kill or persecute - argue with them, sure... Tell them they are silly, sure, attack the organization theologically, sure... But NEVER kill or shun, or persecute in any other meaningful way. That is wrong, and I think that is an absolute truth - they have as much right to life and happiness as I do, unless their idea of happiness intrudes on my idea of happiness, then they are out of line.

Honestly, if I, as a responsible and kind atheist, don't take responsibility for those who are like me, and try to do whatever I can if the chance arose to convince them that they are in error. As I said earlier, it's ok until you start screwing with someone else's lifestyle.

I condemn all who preach hatred, especially those who are atheist. Fortunately atheist radicals often lack the ideological zeal that their religious counterparts display so readily - something about a lack of belief in an afterlife probably.

But Cory, what you're doing about the radical atheists is enough, and yet what we're doing with the radical Christians isn't? I'm with Doc, the line condemning westboro is out the door. I've done what I can, condemned when I can. I'm not going to run for congress to change the tax laws, but I don't see you doing it either.

So why is it ok for you to lump us all in the same pot and say that we're just as bad? I've met some extremely hate filled atheists. Are all atheists the same? I don't think so. I may be naive, but I'm not going to judge anyone because I disagree with their beliefs. I'd rather make my decisions based upon what I see per individual. If I see the westboro group picketing a funeral 1.5 miles from me, I'm not condemning them because they're Christian -- they've twisted that belief system so far past it's purpose, I'm condemning them because they are hateful individuals, hurting families that are already going through something so devastating, that it's unconscionable that a person could even begin to interfere. So I'll condemn anyone taking part. I will not condemn the belief system that they twisted.

10/29/2012 09:03:32 PM · #158

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by vawendy:
There's so much I want to say, but I think I really need to ignore this thread.

Seriously, though. This place felt like it was a nice little family. If I read any more of this thread, I'm not sure that it will be the same again. I have not seen such bigotry and intolerance shown in other threads as I have in this one. If this is the way that a number of people feel about people who have different skin, sex, beliefs than yourself, there's less hope than I thought for the world. I always saw this (with some exceptions :), as a crowd that skews the bell curve a bit towards the more intelligent side than the normal facebook, honey boo boo type crowd.

Just out of curiosity, would you say that this is a common Christian theme, though?

Wendy I don't want to make you hate me more, but darn it, I have to say it... This is another big thing that bothers me about religious folks, is that they often see it as much easier to simply ignore the dissenters, rather than really listening to what is being said and trying to understand it. That's the only theme I see there that I would call a common Christian theme.

You basically just said that you wouldn't even read the entire thread before you judged it. That's pretty darn sad my friend. (or ex-friend perhaps if you mean what you've said..)

And yet, you dare to call someone, perhaps me, bigoted and intolerant, hopeless and the "facebook, honey boo boo type crowd". You're doing a better job of proving my point than I am I'm afraid.

It's just really bad form Wendy, you honestly do yourself (and all Christians by association) a disservice by not striving to understand and reading the entire thread so that you might develop a full understanding of what has been said before judging the entirety of DPC based upon what is said here by a few of us. After all, that's not only exactly what I'm advocating that seems to offend you so badly, but it's also willful ignorance, which in my book is a horrible sin. (although, I actually think you are justified in holding DPC as a whole responsible for not ostracizing me and the others if what we are doing and saying is truly wrong.)

I didn't say you were of the honey boo boo crowd. I specifically said that I thought this crowd was higher than that crowd. That's why I'm sad at the things that are coming forth. I would expect this type of thing from that crowd.

I did not expect it from this one. I find this group to be much more open minded and intelligent, and that's why I'm disappointed.

I read 85% of the thread. When it was getting a little ridiculous in the middle, I skipped about 5 posts (it got significantly longer while I was writing it). I read all of your premises and responses. I have striven to understand, and you're still lumping everyone into one.

I moved to the south (somewhat south). I see the racism. I see people falling into the habit of grouping people and finding fault. The racism in the south is scary. I don't like group thinking. I don't like group biases. I don't think it's warranted, and I don't think it's fair.

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 21:05:10.

10/29/2012 09:03:59 PM · #159

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:
To add something Cory, you claim to be non religious, which is your choice and I'm not knocking that but based on your reasoning I can lump you in with the same group of radical Atheists who would eradicate those who believe in a god especially Christians. Or the radical groups overseas that think all Christians should be killed and are persecuted daily. We really have no persecution here but in certain parts of the world it is very real. Should I lump you in with those groups? I don't think so.

