You can troll my spelling all you wish. It's all good. On a side note, the Oxford dictionary also has also defined what a unicorn is. YAY! Reality is, the DSM does not have "homophobia" as a diagnosis, which means that the voice of the medical community in the civilized world disagrees with the Oxford dictionary. Does hate speech exist? Sure! Both sides employ it. The word "homophobia" is a part of the hate speech. Most people know that. But, I digress. You're trolling now, and I'm choosing not to feed you any more. Our back and forth is here for anyone to read.nthey can draw their own conclusions, much like pineapple did. On that note, I give you the final word ( which I guarintee you'll take, along with a parting insult, no doubt. I'm prophetic about this stuff)
Yes, atheists have done the same things. But religion actively promotes it. Literally, do the wrong things and go to hell. As for raising kids, I don't see why you couldn't teach them to be decent to other people and let them choose religion if they would like. I feel like if I had a kid I could give them perspective rather than just this is right and everything else is wrong. Yes, when it comes down to it morals are what we think is right. But there is an overarching morality to the world. Basically don't hurt people. I'm an anarchist, if I had a kid I would not raise them as one. I would explain why I believe in what I do if they're interested in it. I wouldnt start telling them the government is out to get them and the only way to stop it is to take the system down when they're 3. EDIT: Basically what I'm saying is yes they will pick up things but you can try to take an unbiased approach when raising them.
James 4:12 (Aramaic bible in plain English) One is he who lays down The Written Law and judgment, who is able to give life and to destroy. Who are you who are judging your neighbor? So I go back to my earlier point. A Christian shouldn't judge. That's for your god to do.
I was raised Christian, rejected it and I'm now a proud athiest. My children beliee in fairies and unicorns and ol Saint Nick.they also have friends and neighbours that go to church every Sunday, or mosque every day except Sunday. If they choose to believe then I will take them until they are of age to take themselves. I've even read some scripture to my eldest when she has asked about it. Not all atheists are anti religion, most of us are anti shove it down our throats
I have know a few atheists. All of them have been really friendly and lead very moral and even generous lives. I believe that this encapsulates MOST atheists, and it's just the very few atheist asshats that get all the press, giving the group a bad name. The same holds true for Christians. Most are lovely friendly generous people, but a few asshats always stand out and act like 12 year olds. The fringe people in any movement are bad
Yea I wasn't trying to classify atheists as anything. Moose just mentioned atheists have used to the same tactics and I was saying that religion is trying to promote these things while atheists don't have a general belief system so I wouldn't call it inherently bad. EDIT: I would just like to clarify I don't think religious people are bad. But most religious people were raised that way since they were very young. I won't ever be okay with people teaching kids things to promote their agenda. EDIT2: The thing about unicorns and Santa are interesting. Those are things that implement wonder and imagination in kids that we expect them to outgrow. While religion is just as extravagant, if not more, and people teach them to believe it their entire lives.
To raise a question about this topic and somewhat broader issues. This ladies drama is due to a lack of compromise on her part, is that a symptom of a wider and growing intolerance for comprise? In topics from religion to politics even science there seems to be a refusal to accept that by working together most issues can have some resolution that is to an extent acceptable to all. Instead there seems to be a attitude that it's got to be everything for you or nothing for everyone.
