Ye Religion Thread

[deft]

Why does e-praying single out Christianity?  Also, why is it that mocking religion by simply repeating its beliefs lower it to that level of stupidity?  I know a lot of intelligent people who are religious.  What it comes down to is religious people who can't think rationally (they aren't the only ones - sad I have to add things like this to my sentences on these forums) and come into arguments and debates and say things like "it's just a theory", "it takes more faith to be an atheist", and many many many other ignorant statements.  I don't have a problem with someone who believes in a God, but to identify yourself with a specific religion and attach yourself to all the small details doesn't make sense.  There are many, many people who do take the bible literally - and quite honestly it scares me :<

"It must be admitted, at least in the USA, you can say anything derogatory - using any kind of racial slur, etc that you want about Christians without much happening, but  make a derogatory remark about most any other religious belief and you can find yourself in jail charged with a hate crime. Why is that?" 

You're asserting that like it's a fact, I've never experienced anything like this.  You do realize Christianity completely dominates any other religion or non belief in this country, right?

edit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU10wpgetNk - great video to demonstrate what I was saying in the first part of my post, I can't believe Hannity showed this interview on his show..but I'm glad he did :>

[DaHanG]

No, the reason I've asked the question is I've been following this thread even though I've only posted sporadically lately and I do believe however, if an astute programmer parsed the thread you would find for every positive statement made, there are many many more degenerating either the concept, statement, or person making the statement regarding Christianity.

It must be admitted, at least in the USA, you can say anything derogatory - using any kind of racial slur, etc that you want about Christians without much happening, but  make a derogatory remark about most any other religious belief and you can find yourself in jail charged with a hate crime. Why is that?

For the ease of staying on the same page, I would like to request that you cite specific examples of degenerating concepts/statements/people regarding Christianity. I haven't looked back at previous pages, but the only thing I can think of fitting in this category is deft insulting reaper. Reaper has stated (if I recall correctly) that he is not a Christian, so this should not apply. If anything, it applies to theism or many other questionable statement's he's made that falls into a much broader category than Christianity alone. If this is not what you are referencing, please reference it for me. I prefer point by point dialogue instead of generalizations about the dialogue that may have long passed. That way, everyone can understand better what's being said.

I personally couldn't care less about mere words, unless someone was violating my personal space to say unpleasant things to me. But I've never heard of people going to jail for expressing opinions only, no matter how harsh - in America. I would like to learn about such cases if they exist.

To put this in perspective, I would like to point two these videos:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiyJzWy3CDQ&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPHnXrU5JzU

Some of the interesting things said were:

HUNTER: They don't have a good - marketing. If they had hallmark cards, maybe they wouldn't feel so left out. We have Christmas cards. We have Kwanza cards now. Maybe they need to get some atheist cards and get that whole ball rolling so more people can get involved with what they're doing. I think they need to shut up and let people do what they do. No, I think they need to shut up about it.

SMITH: I don't think they need to shut up. The reason why I don't think they need to shut up is because there's a whole bunch of people in this world that we can look at and say they need to shut up and they certainly don't. You got everybody fighting for their own individual cause. This is their cause. We might not like it. I don't agree with it at all, but they do have a right.

HUNTER: I think they need to shut up about crying wolf all the time and saying that they're being imposed upon. I personally think that they should never have taken prayer out of schools. I would rather there be some morality in schools. But they did that because an atheist went to court and said their child -- don't pray (INAUDIBLE).

SCHLUSSEL: And what about this obnoxious Michael Newdow, who went all the way to the Supreme Court for his child, the child doesn't know what's going on, to try and get under God taken out of the pledge of allegiance. They are on the attack. It's obnoxious and they do need to shut up.

SMITH: They are going on the attack, but the reality, again, is everybody has their own cause. The fact is there's a whole bunch of people in America who need to shut up and they don't. So why should these people be any less. We live in a nation. We're supposed to be tolerant. We're supposed to be accepting of other people's viewpoints, even when they are not our own and the fact is, if they're an atheist, that's their right. They're not going to change my belief in God (INAUDIBLE).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCHLUSSEL: This is a Christian country.

SMITH: I understand that, but what they're saying is how can -- if we're inclusionary, why can't we include all that and we're not. That's my point.

