Kain Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Originally posted by joetheeskimo5 You're making a generalization, Kain. Actually, most Christians are supposed to ignore threats and bashing. Christianity is supposed to be one of the most secure religons. And the keyword in there is SUPPOSED. I'm SUPPOSED to be Lutherin, but I'm not. According to the Bible, I'm SUPPOSED to worship 'God' and his accept his 'son' as my 'savior', but I don't. Christian's are SUPPOSED to turn the other cheek, but many of them DON'T. Throughout my entirety of 'bashing' Christian's, I've found 1 that wasn't offended and actually had a conversation with me and didn't call me 'heathenistic hellbound moron'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeskywalker1 Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Originally posted by joetheeskimo5 You're making a generalization, Kain. Actually, most Christians are supposed to ignore threats and bashing. Christianity is supposed to be one of the most secure religons. yeah your right, but after a while it just gets annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubatus Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 Originally posted by lukeskywalker1 yeah your right, but after a while it just gets annoying. Pot: Hello, mr Kettle. Kettle: Hello, mr Pot. Pot: Mr Kettle....you're black! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurgan Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 I think I see what you're saying Skinwalker, so let me get this straight: In the US (following your logic) it would be okay to bash Christianity, but not Islam or Judaism. In Saudi Arabia it would be okay to bash Sunni Islam, but not Christianity or Judaism. In China it would be okay to bash Atheism, but not Fulon Gong. etc. (by "okay" I mean acceptable culturally... under law it may vary depending on the limits of speech according to each country). See I don't see why a cultural leader is fair game for bashing but not a minority. That's just reverse discrimination. Perhaps we're thinking here that if a minority is "bashed" this will lead to persecution or something negative of that nature (but if the majority is criticized nothing bad will happen and they'll either shrug it off or take it as honest criticism and reform themselves to the critics liking)? So then the bashing is a form of protected speech... protest? Because if so, let's remember that the freedom of speech in America is granted to ALL citizens, not just those who belong to certain ethnic or religious groups. That I think is a major strike against the idea that this rule should apply legally... it would be up to the person whether or not to do it. I guess that's the heart of the matter. There is no law against say (well there might be but I never heard of it) farting in public. But you might not be a very popular person (unless you're in 1st grade) if you do it. Many many people consider it rude and won't want to be around you if you do it and its loud and smelly (okay sorry for getting off track here.. you guys in the back stop giggling!). Just an example... So you have the freedom to break wind in public, just to be polite maybe you shouldn't do it if you care about upsetting people. Another comparison: While its true say our president is a public figure and he's wide open for criticism, the same can't be said for other individuals (hence laws dealing with libel and slander). Thus I'd say to apply this fairly we'd put religious (and secular) public figures up for criticisms or the religion in general. But bashing individuals? Unfair. Just as unfair if they are in a minority or majority. Saying "All Christians..." is also usually a sign of bias, because it assumes all 1+ billion Christians (belonging to 30,000+ denominations) all think and act the same. In the world there are nearly a billion atheists/agnostics/no religion's, so really its all a matter of perspective. Incidentally I also tend to reject the whole "well if I'm part of a group I can bash it, but if I'm not I can't." It might seem more polite (though not logical), but I'd rather not attack anybody like that, or else I'm being hypocritical. And yet some people will get really mad if you try to use that logic with them... Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurgan Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 So in the end, yes, it's okay to Bash Christianity. But then it's also okay to Bash Atheists, Jews, Blacks, Whites, Muslims, Women, Men, Homosexuals, Heterosexuals, Americans, French, Russians, Chinese, etc and any other group or person you can think of.* Whether or not the community you're in would tolerate it is another matter. In this community for example we have rules against bashing individuals. We also have rules against flaming (even if the arguments are valid... say for example if So and So really is an "ugly smelly moron" that doesn't mean it's allowed for you to tell him so in a post). But I think logically there's no more reason to not bash one group vs. another. I prefer constructive criticism but if you have free speech it shouldn't be limited to criticising only certain groups. And it also might not be "politicially correct" but as you can see from the term itself, it's "political" and not necessarily moral, legal or ethical. And politics are constantly changing and not everyone agrees on any one thing anyway. * By "bashing" I mean insulting or criticising, not literal "bashing" like with clubs. People who are insulted can demand an apology. People who are injured by you may fight back or sue. That kind of bashing would be assault and battery and probably land you in jail or it should if you hurt somebody! Hope nobody was confused... ; p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 Good points, Kurgan. As usual . A few posts back, I pointed out that "bashing" for the purposes of my side of the discussion: As long as by "bash" we're talking about criticisms backed with reasons. I try not to make it a habit to be directly insulting to those with whom I disagree, but my arguments with they and their positions will doubtless be considered as such. I think Twain said something like that once, too. But I have to agree, wholeheartedly, that it is as okay to "bash" other religions as it is to "bash" christianity. It just might not be as necessary! For all the terror connected with the faith, Islam doesn't appear to be direct threat to our nation. If anything, it's the other way