1 | Tsuga Mon, Apr 16, 2012 5:50:56pm |
OK, I'm a sucker for black and white longhaired cats.
That was a good one.
2 | Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste Mon, Apr 16, 2012 5:53:05pm |
Brilliant. The position of Feline Overlord is not always what it is cracked up to be.
3 | wrenchwench Mon, Apr 16, 2012 5:53:48pm |
I guess it was just well-chosen footage, but it looked like that cat was acting.
4 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 5:54:10pm |
Oscar material.
---
How 'Caine's Arcade' raised $164,000 for a boy from East L.A. (+video)
5 | b_sharp Mon, Apr 16, 2012 5:57:54pm |
re: #3 wrenchwench
I guess it was just well-chosen footage, but it looked like that cat was acting.
Yup, it was staged.
6 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 5:59:29pm |
Charles, while you're still tinkering with the code: is it possible to make the "Recent" pop-up appear centered vertically? Otherwise one has to always use the scroll bar to get the full view, unless the name that is hovered over is on the top of the screen.
7 | wrenchwench Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:02:38pm |
re: #6 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Charles, while you're still tinkering with the code: is it possible to make the "Recent" pop-up appear centered vertically? Otherwise one has to always use the scroll bar to get the full view, unless the name that is hovered over is on the top of the screen.
Good idea.
All that info on the pop-up is great.
8 | Page 3 in the Binder of Women Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:08:34pm |
re: #4 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Oscar material.
---How 'Caine's Arcade' raised $164,000 for a boy from East L.A. (+video)
I just watched that tonight after hearing on All Things Considered. What a story. And what a college fund. Kid deserves it. (best part is when he crawls into the cardboard box to dispense the tickets)
9 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:15:36pm |
re: #8 Hoodies for Justice. T
Enthusiasm coupled with inventiveness is inspiring.
10 | Page 3 in the Binder of Women Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:18:58pm |
re: #9 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Enthusiasm coupled with inventiveness is inspiring.
And his dad was cool. All of it was really cool. "Thank you Reddit!"
11 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:21:23pm |
Ye Olde Ones: Image: bgte-old-one-copy1.jpg
12 | Page 3 in the Binder of Women Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:23:10pm |
Sara Ganim, the 24-year-old crime reporter for The Harrisburg Patriot-News, became the second-youngest person to win a Pulitzer Prize when the awards were announced Monday afternoon.Ganim and members of The Patriot-News staff won the Pulitzer for local reporting for "courageously revealing and adeptly covering the explosive Penn State sex scandal involving former football coach Jerry Sandusky."
This was the go-to place for the best news on the horrible breaking story. I actually turned my PA family onto her columns - thank you internet.
How proud she must be.
13 | ProGunLiberal Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:25:23pm |
So, I found out what the issue with the APO group here is. Apparently, this batch of officers cares more about expanding the numbers in the group at the cost of everything else.
They simply didn't care when I began to feel neglected and lonely.
15 | Kragar Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:28:46pm |
re: #11 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Ye Olde Ones: Image: bgte-old-one-copy1.jpg
Got a first edition of that book sitting around my parent's house somewhere.
16 | Dancing along the light of day Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:29:04pm |
Charles, you have outdone yourself!
BRAVO!
( He looks like a neighbors cat named Kiwi)
17 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:29:51pm |
re: #15 Kragar
Didn't know there was a book, just grabbed it from the author's blog.
18 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:29:54pm |
re: #14 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Gus!
Fire in the hole!
National Review's John O'Sullivan: Board of Director to White Nationalist Group
19 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:30:46pm |
re: #18 Gus
You magnificent bastard! /
20 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:31:16pm |
re: #19 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
You magnificent bastard! /
Charles tipped me. I got the assignment. ;)
21 | Digital Display Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:31:41pm |
re: #16 Dancing along the light of day
I wanted to share this with you..Thanks for your support
22 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:31:59pm |
*reading*
23 | Page 3 in the Binder of Women Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:34:35pm |
Hey Hoops, I'm catching up. Congrats on your upcoming move. Sounds so excellent, and deserved.
Me and B sharp are your first uninvited guests. Just give us coordinates. We'll get there.
24 | Dancing along the light of day Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:35:50pm |
re: #21 HoosierHoops
It is playing loudly!
You posted it last night, but I like it!
27 | Dancing along the light of day Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:36:50pm |
re: #23 Hoodies for Justice. T
Ahem, no. but you can be second!
28 | Targetpractice Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:37:41pm |
29 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:37:58pm |
re: #26 Gus
During that time, VDare was instrumental in the formation of Alternative Right which included a grant of 35-thousand dollars. It should be noted that during a previous routing of extremism at National Review that John O’Sullivan was removed as editor.
You don't need that hyphen.
30 | b_sharp Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:39:58pm |
re: #24 Dancing along the light of day
It is playing loudly!
You posted it last night, but I like it!
You really are a sweetheart aren't you?
31 | b_sharp Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:41:41pm |
re: #23 Hoodies for Justice. T
Hey Hoops, I'm catching up. Congrats on your upcoming move. Sounds so excellent, and deserved.
Me and B sharp are your first uninvited guests. Just give us coordinates. We'll get there.
I just got my map app working with GPS, and new belts on the Imprezza. I'm ready to go.
32 | Kragar Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:42:32pm |
re: #17 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Didn't know there was a book, just grabbed it from the author's blog.
Barlowe's Guide to Extraterrestrials. He did a series of prints of aliens from a few dozen sci-fi novels.
33 | Page 3 in the Binder of Women Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:43:23pm |
re: #31 b_sharp
I just got my map app working with GPS, and new belts on the Imprezza. I'm ready to go.
I got a new car. It travels. ROAD TRIP
Hoops, this is not a threat.
34 | Digital Display Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:44:32pm |
re: #24 Dancing along the light of day
It is playing loudly!
You posted it last night, but I like it!
It was great talking to you the other night..So it was like 2am and I said I wasn't going to go to sleep before the storm came through? Well I did at about 4am..At 4:30 it hit.. I jumped up ready to jump into the bathtub..
Nice blankets..Pillows..Flashlights.. We were lucky...
Saturday Morning..The most painful thing I posted to start the day in Oklahoma is that there will be souls here that will not be alive by the end of the day..This is just beginning..It breaks my heart
35 | Dancing along the light of day Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:45:28pm |
re: #34 HoosierHoops
I love chatting with you, and REALLY appreciate your & Charles gift of music.
36 | Digital Display Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:45:59pm |
re: #33 Hoodies for Justice. T
I got a new car. It travels. ROAD TRIP
Hoops, this is not a threat.
The place sleeps 10..You with all lizards will always be welcome
37 | steve_davis Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:49:15pm |
LOL!! That cat has now been contracted by Putnam for six volumes under the heading Remembrance of Things Pawsed. Seriously, if you aren't laughing towards the end, when the cat looks slowly back over his shoulder at the camera, then you just aren't getting enough fiber in your diet!
38 | Dancing along the light of day Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:49:29pm |
re: #36 HoosierHoops
I dibs a bed, and not the floor!
39 | b_sharp Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:51:49pm |
re: #29 jaunte
You don't need that hyphen.
Yup, another hyphen, or as the youngsters call it, a dash, for the extraneous character bucket which is already filling with quotes, double quotes, commas, exclamation marks and ellipses.
40 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:52:33pm |
re: #20 Gus
Realpolitikal suggestion: emphasize Kevin McDonald's presence at VDare site, a few juicy words about him.
42 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:53:25pm |
re: #40 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
(Yes, I noted the quote. I mean, show his own page at vdare.)
43 | William Barnett-Lewis Mon, Apr 16, 2012 6:54:12pm |
Ah, I needed that video tonight, Thank you so much, Charles.
"the whipped cream in the bathroom is not whipped cream" Ain't that just the ultimate truth in this world?
44 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:01:23pm |
re: #42 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Just for general info: the notorious antisemite, pal of David Irving, late Joe Sobran has an article at VDare:
[Link: www.vdare.com...]