Actually. You should, it's fair, as I share a great deal of similarity with them.

My real response is that they are out of line, and I would like to do something about them, clearly it's not ok to kill or persecute - argue with them, sure... Tell them they are silly, sure, attack the organization theologically, sure... But NEVER kill or shun, or persecute in any other meaningful way. That is wrong, and I think that is an absolute truth - they have as much right to life and happiness as I do, unless their idea of happiness intrudes on my idea of happiness, then they are out of line.

Honestly, if I, as a responsible and kind atheist, don't take responsibility for those who are like me, and try to do whatever I can if the chance arose to convince them that they are in error. As I said earlier, it's ok until you start screwing with someone else's lifestyle.

I condemn all who preach hatred, especially those who are atheist. Fortunately atheist radicals often lack the ideological zeal that their religious counterparts display so readily - something about a lack of belief in an afterlife probably.

But Cory, what you're doing about the radical atheists is enough, and yet what we're doing with the radical Christians isn't? I'm with Doc, the line condemning westboro is out the door. I've done what I can, condemned when I can. I'm not going to run for congress to change the tax laws, but I don't see you doing it either.

So why is it ok for you to lump us all in the same pot and say that we're just as bad? I've met some extremely hate filled atheists. Are all atheists the same? I don't think so. I may be naive, but I'm not going to judge anyone because I disagree with their beliefs. I'd rather make my decisions based upon what I see per individual. If I see the westboro group picketing a funeral 1.5 miles from me, I'm not condemning them because they're Christian -- they've twisted that belief system so far past it's purpose, I'm condemning them because they are hateful individuals, hurting families that are already going through something so devastating, that it's unconscionable that a person could even begin to interfere. So I'll condemn anyone taking part. I will not condemn the belief system that they twisted.

I hate to break this to you, but in fact there really isn't a "we". I don't choose to be an atheist - I simply can't find a religion that makes any sense to me. They are racists and hate mongers who also happen to not have a religious association.

You see the difference there? It's the positive vs. the negative. I am not a Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, or any other religion, and I do not believe in a God.. I therefore am an atheist. I attended a meeting once, never returned. I don't like group thinking, it's just not for me. And it's darn hard to control a group that isn't a group.

So, while you have joined a group, and worked to make yourself a part of that group, I have never taken such steps to be an Atheist. All I do is point out how silly you religious folks seem to me, and that somehow means I've joined a group that I never really wanted to be a part of. I'm a scientist if I had to choose, and yes, I hold my lot to extremely high standards - in fact, I don't think anyone does it nearly as well as we do.

And that was, FYI, what started this entire rant, I hurt Marko's feelings by saying his anti-gay marriage religious views are silly. He then proceeded to tell me I was wrong, and had no right to do such things.

Now, convince the government that they aren't Christians, and you're doing something useful, pray to god about it and they'll be out there next week picketing the funerals of hurricane victims.

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 21:08:47.

10/29/2012 09:23:38 PM · #160

Edited it, and erased it all.

No matter what I say, it's not going to change the fact that you fault me for being associated with Christianity. That I am guilty by association, regardless of which group I choose with which to associate. No matter how much that group condemns the extremists. No matter that there's no problem with gay marriage.

I'm sorry that I've given you a reason to disdain me further.

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 21:36:10.

10/29/2012 09:34:18 PM · #161

Originally posted by vawendy:

That's why I said it was sad, Cory.

That's why I said I didn't want to read the rest of the thread.

That's why I should have put this on ignore.

Because I like this place, and the people in it. Because I really didn't want to see how much disdain people have for me choosing to believe in something.

All that I've gained by continuing to read this thread is that you and some others that have chimed in have decided that by choosing a very progressive group of Christians who are accepting of things that the fanatics are not (gay marriage, big bang, whatever), I'm still lumped in the same category. I would have rather had someone bother to find out that I'm not at all the same as the people who hate.

You claim that Christians cause too many problems. I claim that people who are willing to judge people as groups have caused more.

Then I must have failed to state myself very well.

I do not lump you in wholesale with them, but as a member of the same master affiliation, your group does bear some responsibility to stand in front of their church with "We love gay rights" signs once a month, or at least exert some form of visible disapproval of their views, rather than simply sitting quietly and doing your own thing... You see, this is the one exception to the "Stay out of the business of others" rule... If you're in the same group, then that group must take steps to ensure people who call themselves a part of that group are well aligned with the beliefs.