I'm trolling because I supplied the correct definition of homophobia and not your made up one? Homophobia isn't listed as mental illness on the site you're listing as a source. Therefore it doesn't exist? Who said it was a mental illness? No one did. Racism also isn't listed as a mental illness on that site. Are you going to deny it exists as well? Dumb a also isn't listed as a mental disorder but who would disagree it doesn't exist. Reading your posts is testament to that I apologise you didn't know what the definition of homophobia is and had a strop once pointed out what it actually is and then refused to believe it after reading the English Oxford Dictionary definition of it and then discredited its actual existence on the bases the dictionary also has a definition for a unicorn. You look incredibly daft moose
I'll tip my hand on my age a bit. As an easy reference point for the Americans, I've been around since (ambles off to google) the Nixon administration. Living north of America gives me a distance perspective that many may not have living right in the middle of things, and I'd like to think I have enough time under my belt to see some type of pattern. From my observations over the years, America is becoming more and more polarized. It started with Bill Clinton and went exponentially bad when bush junior won the presidency in court. After that, both parties have been dedicated to hate, and it's only getting worse. I've only seen one case of real bipartisanship in the last decade, and that was over building a basketball arena in Milwaukee Wisconsin for their team the "bucks". Aside from that, I draw a blank. From a distance, it seems like most Americans are unwilling to compromise on many things. Both left and right are guilty of this. My advice is to have some pancakes and cheer for the bucks
Okay.. Well I am going to have to break this up Moose. Thank you for responding. This is completely incorrect. The 10 commands come from the old testaments. Actually most of the rules from the bible come from the old testaments. Including the rules against gays. But here is something out of the New Testaments that say Christians should follow the old testaments. (Jesus did not soften up the old testaments. "It is easer for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid" ~ Like 16:17 "Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law?" ~John 7:19 So, yes, Christians who are true to their bible must follow the old testaments. And Christians must follow said laws. This is not true. No where does it say that Jesus died to get rid of the laws of the Old Testament. That is a common misnomer by Christians who do not think killing women for premarital sex is okay. (As well as any other dislike of the old testaments but then you push the 10 commandments down our throats C.S.Lewis is a man who did not write the bible. You can not assume your religion because. "17 Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the all until it is accomplished."[/red] Matthew 5:17-18 In Ephesians 2:14-15 "14For He Himself is our peace, who made both one and both down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15 by abolishing in his flesh the enmity the law of commandments in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, establishing peace. Now I believe this is what you are talking about when saying Christians do not have to follow the old testaments. My friend this is not playing to make the Old Testament invalid. It is uniting all to follow and believe the Old Testament and that only who one parishes does he no longer live by it for they will be welcomed in a heaven (or a hell) It just made forgiveness easer. I may use her as an example but My greatest dislike towards Christianity is the bible in and of itself.
Now moose I don't have anything against Christians. I am just worn out by the ones who keep shoving it down my throat. Now Moose I respect Christians like you and I also respect those who believe how they wish to believe. It is your faith not mine. I am just debating with you how I see the bible is a negative part of the world and why so many Christians are negative, like Kim Davies.
I wouldn't say most Americans are opposed to compromise. Politicians now, that's a whole other breed of animal. Honestly from what I've experienced in the world most people are "good". They just want to get along with their day and live their life. But where do you draw the line with compromise? Everyone says opinions are equal but that's not true. People were upset at the Iranian nuclear deal because we made a deal with terrorists. Should we have drawn the line and not come to a compromise? What else should we do? Fight? I think in that case compromise is important because we don't have another peaceful option, it's best for both parties to have a common ground. For some things I don't see why we should have a common ground. Saying compromise is always good doesn't seem right. Sometimes you have to say "no, that's not okay. You can't do that".
Maggot: You posted some good stuff up there, and it sounds like your dislike of the bible comes from an actual knowledge base (most people don't understand whAt they don't like) so I commend you. I'll let most of your points stand, but will clarify one of my own. Christ didn't abolish Old Testament law, he fulfilled it, thus "paying our debt" as it were... But, to the larger point, and this is probably true of many things, the topic of Christianity is large and complex, which is why there is so much disagreement both with in Christendom and outside it. Your interpretation is a negative one, and I can respect that. (Even though my interpretation differs). I'm always wary of pulling out singular passages when trying to make a point, as passages come with context that are lost when they are isolated. Even so, I get where you're coming from, and I appreciate the time you took to forward your views. At the end of the day, we can both agree on more than we disagree. Asshat = bad Respect = good
If that is how you perceive it than good on you. Though even in the New Testament there are things I strongly dislike. I am just pointing out how many Christians do not perceive the bible as one that abolishes Fulfills the Old Testament and that is where a lot of hate comes from. The same is for Muslims as their Old Testament can be argued rather it was abolished/Fulfills or not. (remember at one time the Muslim religion was considered the religion of love) So yes we will not agree on the bible and it is fine because as you said there will probably be more things that we agree on than disagree on. So yes I did pull out singular passages, but I gave them enough passages to truly define their meaning in my understanding at it. For example I could have just put Matthew 5:17 up there and be done with it but Matthew 5:18 changes the context. It is in Mathew 5 that makes people question rather the old testaments are valid or not. This who say not is why the bible can be dangerous. Now there are things in the New Testament that is bad in my opinion as well. Though that is for another day because we are going off topic. Thanks for being cool about this it was a pleasure to agree to disagree with you on the perception of the bible and a pleasure to agree with you that Kim Davies punishment is well deserved.
I hope you did not take my words as being or trying to be disrespectful. I am just telling things how I see it. It was not a stab or insult towards you because I do not group you as a bad Christian. I judge people based on their actions, not their beliefs. Even if I highly dislike their beliefs. It is the person I judge.
Sorry, I already have a misses moose in my life, and one little moose in my home. Lol. No more couples please!