Rick is also wrong about me and the Jews, as so many people have been. Being a full-time Jew-hater is hard work, much too hard for me. I was indeed revolted by Bill's fulsome philosemitism, and I now joke that I'm working on a children's book titled The Littlest Holocaust Denier, but my real object has always been to keep this country – and especially my own family—out of war.
[...]
I was so fond of John O'Sullivan that he and I both laughed when he fired me (I'd pretty much forced him to by writing a column slamming Bill). This was some years before Bill gave John himself the axe, an episode I wasn't privy to.
45 | Dancing along the light of day Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:01:27pm |
re: #21 HoosierHoops
It's a good thing the lady next door is deaf!
46 | nines09 Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:02:54pm |
Cats. Love them or hate them there is something about them that made ancient civilizations worship and adore them, sometimes fear them. All you have to see in your life is a cat sitting on the floor and look as if it is watching someone or something walk by. But there is nothing there. At least that you can see. Saw it more than a few times. Spooky.
47 | Digital Display Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:05:40pm |
re: #45 Dancing along the light of day
It's a good thing the lady next door is deaf!
LOL I find living in a college town you get to play anything you want as loud as possible...
Hope today finds you well..
48 | b_sharp Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:06:28pm |
re: #46 Krathing Daeng
Cats. Love them or hate them there is something about them that made ancient civilizations worship and adore them, sometimes fear them. All you have to see in your life is a cat sitting on the floor and look as if it is watching someone or something walk by. But there is nothing there. At least that you can see. Saw it more than a few times. Spooky.
They're watching the shiny spot on the wall go by, or the tiny spot on their lens.
50 | b_sharp Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:08:46pm |
re: #47 HoosierHoops
LOL I find living in a college town you get to play anything you want as loud as possible...
Hope today finds you well..
Even one chord drop tuned metal through a 200 watt tube amp turned to 11?
51 | nines09 Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:10:09pm |
re: #48 b_sharp
I hear you. But I watched them snap to and turn their head as if hearing something and then just follow something across the room and then go back to grooming. Who knows? They aren't talking to me.
52 | Dancing along the light of day Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:13:41pm |
re: #47 HoosierHoops
I am playing youtube Daughtry very loud.
53 | Page 3 in the Binder of Women Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:16:56pm |
RT @mckaycoppins: The Dark Side Of Being Michael Jordan buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/the-da…
— Andrew Kaczynski (@BuzzFeedAndrew) April 17, 2012
54 | Interesting Times Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:17:44pm |
Instead of Buffett Rule, Romney favors economic version of Stand Your Ground law: 1% may do anything to defend their privileged status.— pourmecoffee (@pourmecoffee) April 17, 2012
55 | b_sharp Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:19:18pm |
re: #51 Krathing Daeng
I hear you. But I watched them snap to and turn their head as if hearing something and then just follow something across the room and then go back to grooming. Who knows? They aren't talking to me.
I find that a cat's eyesight is actually worse than a human's eyesight except in the dark. I can see contrast better than either of our cats and can follow the movement of flies better than they can.
Maybe their ability to see spooky apparitions is compensation?
57 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:27:51pm |
re: #44 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Just for general info: the notorious antisemite, pal of David Irving, late Joe Sobran has an article at VDare:
[Link: www.vdare.com...]
That's been up there for a long time, as Sobran is at least 3 years dead. But William F. Buckley shit-canned Sobran for the latter's Anti-Semitism, no matter what Sobran said afterwards. Sobran had become a bitter hater by the time he wrote that article, and thus anything he says in it should be treated with intense suspicion.
58 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:31:19pm |
re: #56 Kragar
Romney Wows Tea Party With Promise To End Obama’s War On The Rich
The idea that there is some kind of war on the rich, when they are wealthier than ever in human history, is just absurd.
59 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:33:50pm |
Use of 'likely voter' model in Kos poll of WI gov recall shows Scott Walker with a 5% lead over Tom Barrett and a 7% lead over Kathleen Falk. The poll shows Barrett with a 12% lead over Falk in the Democratic primary, and that a lot of Republicans are planning to vote in said primary (this is permitted in Wisconsin.
The article on the poll is Here. The National Review The Corner post where I found out about the Kos poll is Here.
60 | Page 3 in the Binder of Women Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:39:10pm |
re: #58 jaunte
Romney Wows Tea Party With Promise To End Obama’s War On The Rich
The idea that there is some kind of war on the rich, when they are wealthier than ever in human history, is just absurd.
The NYT reporter won a fricken Pulitzer for exposing GE's zero tax payment.
Only those who want to be fooled will be fooled. Dog help us.
61 | Interesting Times Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:41:54pm |
re: #59 Dark_Falcon
Whatever happens doesn't change the fact that Scott Walker is a disgusting, vicious, bigoted piece of filth:
You may remember Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker from his cowardly and sneaky women’s rights stripping last week. But did you know that before he was limiting sex ed and repealing pay equity laws, he was rolling back laws that gave same sex couples the right to visit each other in the hospital?
How can you support him knowing he does such despicable things? What could possibly be worth such a gutless and unprincipled selling out of human decency?
62 | Targetpractice Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:44:10pm |
re: #61 Interesting Times
Whatever happens doesn't change the fact that Scott Walker is a disgusting, vicious, bigoted piece of filth:
How can you support him knowing he does such despicable things? What could possibly be worth such a gutless and unprincipled selling out of human decency?
Burning down the unions, once and for all.
/
63 | Lidane Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:45:35pm |
re: #58 jaunte
The idea that there is some kind of war on the rich, when they are wealthier than ever in human history, is just absurd.
Oh, but didn't you know? The scary black Marxist Kenyan Nazi Commie Mooslim Overlord Usurper™ in the White House has declared war on rich white men. They're the poor widdle victims of a meanie POTUS who has the gall to ask them to pay their fair share in taxes.
64 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:46:46pm |
re: #55 b_sharp
I find that a cat's eyesight is actually worse than a human's eyesight except in the dark. I can see contrast better than either of our cats and can follow the movement of flies better than they can.
Maybe their ability to see spooky apparitions is compensation?
Maybe you are just more interested in flies than they are? They tried one, once, as a kitten.
65 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:49:56pm |
It just may be that when the top marginal tax rate is a little higher, (say 39%) wealthy people will have to hire more helpers to make the same kind of money they're making now, when it's at 35%.
66 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:52:05pm |
re: #61 Interesting Times
Whatever happens doesn't change the fact that Scott Walker is a disgusting, vicious, bigoted piece of filth:
How can you support him knowing he does such despicable things? What could possibly be worth such a gutless and unprincipled selling out of human decency?
Simple: I don't consider it a serious wrong. Wisconsin decided against both gay marriage and civil unions and wrote prohibitions on both into their state constitution. This is part of that. I'm not in favor of it, but it is part of a "concede nothing" policy; The idea being that giving a gay couple any rights traditionally associated with marriage will form a 'pryebar' for getting gay marriage adopted through the courts.
The 'hospital rule' is not about hate and instead is about a coherent policy.
67 | Mocking Jay Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:53:50pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
Simple: I don't consider it a serious wrong. Wisconsin decided against both gay marriage and civil unions and wrote prohibitions on both into their state constitution. This is part of that. I'm not in favor of it, but it is part of a "concede nothing" policy; The idea being that giving a gay couple any rights traditionally associated with marriage will form a 'pryebar' for getting gay marriage adopted through the courts.
The 'hospital rule' is not about hate and instead is about a coherent policy.
Hate is the policy.
68 | Lidane Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:54:00pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
The 'hospital rule' is not about hate and instead is about a coherent policy.
If you believe that, there's oceanfront land in Nebraska for sale.
69 | ProGunLiberal Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:54:11pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
And here is where I walk away for the night before I blow a gasket.
70 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:54:46pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
It's a coherent policy designed to keep a defined class of people "less than," and that's wrong.
71 | Interesting Times Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:56:40pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
Simple: I don't consider it a serious wrong...The 'hospital rule' is not about hate and instead is about a coherent policy.
Bull.fucking.SHIT.