Unfortunately for you, I fear that it is your particular brand of Christianity that is out of line with the teachings of the majority of churches, and as such you would probably be the ones ostracized. Still, I applaud your recognition of what is right, and think you are admirable for that.. (I still think you practice dark-squirrel-magick though...)

In the end, please don't think I am painting you with the same brush, but instead telling you that you do have a responsibility to exert whatever force you can upon those who are clearly wrong and members of your group, as only by good people standing up, and loudly proclaiming what is right, and what is wrong, can Christians really become Christ-like. And as I said earlier, I really admire that Jesus fellow you tell stories about, could do with more folks like him.

10/29/2012 09:40:08 PM · #162

Originally posted by vawendy:

Wrong. See above. I don't fault you for that, I may however fault you for not talking to your brothers and sisters about their bad behaviors.

And, for the last darn time, I like you Wendy, I think you're possibly a bit of a prude, that much is true, but I like you, and respect you, and consider you a friend. Don't ever let theological differences change that, please. Do remember that one of the major problems I cited is the difficulty in speaking about the evils of Christianity without every Christian thinking you are personally attacking them. I promise, I don't hate you, nor will I begin to, even if you decide that you are against gay marriage, like Marko. He's still someone I like, and would gladly invite to my home again any time. Of course, he may not want to hang out with me, as I am indeed such a supporter of the sinners. :) You'd be welcome any time as well as far as I'm concerned, to me every person is an individual, and they are treated as such... You can always count on that - even if I do want to hold you to a high standard when it comes to standing up for what is right when you are among your peers.

Message edited by author 2012-10-29 21:42:32.

10/29/2012 09:45:40 PM · #163

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by vawendy:
That's why I said it was sad, Cory.

That's why I said I didn't want to read the rest of the thread.

That's why I should have put this on ignore.

Because I like this place, and the people in it. Because I really didn't want to see how much disdain people have for me choosing to believe in something.

All that I've gained by continuing to read this thread is that you and some others that have chimed in have decided that by choosing a very progressive group of Christians who are accepting of things that the fanatics are not (gay marriage, big bang, whatever), I'm still lumped in the same category. I would have rather had someone bother to find out that I'm not at all the same as the people who hate.

You claim that Christians cause too many problems. I claim that people who are willing to judge people as groups have caused more.

Then I must have failed to state myself very well.

I do not lump you in wholesale with them, but as a member of the same master affiliation, your group does bear some responsibility to stand in front of their church with "We love gay rights" signs once a month, or at least exert some form of visible disapproval of their views, rather than simply sitting quietly and doing your own thing... You see, this is the one exception to the "Stay out of the business of others" rule... If you're in the same group, then that group must take steps to ensure people who call themselves a part of that group are well aligned with the beliefs.

Unfortunately for you, I fear that it is your particular brand of Christianity that is out of line with the teachings of the majority of churches, and as such you would probably be the ones ostracized. Still, I applaud your recognition of what is right, and think you are admirable for that.. (I still think you practice dark-squirrel-magick though...)

In the end, please don't think I am painting you with the same brush, but instead telling you that you do have a responsibility to exert whatever force you can upon those who are clearly wrong and members of your group, as only by good people standing up, and loudly proclaiming what is right, and what is wrong, can Christians really become Christ-like. And as I said earlier, I really admire that Jesus fellow you tell stories about, could do with more folks like him.

I've already been in one church that was kicked out of the Wisconsin Synod because we had the nerve to say that women should be able to vote in the church. Wisconsin synod is in the dark ages on many things.

The problem is this, Cory, you deal with what you can and you pick your battles.

Just like you don't go out and stand on street corners protesting domestic violence against women (which you should, being part of the male organization), you do what you can. When you are in an open and accepting church, there isn't much sense standing on a street corner holding signs. It's more useful serving at food kitchens, donating to food shelves, helping the elderly in the community, knitting shawls for cancer victims.

Regardless what you think of the downsides of religion, the ones that do it well do (it's tempted to say "a hell of a lot") a lot of good. Surely that's worth looking at and not just looking at the extremists.

10/29/2012 09:52:28 PM · #164

possibly a bit of a prude??

You definitely don't know me well.

I'm definitely a prude. :)

Though I don't vote down nudes, unless they're done poorly. :)

10/29/2012 09:55:01 PM · #165

Originally posted by vawendy:

I've already been in one church that was kicked out of the Wisconsin Synod because we had the nerve to say that women should be able to vote in the church. Wisconsin synod is in the dark ages on many things.