SCHLUSSEL: (INAUDIBLE) Look where there are more atheists and where they've lost God, where the church is not that strong. Europe is becoming Islamist. It's fast falling and intolerance is increasing. That's the one reason our country has not become like Europe because we have strong Christians and because atheists are not strong. And I think that's a good thing.



Now, I would like to think what kind of outrage would occur if 2 of the 3 guests on a tv show on national television said "The Christians need to shut up" or "Christians are not strong. And I think that's a good thing." I don't think we even need to speculate about whether or not it would have been more severe than the small internet backlash that was present after that piece aired.

And I do not understand at all the position of "if .0001% of things were said about other groups the flames would be even hotter than the hell most don't believe in" so any help at all would be nice.

[reaper]

If I can say "there are no athiests in foxholes" I think anyone should be able to say anything about Christianity, good or bad.  I hope the context of this thread doesn't prohibit discussing things because you have to be sensitivite towards someone religion, or you'd be hindered in discussing anything. 

I am not Christian, but generally I agree with the religion, god and all.  I agree with QuakeDuke, that if you could intellegently parse this thread, you'd find a wealth of negative remarks toward god in general.  I'd think by nature anything an atheist said about god wouldn't support the idea, so that should be expected.

[Whirlingdervish]

I think the reason that religious-leaning viewpoints seem, to those that hold them, as though they are subjected to more criticism is inherent in the way those viewpoints are central to their understanding of life.

Those people that feel that there is a God and that he/she is the reason for everything being the way it is, have essentially arrived at what they believe to be THE ANSWER. Any questioning of that core belief will come across as an attempt to undermine their basic understanding of all things and thus as an attack against all they hold dear.

For those that don't think that they have the entire fabric of the universe figured out with a simple blanket answer (god), that same type of questioning will sound like an affirmation that they do not and probably cannot understand how everything works and that there is probably no single simple answer for how and why everything is.

It's all about the way you think and how invested you are in what you "know".

[QuakeDuke]

But I've never heard of people going to jail for expressing opinions only, no matter how harsh - in America. I would like to learn about such cases if they exist.

Here just one.....  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929  and there are more.

Regardless of the philosophy you subscribe to - religious or non-religious the question remains - the balance of treatment isn't equal - why not?

My point is if this happens as a response for behavior some find offensive: http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.repentamerica.com/

The same type of things should happen for this type of behavior others find equally offensive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N0sPuNS_D8&NR=1

Yes? No?

QD

[DaHanG]

But I've never heard of people going to jail for expressing opinions only, no matter how harsh - in America. I would like to learn about such cases if they exist.

Here just one.....  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929  and there are more.

Regardless of the philosophy you subscribe to - religious or non-religious the question remains - the balance of treatment isn't equal - why not?

My point is if this happens as a response for behavior some find offensive: http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.repentamerica.com/

The same type of things should happen for this type of behavior others find equally offensive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N0sPuNS_D8&NR=1

Yes? No?

I don't think some Christian protesters being arrested and jailed for less than a day can be extrapolated into a universal imbalance of treatment. The relevant question would be: Are more Christians being arrested purely because of their worldview than any other group protesting (in the absence of lawbreaking behavior such as violence/rioting)? I haven't seen the evidence to suggest this is the case. Countless people from all backgrounds have been wrongfully arrested for protesting. When you said "find yourself in jail" in America, I thought you meant an arrest resulting in any sort of long-term jailtime (since, again, countless people are arrested wrongfully under seemingly limitless circumstances).

There is a difference between a group (who have all their rights granted) protesting against other people's private lifestyles, and another group protesting who is denied the same rights as the other group. Naturally, the former has less to be angry about. The latter is viewed as destined to burn for eternity, denied marriage civil rights, anti-discrimination protection, etc. (in many regions in America). Sometimes such a protest by the gay movement is not directly for the advancement of their own civil liberties, but to send a message to those who disagree with them: They will never change so stop wasting your time protesting our lifestyle. In this case, I think most would agree that an angry message is more effective than a quiet, peaceful message (even if it's less pleasant).