If I had "Twilight Zone" powers right about now, I'd change you into a gay person barred from visiting their life partner. THEN maybe you'd see what it's like.
Your position is disgusting. And never again can you criticize WindUpBird for his comments, because you've just proven every bad thing he says about Republicans is true.
72 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:58:02pm |
re: #70 jaunte
It's a coherent policy designed to keep a defined class of people "less than," and that's wrong.
Hey, I support civil unions and I make no objection to gay marriage. But I also think its a thing each state should decide for itself, and also that if Wisconsin is going prohibit gay unions outright (which it did), that prohibition has to be solid. Speaking for myself, I'd get rid of the prohibition, but its not a decisive factor for me either way.
73 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 7:59:48pm |
re: #72 Dark_Falcon
Hey, I support civil unions and I make no objection to gay marriage. But I also think its a thing each state should decide for itself, and also that if Wisconsin is going prohibit gay unions outright (which it did), that prohibition has to be solid. Speaking for myself, I'd get rid of the prohibition, but its not a decisive factor for me either way.
Hey. I think states should be able to prohibit heterosexual marriage*. What do you think of that? States rights and all.
*Hypothetically speaking.
74 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:00:02pm |
re: #71 Interesting Times
Understand that I have no life partner, nor am I ever likely to have one. If we're to be honest, that almost certainly colors my decision making on this issue.
75 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:00:11pm |
re: #72 Dark_Falcon
I can't support an effort to create a legal second class of citizens.
76 | Interesting Times Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:00:34pm |
re: #72 Dark_Falcon
Hey, I support civil unions and I make no objection to
gayinterracial marriage. But I also think its a thing each state should decide for itself, and also that if Wisconsin is going prohibitgayinterracial unions outright (which it did), that prohibition has to be solid. Speaking for myself, I'd get rid of the prohibition, but its not a decisive factor for me either way.
Now what? And don't get all literal - the principle is the same.
77 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:00:40pm |
re: #73 Gus
Hey. I think states should be able to prohibit heterosexual marriage*. What do you think of that? States rights and all.
*Hypothetically speaking.
Fine by me.
78 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:01:20pm |
re: #77 Dark_Falcon
Fine by me.
Yeah. They should be able to ban certain religions too don't you think?
79 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:01:41pm |
Think of the economic stimulus that all those weddings would bring.
80 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:02:00pm |
re: #74 Dark_Falcon
Dark, no offense, but is your lack of empathy a part of why you're a conservative?
82 | William Barnett-Lewis Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:03:55pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
The 'hospital rule' is not about hate and instead is about a coherent policy.
Sorry DF, but the only policy it's about is hate.
83 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:04:08pm |
re: #76 Interesting Times
Now what? And don't get all literal - the principle is the same.
The difference is that prohibiting marriage on racial grounds is a violation of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Loving vs. Virginia. The Acts of Congress enforcing the 14th Amendment explicitly prohibit racial discrimination (as the amendment intends).
The 14th Amendment says nothing about sexual orientation.
84 | The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:05:44pm |
re: #83 Dark_Falcon
The difference is that prohibiting marriage on racial grounds is a violation of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Loving vs. Virginia. The Acts of Congress enforcing the 14th Amendment explicitly prohibit racial discrimination (as the amendment intends).
The 14th Amendment says nothing about sexual orientation.
And you don't see how the argumentation in Loving applies to the context of gay marriage?
85 | Targetpractice Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:06:40pm |
re: #83 Dark_Falcon
The difference is that prohibiting marriage on racial grounds is a violation of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Loving vs. Virginia. The Acts of Congress enforcing the 14th Amendment explicitly prohibit racial discrimination (as the amendment intends).
The 14th Amendment says nothing about sexual orientation.
Uh, no, the 14th Amendment does not mention race anywhere.
86 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:07:50pm |
re: #78 Gus
Yeah. They should be able to ban certain religions too don't you think?
I think Oklahoma may still be working on banning Islam.
“The federal appeals court in Denver attempted to silence the voice of 70 percent of Oklahoma voters,” State Sen. Anthony Sykes said in a statement. “At some point we have to decide whether this is a country of by and for the judges, or of by and for the people. How far will the people let them go? This ruling is right along with legalizing abortion and forced busing of school children.” [Link: abcnews.go.com...]
87 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:08:49pm |
re: #83 Dark_Falcon
Are you arguing on moral or legal grounds?
88 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:09:17pm |
re: #78 Gus
Yeah. They should be able to ban certain religions too don't you think?
No, and I recently had that argument with my father actually. He favored a "defining of religion" to exclude Islam, which I opposed firmly as incompatible with the 1st Amendment (multiple 'toleration of religion' definitions at the time of the passage of the bill of rights expressly mentioned Islam, to make its inclusion within the Amendment's scope crystal -clear, though I'd not support exclusion even had such definitions not been present). The Constitution is very clear on this point, and the 14th Amendment made the Free Exercise Clause binding on the states.
89 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:09:29pm |
re: #83 Dark_Falcon
The difference is that prohibiting marriage on racial grounds is a violation of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Loving vs. Virginia. The Acts of Congress enforcing the 14th Amendment explicitly prohibit racial discrimination (as the amendment intends).
The 14th Amendment says nothing about sexual orientation.
Reading that then people can discriminate against GLBT for anything they wish. Not only gay marriage but then they can discriminate against them regarding housing, employment, etc.
90 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:09:38pm |
re: #87 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Are you arguing on moral or legal grounds?
Legal grounds.
91 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:10:36pm |
re: #88 Dark_Falcon
No, and I recently had that argument with my father actually. He favored a "defining of religion" to exclude Islam, which I opposed firmly as incompatible with the 1st Amendment (multiple 'toleration of religion' definitions at the time of the passage of the bill of rights expressly mentioned Islam, to make its inclusion within the Amendment's scope crystal -clear, though I'd not support exclusion even had such definitions not been present). The Constitution is very clear on this point, and the 14th Amendment made the Free Exercise Clause binding on the states.
I see. So I have more rights to fabricate some religion out of the top of my head and have more rights then gay people. What if I create a gay religion?
92 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:12:03pm |
re: #88 Dark_Falcon
No, and I recently had that argument with my father actually. He favored a "defining of religion" to exclude Islam, which I opposed firmly as incompatible with the 1st Amendment (multiple 'toleration of religion' definitions at the time of the passage of the bill of rights expressly mentioned Islam, to make its inclusion within the Amendment's scope crystal -clear, though I'd not support exclusion even had such definitions not been present). The Constitution is very clear on this point, and the 14th Amendment made the Free Exercise Clause binding on the states.
Let's say I create The Church of Gay Marriage. It's a religion. I meet all legal requirement. Part of my religion requires that our adherents get married. Denial of this constitutes a violation of my freedom of religion. What about that?
93 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:13:43pm |
Let me just be clear, I don't want to defend Scott Walker for his 'hospital rule'. But the morality of that rule is to me a point of secondary import; I'm not going to support someone like Kathleen Falk over a point like that. The core reasons for my support of Gov. Walker have always been economic, especially my support of his reduction in collective bargaining for public sector unions. That reason remains intact and with it my support.
95 | The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:15:29pm |
re: #90 Dark_Falcon
Legal grounds.
No, you think you're arguing on legal grounds but you haven't noticed the Equal Protection Clause doesn't actually mention race, nor does the 14th Amendment as a whole. So the basis of your argument derived from a loose interpretation of "original intent" of the amendment as ameliorating inequalities only of race...a position that, mind you, also invalidates all findings based on gender discrimination that cite the 14th.
96 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:16:00pm |
re: #92 Gus
Let's say I create The Church of Gay Marriage. It's a religion. I meet all legal requirement. Part of my religion requires that our adherents get married. Denial of this constitutes a violation of my freedom of religion. What about that?
You can hold religious ceremonies for gay couples, no law can ban that without violating the Free Exercise Clause. but whether the law calls it marriage is another question and not one a church may force the law to answer in its favor.
97 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:17:24pm |
Welcome to America. Where you have a right to create your own armed militia, a literal miniature army, armed to the teeth. Not only that but a Nazi militia with all the typical Nazi bells and whistles but with guns...