The problem is this, Cory, you deal with what you can and you pick your battles.

Just like you don't go out and stand on street corners protesting domestic violence against women (which you should, being part of the male organization), you do what you can. When you are in an open and accepting church, there isn't much sense standing on a street corner holding signs. It's more useful serving at food kitchens, donating to food shelves, helping the elderly in the community, knitting shawls for cancer victims.

Regardless what you think of the downsides of religion, the ones that do it well do (it's tempted to say "a hell of a lot") a lot of good. Surely that's worth looking at and not just looking at the extremists.

LO-frickin-L .. Why do you folks keep assigning me to groups that I never joined? I am absolutely against violence against most women, as I am against violence against most people (of course, the most bit here is because I will advocate for violence against anyone, given the right circumstances).. But I assure you, I've never joined the "Male Organization", although I do have a "Male Organ", I guess that's pretty close syntactically.

I don't know about that being more useful... Didn't Jesus say something about teaching a man to fish? Seems to me that serving food at food kitchens, and donating food both fall into the "giving a man a fish" category. Not that giving someone food is a bad deed, not at all! I myself have volunteered in soup kitchens as well - but it mostly left me feeling like I was just putting a bandaid on a festering wound.

And of course the good is worth looking at, not just the bad. The issue is I don't feel a need to talk to you about what you're doing right, there's no use, as you're already doing it right. The far more useful conversation centers around what you aren't doing right, as a group of course. :)

10/29/2012 10:05:27 PM · #166

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by vawendy:

I've already been in one church that was kicked out of the Wisconsin Synod because we had the nerve to say that women should be able to vote in the church. Wisconsin synod is in the dark ages on many things.

The problem is this, Cory, you deal with what you can and you pick your battles.

Just like you don't go out and stand on street corners protesting domestic violence against women (which you should, being part of the male organization), you do what you can. When you are in an open and accepting church, there isn't much sense standing on a street corner holding signs. It's more useful serving at food kitchens, donating to food shelves, helping the elderly in the community, knitting shawls for cancer victims.

Regardless what you think of the downsides of religion, the ones that do it well do (it's tempted to say "a hell of a lot") a lot of good. Surely that's worth looking at and not just looking at the extremists.

LO-frickin-L .. Why do you folks keep assigning me to groups that I never joined? I am absolutely against violence against most women, as I am against violence against most people (of course, the most bit here is because I will advocate for violence against anyone, given the right circumstances).. But I assure you, I've never joined the "Male Organization", although I do have a "Male Organ", I guess that's pretty close syntactically.

Oh, come on! You were supposed to see that it was ridiculous.

Ah well. I'm tired. It's a lot of work watching the rain today. :P

gn'te

10/29/2012 10:06:33 PM · #167

Originally posted by vawendy:

Ah well. I'm tired. It's a lot of work watching the rain today. :P

gn'te

Good night, sleep tight.. Don't let the hurricane bite. ;)

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

10/29/2012 10:07:08 PM · #168

Originally posted by vawendy:

possibly a bit of a prude??

You definitely don't know me well.

I'm definitely a prude. :)

Though I don't vote down nudes, unless they're done poorly. :)

Well... I didn't want to offend. ;) LOL!

Spork99

OM System OM-1

10/30/2012 11:45:25 AM · #169

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Spork99:
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.

1. It's not remotely the same thing. You're born white, the choice to be a Neo-Nazi or a member of the KKK shows specific intent.

2. Like it or not, if you're a Christian, maintain that homosexuality is a mortal sin and against God's will, and want to keep it "In the closet where it belongs" by refusing professional services, et al, then yes, you're on the same page as Westboro, just maybe not foaming at the mouth in your approach.

PLEASE explain how this is fallacious.

Both are examples of assigning guilt simply by association with some group. You're white, therefore you are a racist. You're a member of a Christian church therefore you are a homophobe. You're a man, therefore, you're a mysogynist. You are a Muslim, therefore, you're a terrorist. You're an American, therefore you're a gun-toting xenophobe.

By your reasoning all of the above would be true.

Apple iPhone 5

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

10/30/2012 11:48:30 AM · #170

It's about time a few people starting turning their other cheeks.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

10/30/2012 12:29:02 PM · #171

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Spork99:
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.

1. It's not remotely the same thing. You're born white, the choice to be a Neo-Nazi or a member of the KKK shows specific intent.