around. Christianity, on the other hand, appears to flourish in the consumer capitalism of our great nation the way grass enjoys a good coat of fresh manure. It grows strong and healthy and green is the dominate color In short, it would be 'okay' to bash Islam or Judaism in the U.S., but largely unnecessary. This is still done however, but frequently the criticisms that these two religions are groundless, as are many of the criticisms that christianity draws. In fact, I would say that many people offer criticism without offering legitimate reason. That amounts to critical talking, not critical thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homuncul Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 For example. Communism is a great idea, in theory, right? I mean, everyone is equal, no want for anything, nobody lording over you. It's more complicated than that, but you get the idea. Crap. Even our genes are selfish. That's an ultimate dismiss for such idea. And it's not a great idea at all. People just love to think in abstractions, some of them can be put to practice (existence), others can't (equality). I hold to that communism can be no longer justifyed even theoretically (as probably all utopias) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 Well, it was just an example. I dont know enough about communism to really make that sort of judgement, but you get the idea. It was more to make a point than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeskywalker1 Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 As long as by "bash" we're talking about criticisms backed with reasons Is there really a reason? Or at least one that matters? Is there a reason to do anything bad? Here some of the stuff thats been said The dude from the 700 club said a terroristic remark, so lets make fun of christians... Christians were involved in the crusuades, so lets make fun of them ( oh BTW, after finding out some stuff about the crusuads, it appears that christians, muslims and others were involved right? Of course, only the christians are responsible, and everyone has the right to bash them ) So we should make fun of christians. Well.... the germans were a huge part of WWII, and killed thousands in the holocost, lets insult them. Christians believe stuff i dont think is fair, thats good enough for me, lets make fun of them. They believe things i dont believe, lets bash em! Are they good reasons? I know I missed a lot, but those were the fastest things i could think of. Once again, is there a reason to do anything bad? Like Kurgan said, just because someone maybe be what you say, doesnt mean you have to say it to them.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 But see, we're not talking about the people who are "insulting" Christians. Not at all. If I walk up to you and say "You're a Christian, you must be stupid" then of course I'm in the wrong. Christians seem to have this paranoia that anyone who is questioning their religion or pointing out contradictions or bad spots are "bashing" them. Have you ever heard of constructive criticism? Someone can point out a negative without you having to feel attacked. I think "bashing" is a very poor word for the subject.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master_Keralys Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 Some good points all around. Here's the thing, though: it's all right for someone to criticize the Christian agenda, call us backwards, bigots, and a whole lot of other words that I don't use even when I'm not on these forums. On the other hand, if a Christian so much as begins to criticize abortion, the gay rights agenda, or a multiplicity of other topics, we are shouted down. Again, with "bigot" and everything else. In other words, it's okay to be an "out" gay guy, but not an "out" Christian guy, b/c the Christian guy might offend somebody.... That would be bad... I think that's the point that was trying to be made all along on this thread. I agree completely when saying that constructive criticism is a good thing. I would say however, that actual bashing should be under the same regulations as bashing any other group. Instead, the intelligentsia slam us for everything we do. They choose to ignore the dramatic work done by Christian organizations fighting against slavery, sex trafficking, AIDS, and hundreds of other human rights battles and accuse us of being intolerant bigots who don't care about basic human liberties. Does this strike anyone else as odd? I'm also tired of being politically correct. It's "wrong" to offend someone (unless they're a Christian, of course ). Which is stupidity. Some people just need to be offended... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 Something that I've never gotten is the free will argument, People say before the apple we didn't have free will and that's what made it paradise. Well if we didn't have free will how was it that Eve was able to go against god and eat the apple? Furthermore if god was in control of them wouldn't he have no need to tell them to not eat the forbidden fruit? I'm just trying to give some incite into my thoughts, not sure what this does, I'm just naturally curious like all living creatures. Also on an issue of homosexuality. Why is it that people don't condone homosexuality yet they do condone other types of sex that the bible doesn't condone. From bible.com "Much of our society has embraced many perverted sexual practices that are considered in the Bible as abominations to God. Homosexuality is among the list of deviate or abnormal sexual practices however, there are many other practices that can be included as well. Pornography, pedophilia, prostitution, bestiality, oral sex, phone sex and computer virtual reality sex, just to name a few of them." makes me wonder why some say no homo's, yet they look at porn or engage in oral sex... my state of confusion must be their goal :\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 Originally posted by Master_Keralys Instead, the intelligentsia slam us for everything we do. They choose to ignore the dramatic work done by Christian organizations fighting against slavery, sex trafficking, AIDS, and hundreds of other human rights battles and accuse us of being intolerant bigots who don't care about basic human liberties. Does this strike anyone else as odd? But see, you can't go holding up all the good things that Christians have done and say "See, here is why Christianity is good!" Because that will