You just can't have gay marriage.
98 | Targetpractice Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:17:35pm |
re: #93 Dark_Falcon
Let me just be clear, I don't want to defend Scott Walker for his 'hospital rule'. But the morality of that rule is to me a point of secondary import; I'm not going to support someone like Kathleen Falk over a point like that. The core reasons for my support of Gov. Walker have always been economic, especially my support of his reduction in collective bargaining for public sector unions. That reason remains intact and with it my support.
And the fact that Walker never once, while campaigning for the office, told the voters that he intended to gut collective bargaining?
99 | The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:18:26pm |
re: #96 Dark_Falcon
You can hold religious ceremonies for gay couples, no law can ban that without violating the Free Exercise Clause. but whether the law calls it marriage is another question and not one a church may force the law to answer in its favor.
But then the law has to justify why its civil definition of marriage is constrained only to being between a man and a woman...which is why the argumentation of Loving is relevant to issue of gay marriage.
100 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:18:33pm |
re: #95 The Ghost of a Flea
No, you think you're arguing on legal grounds but you haven't noticed the Equal Protection Clause doesn't actually mention race, nor does the 14th Amendment as a whole. So the basis of your argument derived from a loose interpretation of "original intent" of the amendment as ameliorating inequalities only of race...a position that, mind you, also invalidates all findings based on gender discrimination that cite the 14th.
re: #83 Dark_Falcon
The difference is that prohibiting marriage on racial grounds is a violation of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Loving vs. Virginia. The Acts of Congress enforcing the 14th Amendment explicitly prohibit racial discrimination (as the amendment intends).
The 14th Amendment says nothing about sexual orientation.
Note the bolded phrase: The Civil rights Act of 1964 explicitly mentions gender, and it is one of the primary mechanisms by which the 14th Amendment is enforced.
101 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:19:02pm |
re: #96 Dark_Falcon
You can hold religious ceremonies for gay couples, no law can ban that without violating the Free Exercise Clause. but whether the law calls it marriage is another question and not one a church may force the law to answer in its favor.
I get it. So in Wisconsin, a Nazi can walk in to visit his wife (whom he beats on occasion) when she's in the hospital. Some nice gay man though won't be allowed to visit his loved one of 20 years.
God bless America!
102 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:19:45pm |
re: #99 The Ghost of a Flea
But then the law has to justify why its civil definition of marriage is constrained only to being between a man and a woman...which is why the argumentation of Loving is relevant to issue of gay marriage.
That's true, and eventually we'll have to see what the Supreme Court says about that.
103 | CuriousLurker Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:20:36pm |
re: #74 Dark_Falcon
Understand that I have no life partner, nor am I ever likely to have one. If we're to be honest, that almost certainly colors my decision making on this issue.
I don't know what disturbs me more D_F, assholes who actively hate, or people who seem decent, but have no compassion or empathy for their fellow citizens as long as the injustice in question doesn't affect them personally.
You know, I'm Muslim and Islam doesn't permit gay marriage, but that's neither here nor there because our Constitution doesn't guarantee rights based on religious morality. This is exactly where people stumble IMO.
If we're going to bring in the notion of marriage being between one man & one woman, then we're inserting religion into it. There's no denying that—where else would that idea come from?
104 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:21:57pm |
re: #101 Gus
I get it. So in Wisconsin, a Nazi can walk in to visit his wife (whom he beats on occasion) when she's in the hospital. Some nice gay man though won't be allowed to visit his loved one of 20 years.
God bless America!
I'm not crazy about it either. But I can't just drop every candidate I disagree with over some morals issue, or I'd hardly every vote for any candidate for major office.
105 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:23:37pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
The 'hospital rule' is not about hate and instead is about a coherent policy.
Would you be OK with a coherent policy of hate?
106 | Mocking Jay Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:27:02pm |
sigh
We're talking to a man who cheered when Christie vetoed gay marriage in Jersey.
107 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:27:51pm |
re: #104 Dark_Falcon
I'm not crazy about it either. But I can't just drop every candidate I disagree with over some morals issue, or I'd hardly every vote for any candidate for major office.
Scott Walk is an asshole. Anyone that votes for him is either clueless or a freaking creep because electing him into office is approving of bigotry.
108 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:28:26pm |
I'd also note at this time that hospitals are not required to not grant gay couples visiting privileges, rather they cannot be legally compelled to so. I therefore would urge all hospitals in Wisconsin to institute policies that grant persons being able to show 'life partner' status the same visiting privileges accorded to married couples. (I leave to the forum to propose how this status would be proven, as some evidence would be needed to prevent the policy being used to evil ends by people not actually a life partner.)
109 | CuriousLurker Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:28:58pm |
re: #104 Dark_Falcon
I'm not crazy about it either. But I can't just drop every candidate I disagree with over some morals issue, or I'd hardly every vote for any candidate for major office.
If not morals as outlined in the Constitution then WHAT, D_F??
110 | Mocking Jay Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:29:21pm |
re: #108 Dark_Falcon
I'd also note at this time that hospitals are not required to not grant gay couples visiting privileges, rather they cannot be legally compelled to so. I therefore would urge all hospitals in Wisconsin to institute policies that grant persons being able to show 'life partner' status the same visiting privileges accorded to married couples. (I leave to the forum to propose how this status would be proven, as some evidence would be needed to prevent the policy being used to evil ends by people not actually a life partner.)
Yeah, I'm sure those Catholic hospitals will get right on that.
111 | Mocking Jay Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:31:13pm |
Holy shit...
DIANE SAWYER: As we move away from this primary campaign into the next phase -- again, on Yahoo, we got two questions most often, first about Seamus -- which as you know is out there forever -- would you do it again?
MITT ROMNEY: Certainly not with the attention it's received.
EVERY CHOICE YOU MAKE DOES NOT NEED TO BE POLITICAL!!!
Fuck. This is a very creepy man.
112 | jaunte Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:32:17pm |
re: #108 Dark_Falcon
I don't think the prejudices against gay couples are just going to wither away; equality (as usual) will have to be supported by the force of law.
113 | palomino Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:32:54pm |
re: #104 Dark_Falcon
I'm not crazy about it either. But I can't just drop every candidate I disagree with over some morals issue, or I'd hardly every vote for any candidate for major office.
I'd suggest that's a better option than voting for a party that's anti-AGW, anti-gay rights, anti-evolution, Islamophobic, homophobic, beset by ODS, and the general laughingstock of the developed world.
114 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:33:28pm |
re: #103 CuriousLurker
You know, I'm Muslim and Islam doesn't permit gay marriage, but that's neither here nor there because our Constitution doesn't guarantee rights based on religious morality. This is exactly where people stumble IMO.
You seem to be saying that your religion applies only to what you do, not what others do.
Unfortunately that is not what the theologians, imams, or popes would venture to say, even if they wanted to due to the fear of great punishment.
Have you ever considered adopting a new name for your form of spirituality?
:=)
115 | The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:34:38pm |
re: #113 palomino
I'd suggest that's a better option than voting for a party that's anti-AGW, anti-gay rights, anti-evolution, Islamophobic, homophobic, beset by ODS, and the general laughingstock of the developed world.
Or a guy whose fiscal conservatism resulted in +35% to overall county spending during his tenure.
116 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:35:10pm |
re: #114 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
You seem to be saying that your religion applies only to what you do, not what others do.
Unfortunately that is not what the theologians, imams, or popes would venture to say, even if they wanted to due to the fear of great punishment.
Actually it depends on the religious leader. Not all of them demand universal adherence to their doctrines.
117 | Dark_Falcon Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:36:16pm |
While I disagree with Gov. Walker on the issue of gay unions, I will not cease my support for him over the matter. But neither will I favor his actions against gay unions and for its part in doing that my #66 was a significant mistake.
And that's all I have to say on this issue.
118 | Interesting Times Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:38:38pm |
re: #117 Dark_Falcon
While I disagree with Gov. Walker on the issue of gay unions, I will not cease my support for him over the matter.