2. Like it or not, if you're a Christian, maintain that homosexuality is a mortal sin and against God's will, and want to keep it "In the closet where it belongs" by refusing professional services, et al, then yes, you're on the same page as Westboro, just maybe not foaming at the mouth in your approach.

PLEASE explain how this is fallacious.

Both are examples of assigning guilt simply by association with some group. You're white, therefore you are a racist. You're a member of a Christian church therefore you are a homophobe. You're a man, therefore, you're a mysogynist. You are a Muslim, therefore, you're a terrorist. You're an American, therefore you're a gun-toting xenophobe.

By your reasoning all of the above would be true.

Spork, forgive me for saying this, but for the fourth time in this thread, it appears that you have a serious lack of reading comprehension.

American White Male is not a club or group I joined, as Gaga said, I was born this way. Christian Church, Muslim, those are Groups you can join. Terrorist, this is a label applied to criminals that has little to do with anything else, have you forgotten that the IRA weren't Muslim?

Gun-toting, yes. Xenophobe, lol, just lol.

Spork my friend, you really should give up this /rant thing, it doesn't suit you - you're much more talented at the WTHizzit game.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

10/30/2012 05:08:49 PM · #172

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Spork99:
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.

1. It's not remotely the same thing. You're born white, the choice to be a Neo-Nazi or a member of the KKK shows specific intent.

2. Like it or not, if you're a Christian, maintain that homosexuality is a mortal sin and against God's will, and want to keep it "In the closet where it belongs" by refusing professional services, et al, then yes, you're on the same page as Westboro, just maybe not foaming at the mouth in your approach.

PLEASE explain how this is fallacious.

Both are examples of assigning guilt simply by association with some group. You're white, therefore you are a racist. You're a member of a Christian church therefore you are a homophobe. You're a man, therefore, you're a mysogynist. You are a Muslim, therefore, you're a terrorist. You're an American, therefore you're a gun-toting xenophobe.

By your reasoning all of the above would be true.

Spork, forgive me for saying this, but for the fourth time in this thread, it appears that you have a serious lack of reading comprehension.

American White Male is not a club or group I joined, as Gaga said, I was born this way. Christian Church, Muslim, those are Groups you can join. Terrorist, this is a label applied to criminals that has little to do with anything else, have you forgotten that the IRA weren't Muslim?

Gun-toting, yes. Xenophobe, lol, just lol.

Spork my friend, you really should give up this /rant thing, it doesn't suit you - you're much more talented at the WTHizzit game.

Again, because you clearly don't understand, it doesn't matter. You may not have "joined" the white male group, but you are a part of it. For plenty of people, that alone makes you a racist asswipe. If that's not right, then neither is your characterization of all Christians as homophobes.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/30/2012 05:33:37 PM · #173

Originally posted by Spork99:

SMH. Really bro, stick to this thread.. You are better at it, there mindless drivel and incorrectly interpreted attributions are a talent, in this context it's just useless and only hurts the real discussion.

I never characterized all Christians as homophobes.. You did that, in your head, although I suppose I shouldn't be surprised - given your repeated demonstrations of your inability to comprehend even the simplest of statements.

I DID however say that all Christians are responsible for the behavior of OTHER Christians... That much I stand by, as it's up to groups like this to police themselves, and there are a few groups that have made the mistake of allowing pretty much anyone to join and call themselves a part of that group. This, however, doesn't mean they are relieved of their duty to either abandon their group affiliation, or to control the group they are affiliated with in such a way that results in no-one hiding behind the protection of the claim of religious freedom, while spewing forth hatred and harmful attempts to control the lives of others.

Now, if that isn't clear after the fourth explanation, I honestly don't know what to say.

Furthermore, I'd like to point out that you are actually violating forum rule 12, as this is clearly a repeated attempt to incite me, since you have now, multiple times, attributed statements to me that I've never made, which only serves to incite folks who haven't actually read this entire thread. While I have no intention of reporting you, I would suggest that you review the rules, just so you can be sure that you're not stepping over the line unintentionally.

Message edited by author 2012-10-30 17:34:54.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

10/30/2012 05:46:07 PM · #174

Originally posted by Cory:

I DID however say that all Christians are responsible for the behavior of OTHER Christians...

Explain to me how my friend Isaiah, a Christian I met when I was in Zimbabwe in 1991 is responsible for the behavior of a person holding a picket sign in Texas? What practical steps do you suggest he takes at his village 90 minutes outside Bulawayo?