leave you open to people saying "Look at all the bad things Christianity has done, it must be bad!" It's the same line of thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master_Keralys Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 True, but that's not the point I was trying to make. Instead, I was trying to point out that anything and everything Christians do is threatened by the intelligentsia. I was trying to make a point about how not offending people seems to apply to everyone except Christians. What you said is absolutely right, though. Christians can't point to the good and ignore the bad. We do, however, have a reason (though not an excuse) for the bad. Our argument is that man is inherently corrupt and that he is therefore incapable of doing good all the time. That's the foundation of the religion; without it, we have no need for Christ. Thus, the very problem you pose is answered by the religion itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeskywalker1 Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 lol, sith, i went online at school today, and couldnt read the whole thread because of the "sex" stuff you posted! It blocked out the whole bottom of the page! anyways, as for all I was saying in my last post, it was assuming the bashing was bad... not just a little contradiction you think you have found. Something that I've never gotten is the free will argument, People say before the apple we didn't have free will and that's what made it paradise. Well if we didn't have free will how was it that Eve was able to go against god and eat the apple? Furthermore if god was in control of them wouldn't he have no need to tell them to not eat the forbidden fruit? Yeah, we had free will.... but im not really sure if we had the sin in us... i think Adam and Eve were made good (like satan) and then corrupted themselves by sinning against God... Billy Graham: "Decision" Magazine: The State of the Suffering Church Something interesting i just found, its on the subject, maybe you would like to read about it.... makes me wonder why some say no homo's, yet they look at porn or engage in oral sex... my state of confusion must be their goal :\ Interesting, im not sure where you got this from... being a christian kind of means your not supposed to engage in any of that...... even though im sure several people say no homos and do those acts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Originally posted by lukeskywalker1 Interesting, im not sure where you got this from... being a christian kind of means your not supposed to engage in any of that...... even though im sure several people say no homos and do those acts. bible.com I'm just questioning all the things it says. I've gone to a billy graham convention thing many times, and frankly the man scares me, first of all he looks like he's going to rape a 6 year old and secondly he never shut up about drugs, alcohol, video games, and homos (he used the word homo and fag A LOT!) He reminded me of those mothers against violent video games and that other crap these mothers are against. I was worried they were going to end up going out and killing people... but that's probably just my paranoia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Just out of curiosity and to keep things fair, IS..... just what does a man who looks like he is "going to rape a 6 year old" look like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Originally posted by SkinWalker Just out of curiosity and to keep things fair, IS..... just what does a man who looks like he is "going to rape a 6 year old" look like? well he just reminds me of those old guys you see on the news that's been convicted of rapping a little kid... I guess it's kind of rude to say that, just trying to give an example of how he frightens me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeskywalker1 Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Just out of curiosity and to keep things fair, IS..... just what does a man who looks like he is "going to rape a 6 year old" look like? lol video games What did he say about em? Im just wondering... ill look around his site. Anyways, homosexuality is a BIG issue with christianity (you can understand, even if you disagree) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 He was blaming games like GTA for things like prostitution and gun violence and even for homosexuality. It's been a while since last time I went I was scared out of my mind by some of the things he'd said and people in the crowds were saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joetheeskimo Posted November 6, 2003 Share Posted November 6, 2003 Originally posted by InsaneSith He was blaming games like GTA for things like prostitution and gun violence and even for homosexuality. It's been a while since last time I went I was scared out of my mind by some of the things he'd said and people in the crowds were saying. HOMOSEXUALITY?! Now that's going a little too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted November 6, 2003 Share Posted November 6, 2003 What, you mean you can't heal gunshot wounds by shagging a hooker? I'll have to try running over the medkit instead. Extreme right wing conservative fundamentalist christians make me laugh. Of course, fundamentalists of any sort make me laugh, so this isn't exclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master_Keralys Posted November 6, 2003 Share Posted November 6, 2003 Remember, there's a difference between a fundamentalist and an extremist. An extremist would be the KKK because the blow one verse way out of proportion. A fundamentalist is me. That just means I believe it is accurate and true in every way: I believe it fundamentally. In other words, you can be a fundamentalist and remain a rational, logical being. The same is not true of an extremist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 Hmm, good point. I guess you're right. Fundamentalists don't bother me too much. Extremists do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 Though sometimes, when you see things that 'Fundamentalists' do that really irks you (i.e: Whinning about the Commandments being moved from that court building. Face it, all Christians want is to be favored above all others, and I could have sworn pride is a mortal sin...hm?), you start having problems differentiating the high-strung Fundamentalists from the not-so-extreme Extremists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.