Then don't complain when others refer to Republicans as bigots. A vote for hate is a vote for hate, no matter what other excuses you make.
119 | CuriousLurker Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:40:23pm |
re: #117 Dark_Falcon
Oy. *facepalm* I'm going back into lurk mode....
120 | ProGunLiberal Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:41:07pm |
re: #119 CuriousLurker
Ditto. I cooled down and came back to see how the shitstorm had developed.
My reaction is the same.
122 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:42:10pm |
re: #66 Dark_Falcon
Simple: I don't consider it a serious wrong. Wisconsin decided against both gay marriage and civil unions and wrote prohibitions on both into their state constitution. This is part of that. I'm not in favor of it, but it is part of a "concede nothing" policy; The idea being that giving a gay couple any rights traditionally associated with marriage will form a 'pryebar' for getting gay marriage adopted through the courts.
The 'hospital rule' is not about hate and instead is about a coherent policy.
You want to be that guy between someone's loved one in the hospital?
guess it's not America unless a queer is being fucked with by a conservative, wave that flag
123 | The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:43:14pm |
re: #117 Dark_Falcon
While I disagree with Gov. Walker on the issue of gay unions, I will not cease my support for him over the matter. But neither will I favor his actions against gay unions and for its part in doing that my #66 was a significant mistake.
And that's all I have to say on this issue.
Well hurrah for banality.
At least he isn't some kind of crony capitalist who turned civil service jobs into gubernatorial appointment and pushed through "fiscal reforms" that actually just defer costs to counties.////
124 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:43:48pm |
re: #104 Dark_Falcon
I'm not crazy about it either. But I can't just drop every candidate I disagree with over some morals issue, or I'd hardly every vote for any candidate for major office.
if you want to vote for evil people, don't be surprised when people take issue with that
125 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:45:31pm |
re: #116 Shvaughn
Actually it depends on the religious leader. Not all of them demand universal adherence to their doctrines.
Tell me one who doesn't claim that they are right and all others are wrong. That some are more or less militant changes nothing.
126 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:50:18pm |
re: #125 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
Tell me one who doesn't claim that they are right and all others are wrong. That some are more or less militant changes nothing.
Not all religions are of the kind that says "all others are wrong." Only some are like that.
127 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:52:39pm |
re: #126 Shvaughn
Not all religions are of the kind that says "all others are wrong." Only some are like that.
Can you name prominent religions that are not like that?
128 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:52:47pm |
I'm a bit confused why it is ok for one side in the debate to label someone as evil, but it's not ok for the other side to do so.
Seriously, if we call a politician evil, yet object to them considering evolution or Obama evil, that is messed-up.
129 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:54:30pm |
re: #128 ggt
I'm a bit confused why it is ok for one side in the debate to label someone as evil, but it's not ok for the other side to do so.
Seriously, if we call a politician evil, yet object to them considering evolution or Obama evil, that is messed-up.
"Evil" is always in the eye of the beholder. So of course they can claim that evolutionary Obama is evil squared. What matters is what are their reasons for saying this.
130 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:56:36pm |
re: #129 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
"Evil" is always in the eye of the beholder. So of course they can claim that evolutionary Obama is evil squared. What matters is what are their reasons for saying this.
Right, yet I see labels thrown around that seem to be value judgements. I'm not sure it conveys a helpful message. Do we want to communicate or argue?
131 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:57:08pm |
re: #125 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
Tell me one who doesn't claim that they are right and all others are wrong. That some are more or less militant changes nothing.
"True religion is not about possessing the truth. No religion does that. It is rather an invitation into a journey that leads one toward the mystery of God. Idolatry is religion pretending that it has all the answers." Bishop J.S. Spong "Q&A on The Parliament of the World's Religions," weekly mailing, 2007-SEP-05.
132 | palomino Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:57:27pm |
re: #117 Dark_Falcon
While I disagree with Gov. Walker on the issue of gay unions, I will not cease my support for him over the matter. But neither will I favor his actions against gay unions and for its part in doing that my #66 was a significant mistake.
And that's all I have to say on this issue.
Walker is a relic from another era. Not only anti-gay but anti-fair pay as well. As much as Walker would like to take us all back to his rural evangelical roots, it's a pipe dream. The gays are out of the closet and women are accustomed to equal pay, an idea they like. Vote for regressives if it makes you happy. But you're on the wrong side of history, you'll probably realize that in a generation or so.
133 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:57:41pm |
re: #130 ggt
Right, yet I see labels thrown around that seem to be value judgements. I'm not sure it conveys a helpful message. Do we want to communicate or argue?
I think at some point it's fair to say "debate over".
134 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 8:59:31pm |
re: #133 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
I think at some point it's fair to say "debate over".
Yeah, I agree. I'd rather see the conversation stop.
A person who holds a different viewpoint--even if it is decades out-of-date and extremely detrimental to the current world status-is not evil, IMHO. The person is flawed, not evil.
135 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:00:36pm |
"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God." Baha'u'llah, founder of the Baha'i Faith, "Gleanings," Page 217
"The idea that Jesus is the only way to God or that only those who have been washed in the blood of Christ are ever to be listed among the saved, has become anathema and even dangerous in our shrinking world." Episcopal Bishop John S. Spong.
Naveen Chawla, longtime friend and biographer of Mother Teresa asked her: "Do you convert?" She replied, "Of course I convert. I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you've found God, it's up to you to decide how to worship him."
These are from:
[Link: www.religioustolerance.org...]
136 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:00:49pm |
re: #134 ggt
Well, again, evil is in the eye of the beholder.
137 | Interesting Times Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:03:07pm |
re: #134 ggt
A person who holds a different viewpoint--even if it is decades out-of-date and extremely detrimental to the current world status-is not evil, IMHO. The person is flawed, not evil.
If that person's actions result in real suffering - and they continue even after being made aware of this - they are evil. Full stop. I care about the victims of their blindness, selfishness, and stupidity, not the victimizer's poor little hurt feelings.
138 | palomino Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:03:25pm |
re: #134 ggt
Yeah, I agree. I'd rather see the conversation stop.
A person who holds a different viewpoint--even if it is decades out-of-date and extremely detrimental to the current world status-is not evil, IMHO. The person is flawed, not evil.
Furthermore, when you start throwing around the word evil, it all sounds so biblical and apocalyptic. And the last thing we need is our politics to be dominated even more by religion and end-of-the-world hysteria.
139 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:04:40pm |
re: #137 Interesting Times
If that person's actions result in real suffering - and they continue even after being made aware of this - they are evil. Full stop. I care about the victims of their blindness, selfishness, and stupidity, not the victimizer's poor little hurt feelings.
I don't care about their feelings either.
I am concerned about quality of communication. I don't think "evil" is a useful word anymore.
140 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:05:11pm |
Hinduism has a deserved reputation of being highly tolerant of other religions. Hindus have a saying: "Ekam Sataha Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti," which may be translated: "The truth is One, but different Sages call it by Different Names"
[Link: www.religioustolerance.org...]
141 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:06:12pm |
re: #135 Shvaughn
"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God." Baha'u'llah, founder of the Baha'i Faith, "Gleanings," Page 217
He has just said polytheism is wrong.
"The idea that Jesus is the only way to God or that only those who have been washed in the blood of Christ are ever to be listed among the saved, has become anathema and even dangerous in our shrinking world." Episcopal Bishop John S. Spong.
He has just said that those who say that Jesus is the only way to God are wrong.
Naveen Chawla, longtime friend and biographer of Mother Teresa asked her: "Do you convert?" She replied, "Of course I convert. I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you've found God, it's up to you to decide how to worship him."
Yet this doesn't imply these religions are right (if only because they can't be all right at the same time).
142 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:07:52pm |
re: #126 Shvaughn
Not all religions are of the kind that says "all others are wrong." Only some are like that.
Spirituality concepts yes, but the major religions are not "only some".
143 | freetoken Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:08:35pm |
re: #140 Shvaughn
Did you see my link last night, of a riot in India where some Hindus turned violent at a lower caste eating meat on a campus?
144 | Interesting Times Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:09:39pm |
re: #139 ggt
I am concerned about quality of communication. I don't think "evil" is a useful word anymore.
So you seem to be saying it's been diluted to meaninglessness thanks to fraudulent and ridiculous overuse (overwhelmingly by the rightwing propaganda complex). Well, there's no "Godwin's Law", yet, for the word "evil" per sae.*
*Though trust me, I can come up with far more colorful descriptors if need be :P
145 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:09:53pm |
re: #143 freetoken
They weren't true Hindus! /
146 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:11:10pm |
re: #140 Shvaughn
Hinduism has a deserved reputation of being highly tolerant of other religions. Hindus have a saying: "Ekam Sataha Vipraha Bahudha Vadanti," which may be translated: "The truth is One, but different Sages call it by Different Names"
[Link: www.religioustolerance.org...]
Yeah, well, being tolerant is not the same as saying they're right. Christianity says Hinduism is wrong. So Hinduism cannot say Christianity is right without denying itself.
147 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:11:14pm |
re: #143 freetoken
Did you see my link last night, of a riot in India where some Hindus turned violent at a lower caste eating meat on a campus?
What does that have to do with anything?
148 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:11:29pm |
re: #144 Interesting Times
So you seem to be saying it's been diluted to meaninglessness thanks to fraudulent and ridiculous overuse (overwhelmingly by the rightwing propaganda complex). Well, there's no "Godwin's Law", yet, for the word "evil" per sae.*
*Though trust me, I can come up with far more colorful descriptors if need be :P
Yes, I think you are correct. I've been getting that feeling in my stomach when I see or hear the word lately.
I might go so far as to say I think the Breviks of the world are passed flawed, or mentally ill, I do think he is a monster.
149 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:11:52pm |
re: #146 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Yeah, well, being tolerant is not the same as saying they're right. Christianity says Hinduism is wrong. So Hinduism cannot say Christianity is right without denying itself.
There's no monolithic thing called "Christianity" that says Hinduism is wrong.
150 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:12:14pm |
re: #149 Shvaughn
There's no monolithic thing called "Christianity" that says Hinduism is wrong.
Yes, there is.
151 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:14:25pm |
re: #141 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
He has just said polytheism is wrong.
He has just said that those who say that Jesus is the only way to God are wrong.
Yet this doesn't imply these religions are right (if only because they can't be all right at the same time).
I disagree with your interpretations of "he's saying [X] is wrong."
Also, the concept that one religion must be "right" and the others must be "wrong" is something that you are attempting to assert here, but it's unproven. It's a binary statement of truth that isn't central to all religious belief systems.
152 | The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:14:28pm |
re: #127 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Can you name prominent religions that are not like that?
Doctrinally speaking, Hinduism is pretty chill about "rightness" as your afterlife is a matter of your dharma and karma rather than your avowed alliance. Non-Hindus are just as much a part of the cycle. Even really conservative Hinduism just sets a differentiation...based in the Manu Dharmashastra...of mleccha--people outside the boundaries of Hinduism that will have to be reincarnated as Hindus before they attain moksha. Buddhism, Tantra and Shinto, have similar worldviews. It's not a perfect state of tolerance, though, as sectarian competition can incorporate doctrinal issues.
To go a bit farther--it's the monotheists that tend to have the most aggressive posture about "rightness," because Morality, Truth, and most other grand philosophical concepts are synonymous with a single deific figure. In non-monotheist (pantheists, polytheist, spiritualist, etc) traditions there tends to be metaphysical abstracts that co-exist with the eminent divine beings.
153 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:14:28pm |
re: #150 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Yes, there is.
AFAIK, the only monolithic Christian authority out there is the Vatican. It thinks it represents all Christians, but not all Chrisitans think so.
I do not believe the Vatican says Hinduism is wrong.
154 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:14:55pm |
re: #150 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Yes, there is.
Really, who makes those decisions?
156 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:16:16pm |
re: #152 The Ghost of a Flea
To go a bit farther--it's the monotheists that tend to have the most aggressive posture about "rightness," because Morality, Truth, and most other grand philosophical concepts are synonymous with a single deific figure.
Most Jews don't seem to be all up about that, despite being the oldest Abrahamic monotheistic faith.
157 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:16:20pm |
re: #131 Shvaughn
"True religion is not about possessing the truth. No religion does that. It is rather an invitation into a journey that leads one toward the mystery of God. Idolatry is religion pretending that it has all the answers." Bishop J.S. Spong "Q&A on The Parliament of the World's Religions," weekly mailing, 2007-SEP-05.
I could say that first sentence, as an atheist. If I had, would you use that as an example that the Pope, the Taliban, the Supreme Defender of the faith in Iran, the protector of the faith in Saudi (or whatever the longer title is) are really on my, and your, side?
158 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:17:24pm |
re: #157 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
I could say that first sentence, as an atheist. If I had, would you use that as an example that the Pope, the Taliban, the Supreme Defender of the faith in Iran, the protector of the faith in Saudi (or whatever the longer title is) are really on my, and your, side?
Why would I claim that?
159 | The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:18:03pm |
re: #156 Shvaughn
Most Jews don't seem to be all up about that, despite being the oldest Abrahamic monotheistic faith.
The Jews have a fantastic tradition of discussion and debate about Meaning and Truth. I have huge respect for the Halacha.
160 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:18:36pm |
re: #151 Shvaughn
I disagree with your interpretations of "he's saying [X] is wrong."
So what?
Also, the concept that one religion must be "right" and the others must be "wrong" is something that you are attempting to assert here, but it's unproven. It's a binary statement of truth that isn't central to all religious belief systems.
Religions usually make factual statements about reality, these statements define these religions. These statements about reality also tend to be largely incompatible. So implicitly, by the very act of making these statements religions implicitly disagree with each other (i.e., say that others are wrong).
161 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:19:09pm |
re: #154 Shvaughn
Really, who makes those decisions?
Interesting how you didn't have a problem making a statement about what Hinduism allegedly thinks.
162 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:19:45pm |
re: #160 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
So implicitly, by the very act of making these statements religions implicitly disagree with each other (i.e., say that others are wrong).
Not all religions believe that disagreement means "we're right, they're wrong."
Why is this so hard for you to believe?
163 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:19:55pm |
re: #153 ggt
AFAIK, the only monolithic Christian authority out there is the Vatican. It thinks it represents all Christians, but not all Chrisitans think so.
I do not believe the Vatican says Hinduism is wrong.
What do you mean by wrong? If it is not wrong is it it right, or only partly right?
164 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:20:22pm |
re: #161 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Interesting how you didn't have a problem making a statement about what Hinduism allegedly thinks.
I didn't make any statements about Hindu belief.
165 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:20:39pm |
re: #153 ggt
AFAIK, the only monolithic Christian authority out there is the Vatican. It thinks it represents all Christians, but not all Chrisitans think so.
I do not believe the Vatican says Hinduism is wrong.
Of course it does, implicitly. By proclaiming Christian doctrine.
166 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:20:41pm |
Alternative Right also interviewed Merlin Miller. A3P candidate.
Added update just now.
167 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:21:01pm |
"All other religions must be wrong in order for one religion to be right" is a religious belief.
168 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:21:31pm |
re: #166 Gus
Gus, I'm impressed at the work you've been doing.
169 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:22:01pm |
re: #164 Shvaughn
I didn't make any statements about Hindu belief.
You made a statement about Hinduism in #140.
170 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:22:11pm |
re: #168 Shvaughn
Gus, I'm impressed at the work you've been doing.
Thanks. I hate those people with a passion.
171 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:22:46pm |
re: #169 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
You made a statement about Hinduism in #140.
That was a quote; I apologize for not properly encoding it in blockquote tags.
172 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:23:35pm |
re: #171 Shvaughn
That was a quote; I apologize for not properly encoding it in blockquote tags.
So you posted a quote with which you disagreed?
173 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:24:15pm |
re: #172 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
So you posted a quote with which you disagreed?
No, I posted a quote. Do you disagree with the quote? Are you saying it's inaccurate?
174 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:24:57pm |
re: #173 Shvaughn
No, I posted a quote. Do you disagree with the quote? Are you saying it's inaccurate?
So I take it you agree with it. Yet it makes a claim about Hinduism as if it were a monolith.
175 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:25:15pm |
re: #158 Shvaughn
Why would I claim that?
because you implied that:
True religion is not about possessing the truth. No religion does that
I am simply saying that they do. Just because you find an individual quotation or two where someone is putting a necessary "political" spin on the issue because they recognize the realities on this planet, doesn't make it true.
We can reference the current entry of the Catholic church into medical policy in the USA, for example.
176 | palomino Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:27:18pm |
re: #111 Oblivious Troll
Holy shit...
EVERY CHOICE YOU MAKE DOES NOT NEED TO BE POLITICAL!!!
Fuck. This is a very creepy man.
Remember in one of the first of the 4,000 GOP debates, Romney was asked if he had ever knowingly hired illegal immigrants for gardening. His response: "For Pete's sake, I'm running for president. I know I can't employ illegals."
Yes, this is a man of great principle. Problem is he only has one--he'll be anything you want as long as you vote for him.
177 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:28:37pm |
re: #175 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
because you implied that:
True religion is not about possessing the truth. No religion does that
No, I didn't imply any such thing.
I said some religions believe they possess absolute truth and all others are wrong. But I also said that not all religions believe this.
I am simply saying that they do. Just because you find an individual quotation or two where someone is putting a necessary "political" spin on the issue because they recognize the realities on this planet, doesn't make it true.
But for some faith traditions, it's not simply a "political spin," it's a religious belief that "all roads lead to the truth."
We can reference the current entry of the Catholic church into medical policy in the USA, for example.
Sure, the Catholic Church thinks they're right and everyone else is either partially wrong or fully wrong. But the Catholic Church is not all religion.
Look up John Shelby Spong -- he's an example of a Christian (an Episcopal Bishop) who doesn't claim that Christianity is the only "right" religion and all others are thus "wrong."
178 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:30:34pm |
re: #174 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
So I take it you agree with it. Yet it makes a claim about Hinduism as if it were a monolith.
Actually it doesn't. It talks about Hinduism's reputation (which is an accurate statement) for religious tolerance, and it mentions one saying in Hinduism. Neither of those requires that Hinduism be monolithic in belief.
I don't claim that Hinduism is a monolithic belief system.
Meanwhile, you have claimed that Christianity is a monolithic belief system. Can you justify this without trying to get me to support a straw man which I've never claimed?
179 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:33:43pm |
re: #149 Shvaughn
There's no monolithic thing called "Christianity" that says Hinduism is wrong.
re: #150 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Yes, there is.
Can you support this statement?
Your only attempt so far to justify your statement involves trying to say I claimed Hinduism is monolithic, which I didn't do. So can you please directly address your statement -- you said directly that there IS a monolithic thing called Christianity which says Hinduism is wrong.
Will you support that statement, or retract it?
180 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:36:24pm |
re: #178 Shvaughn
Actually it doesn't. It talks about Hinduism's reputation (which is an accurate statement) for religious tolerance, and it mentions one saying in Hinduism. Neither of those requires that Hinduism be monolithic in belief.
Of course it does, it requires it to be monolithic in religious tolerance and monolithic in acceptance of that saying.
Meanwhile, you have claimed that Christianity is a monolithic belief system. Can you justify this without trying to get me to support a straw man which I've never claimed?
No, I'm saying Christianity as a whole implicitly says that all other religions are wrong. And sure you can find rare outliers like Spong (whose concepts are unique, extreme and not representative of anything but his own opinion; frankly, he's barely a Christian). That tells us nothing about what Christianity as a whole (with all its internal divisions) says.
181 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:37:43pm |
re: #163 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
What do you mean by wrong? If it is not wrong is it it right, or only partly right?
Good question. Probably depends on which side of the International Date Line you are on when you ask and what Day of the week is for the person hearing the question.
:0
182 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:39:08pm |
re: #180 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
No, I'm saying Christianity as a whole implicitly says that all other religions are wrong. And sure you can find rare outliers like Spong (whose concepts are unique, extreme and non representative of anything but his own opinion; frankly, he's barely a Christian). That tells us nothing about what Christianity as a whole (with all its internal divisions) says.
Right, so Christianity monolithically says [X] except that whenever someone says [Y], you're going to say they don't count or they're "barely a Christian" (even if they're a Bishop!) so that you can maintain that Christianity "as a whole" says a single thing about other religions.
The thing is, there's no "Christianity as a whole" that shares any unified beliefs, and Bishop Spong's beliefs aren't as crazy and marginalized as you may think. (They're pretty common beliefs in the religious circles I move in.)
183 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:39:45pm |
In fact, Spong basically says that all traditional Christian interpretations are wrong:
Twelve points
Theism, as a way of defining God, is dead. So most theological God-talk is today meaningless. A new way to speak of God must be found.
Since God can no longer be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to seek to understand Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic deity. So the Christology of the ages is bankrupt.
The Biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense.
The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ's divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible.
The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by an incarnate deity.
The view of the cross as the sacrifice for the sins of the world is a barbarian idea based on primitive concepts of God and must be dismissed.
Resurrection is an action of God. Jesus was raised into the meaning of God. It therefore cannot be a physical resuscitation occurring inside human history.
The story of the Ascension assumed a three-tiered universe and is therefore not capable of being translated into the concepts of a post-Copernican space age.
There is no external, objective, revealed standard written in scripture or on tablets of stone that will govern our ethical behavior for all time.
Prayer cannot be a request made to a theistic deity to act in human history in a particular way.
The hope for life after death must be separated forever from the behavior control mentality of reward and punishment. The Church must abandon, therefore, its reliance on guilt as a motivator of behavior.
All human beings bear God's image and must be respected for what each person is. Therefore, no external description of one's being, whether based on race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation, can properly be used as the basis for either rejection or discrimination.
184 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:40:39pm |
Whats a 'Lith"?
As in Mono-lithic.
Is that like Space Odyssey?
185 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:40:58pm |
re: #177 Shvaughn
I said some religions believe they possess absolute truth and all others are wrong. But I also said that not all religions believe this.
The Christina religion(s), and certainly the largest one, Catholics, most certainly do. The Muslim religion, most certainly does. The Hindus may have more tolerant sides, except when they burn Mosques.
But for some faith traditions, it's not simply a "political spin," it's a religious belief that "all roads lead to the truth."
No doubt there are some, even "Christian" ones, like Americans United and Barry Lynn, but they are a tiny minority in numbers.
Sure, the Catholic Church thinks they're right and everyone else is either partially wrong or fully wrong. But the Catholic Church is not all religion.
It is however large enough to be the majority, along with Islam. We, IMHO, are talking of the dominant human religions, not the exceptions.
Look up John Shelby Spong -- he's an example of a Christian (an Episcopal Bishop) who doesn't claim that Christianity is the only "right" religion and all others are thus "wrong."
And I am an atheist who understands that people can have beliefs or traditions different from mine that help them navigate life to the same end. So, why don't you quote me?
186 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:41:29pm |
re: #183 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
In fact, Spong basically says that all traditional Christian interpretations are wrong:
There's a difference between Spong preaching an alternative interpretation to his own faith, and outright saying that all other faith systems are necessarily wrong.
187 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:41:53pm |
188 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:42:21pm |
189 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:42:39pm |
re: #183 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
In fact, Spong basically says that all traditional Christian interpretations are wrong:
Thomas Jefferson beat him to it.
190 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:42:50pm |
re: #182 Shvaughn
I don't see what Spong holding a church rank says about his beliefs, so that he was a bishop once is pretty irrelevant. If you can show that such beliefs are less than marginal, you're welcome.
191 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:43:16pm |
re: #185 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
And I am an atheist who understands that people can have beliefs or traditions different from mine that help them navigate life to the same end. So, why don't you quote me?
I have no problems with quoting atheists.
192 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:43:39pm |
re: #182 Shvaughn
Right, so Christianity monolithically says [X] except that whenever someone says [Y], you're going to say they don't count or they're "barely a Christian" (even if they're a Bishop!) so that you can maintain that Christianity "as a whole" says a single thing about other religions.
The thing is, there's no "Christianity as a whole" that shares any unified beliefs, and Bishop Spong's beliefs aren't as crazy and marginalized as you may think. (They're pretty common beliefs in the religious circles I move in.)
FYI:
Earlier in the day there was a pun thread involving algebra.
:)
193 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:44:30pm |
re: #190 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
I don't see what Spong holding a church rank says about his beliefs, so that he was a bishop once is pretty irrelevant. If you can show that such beliefs are less than marginal, you're welcome.
The discussion started because someone (was that you?) wanted to know if there are religious leaders who don't insist that their own faith tradition is the "only right" one and the rest are "automatically wrong."
194 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:45:46pm |
re: #186 Shvaughn
There's a difference between Spong preaching an alternative interpretation to his own faith, and outright saying that all other faith systems are necessarily wrong.
There isn't any substantive difference, it's a matter of demarcation, which is arbitrary. When we look at his beliefs, it's clear that he makes factual claims about a faith. It doesn't matter if this faith is close to him or distant from him. In any case, he is not, for example, a Catholic, but his statements imply Catholicism is wrong. Which just goes to illustrate my point.
195 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:47:08pm |
re: #191 Shvaughn
I have no problems with quoting atheists.
I meant that as a joke, given that atheism is not a religion to anyone but believers.
My point was, and is, that finding examples of outliers proves nothing about the majority. Bell curves and all that stuff...
196 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:47:12pm |
Ah, here it is, it was FFTT who started the conversation by asking about religious leaders:
re: #114 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
You seem to be saying that your religion applies only to what you do, not what others do.
Unfortunately that is not what the theologians, imams, or popes would venture to say, even if they wanted to due to the fear of great punishment.
Which is why, as a Bishop, John Shelby Spong's rank is pertinent to the conversation.
And I daresay that there are many religious people who, even if they think their own religion is "more right" than others, would hold that their faith only applies to what they do and not what others do.
197 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:47:28pm |
re: #193 Shvaughn
Sure, then it evolved beyond mere leaders, and into discussion of religions, which is where I chimed in.
198 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:48:16pm |
re: #195 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
I meant that as a joke, given that atheism is not a religion to anyone but believers.
I certainly don't think of atheism as a religion. In fact, it's compatible with some forms of religion, oddly enough.
200 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:48:58pm |
re: #199 Gus
Whahappened?
201 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:49:15pm |
I wish we could have these fun chats a little earlier in the evenings. Religion is so much more fun than politics, but my eyelids are giving up on me, so goodnight.
202 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:49:55pm |
re: #200 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
Whahappened?
Some of the bigger names on Twitter taking note. And of course the sad people.
203 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:50:01pm |
re: #194 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
There isn't any substantive difference, it's a matter of demarcation, which is arbitrary. When we look at his beliefs, it's clear that he makes factual claims about a faith. It doesn't matter if this faith is close to him or distant from him. In any case, he is not, for example, a Catholic, but his statements imply Catholicism is wrong. Which just goes to illustrate my point.
Where did he say that "Catholicism is wrong" or even that Catholicism is inconsistent with his own beliefs and teaching?
You are going a lot on "implies." But you'd think that if someone were so judgy-judgy we're-right-they're-wrong as you claim, you would have stronger language to back that up.
204 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:50:43pm |
re: #201 Flame Fin Tomini Tang
I wish we could have these fun chats a little earlier in the evenings. Religion is so much more fun than politics, but my eyelids are giving up on me, so goodnight.
Maybe we can talk about it later sometime. I have a lot of respect for atheists.
205 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:50:51pm |
Hilarious:
“Mainstream” conservatism is a joke. I’m sure Gus is peppering Media Matters with emails about O’Sullivan now.
206 | Achilles Tang Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:51:49pm |
re: #196 Shvaughn
And I daresay that there are many religious people who, even if they think their own religion is "more right" than others, would hold that their faith only applies to what they do and not what others do.
Yes, the habitual once a week social worshipers who we will seldom meet here./
Night again.
207 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:52:12pm |
208 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:52:42pm |
re: #203 Shvaughn
If Spong is right and #183 is true, then Catholicism is wrong. It doesn't need to be said explicitly. That's why "implies". I'm careful with words. Religious people are often polite in these matters and many of them indeed won't explicitly say "your religion is wrong". Yet if Christ was crucified, then Islam is wrong.
209 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:53:19pm |
re: #208 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
If Spong is right and #183 is true, then Catholicism is wrong. It doesn't need to be said explicitly. That's why "implies". I'm careful with words. Religious people are often polite in these matters and many of them indeed won't explicitly say "your religion is wrong". Yet if Christ was crucified, then Islam is wrong.
Wait, I thought Islam recognized Jesus.
210 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:55:19pm |
re: #209 ggt
Wait, I thought Islam recognized Jesus.
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.
Quran 4:157
211 | Gus Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:55:59pm |
That genius at OD think it's about Alternative Right. What a blockhead. It's not about Alternative right which sucks six ways 'till Sunday but about John O'Sullivan.
212 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:57:21pm |
re: #208 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
If Spong is right and #183 is true, then Catholicism is wrong. It doesn't need to be said explicitly. That's why "implies". I'm careful with words. Religious people are often polite in these matters and many of them indeed won't explicitly say "your religion is wrong". Yet if Christ was crucified, then Islam is wrong.
Does John Shelby Spong say that Catholicism is "wrong" according to what he believes?
Is the idea of "my side is right, other sides are wrong" part of his theology?
You seem to have decided that it's an automatic part of any religious belief. However, that's not a belief that is universally held.
213 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:58:21pm |
re: #211 Gus
It hits the fan again? ;)
214 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 9:58:31pm |
re: #211 Gus
That genius at OD think it's about Alternative Right. What a blockhead. It's not about Alternative right which sucks six ways 'till Sunday but about John O'Sullivan.
You're not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed there.
215 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 10:04:21pm |
re: #212 Shvaughn
I don't have much to add to #208, except this. Spong makes factual claims. He either believes them to be correct or he doesn't. If he does, then he also believes Catholic doctrine to be incorrect. He can still believe that Catholicism (or any other religion) will lead to some sort of salvation. So basically it depends on the parameters by which you define rightness or wrongness of the religion. If the only parameter is "it leads to salvation", then one can believe religions to be "true" in some sense, while factually incorrect. That is not the usual use of the term, at least as far as I'm concerned, but whatever. If, on the other hand, the parameter is truthfulness of the central claims of a religion, then all religions cannot be "true" at the same time.
216 | Shvaughn Mon, Apr 16, 2012 10:12:23pm |
re: #215 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
I think we're just at the point of repeating ourselves here, and I want to avoid doing that.
I might add that "leads to salvation" may not be John Shelby Spong's criteria, by way.
Other than that, I am out for now. Peace!
217 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 10:21:37pm |
re: #210 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.
Quran 4:157
I need that translated into prose or something I can understand. What assumption? Another was made to resemble him?
How confusing.
Like the Bible, so easily subject to interpretation and manipulation.
218 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Apr 16, 2012 10:26:10pm |
re: #217 ggt
It is indeed very colorful language that is sometimes hard to read. But basically it says that contrary to Christian doctrine, Jesus was not killed or crucified, but rather taken by Allah. Here's another translation:
That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-
219 | Gretchen G.Tiger Mon, Apr 16, 2012 10:29:38pm |
re: #218 The Nightmare of the five Orders of Beggars
It is indeed very colorful language that is sometimes hard to read. But basically it says that contrary to Christian doctrine, Jesus was not killed or crucified, but rather taken by Allah. Here's another translation:
So in essence,
-Jesus did ascend, he just didn't do it as a Zombie.
-Christians are not incorrect in their thinking because Allah made it seem so to them.