[Arm0r]

im sure ive seen a flying spaghetti monster logo posted in this thread a couple times 

[deft]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxZE-_K6L1g&feature=related

[haunted]

I've been idling in #Jesus lately, just as a joke and to see what they actually talk about in that channel. (Yes, it's an actual channel with a topic).. I was banned after being in there for a week because I decided to give this guy a history lesson after he said "The romans liked jesus, the jews murdered him". He then sent me these pms after banning me.

<JIMHF> you are so wrong in your thinking
<JIMHF> the Jews killed Christ    the romans didnt even want to.  they couldnt find any fault in jesus
<JIMHF> the jews yelled 'crucify him' over and over
<JIMHF> get you facts striaght
<JIMHF> um  u are mistaken
<haunted> ummm... i _HOPE_ you're kidding. 1) the romans were a dirty, violent people. They would kill anyone just for the hell of it, for any small reason at all. 2) The Romans did not like the jews, they wouldn't kill someone just because the jews wanted them to.. are you insane? 3) Were you there when the jews yelled 'crucify him' repetively? No, you weren't.
<haunted> You're just a dumbass that took "the passion" by mel gibson literally.
<JIMHF> read the new testimate please? b4 u blaspheme the Word any more
<haunted> Some jewish people sold jesus out to the romans, because the romans wanted jesus dead. The romans saw no fault in jesus? YOU DUMBASS, of course the romans hated him!!! He walked around claiming to be a prophet from god and was very influential, therefore taking POWER from Rome
<haunted> I think YOU need to get your facts straight there buddy.
<JIMHF> you are mistaken badly   
<JIMHF> read the bible
<haunted> umm, maybe you should try reading the bible instead of listening to other people tell you what to think. Because those are facts... it actually sickens me to think that you're that ignorant to not know that.
<JIMHF> i have read the new testimate you obviously have been decieved
<haunted> ok
<JIMHF> Mark 15:12-15 (NKJV)
<JIMHF> 12 Pilate answered and said to them again, "What then do you want me to do with Him whom you call the King of the Jews?"
<JIMHF> 13 So they cried out again, "Crucify Him!"
<JIMHF> 14 Then Pilate said to them, "Why, what evil has He done?" But they cried out all the more, "Crucify Him!"
<JIMHF> 15 So Pilate, wanting to gratify the crowd, released Barabbas to them; and he delivered Jesus, after he had scourged Him, to be crucified.
<haunted> Wow, nice random new testament quote. that doesn't mean that "the romans saw no fault in jesus" jackass. Why would the Roman emperor, a dictator, see no fault in someone gaining power in his empire by preaching a religion that was forbidden in his empire?
<haunted> Please, answer that dumbass.
<JIMHF> the scripture in mark is enogh proof that you were mistaken.   yet you still want to argue
<haunted> I have proved you wrong around 10x and you have done nothing but post a stupid scripture that doesn't contradict anything I say, yet you still want to argue...
<JIMHF> pilate was the roamn ruler of that part of the empire:    14 Then Pilate said to them, "Why, what evil has He done?" But they cried out all the more, "Crucify Him!"
<haunted> wow, well I guess you're too dumb to refute anything I said
<haunted> No wonder your a brainwashed dumb fuck
<haunted> lol
<JIMHF> the Word of God refutes what you have said
<haunted> the word of God? bitch please. you need to grow up and not take something as idiotic as the new testament literally just because daddy and mommy told you to do so.
<haunted> get a brain, reading your ignorant bullshit is too zz for me
<JIMHF> heres what Jesus said:  Matthew 20:18-19 (NKJV)
<JIMHF> 18 "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death,
<JIMHF> 19 and deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and to scourge and to crucify. And the third day He will rise again."
<haunted> What point are you hinting to make by these 2 highly interesting scriptures?
<JIMHF> the Jews had Jesus crucified.
<haunted> umm where does it say that.
<haunted> it says he got betrayed, how can you blame an entire race of people for murder from that?
<JIMHF> i dont blame the jews   u misunderstand me.  i love the jewish people.  Jesus is jewish how could i hate the jews?
<JIMHF> i blame the pharisees and such   and the jews that were screaming out ' crucify him'
<JIMHF> not al the jews
<haunted> what you're still not realizing though is that the Roman government, specifically any dictator in charge, would DEFINITELY want jesus dead!!
<JIMHF> the jews are Gods chozen people.
<haunted> In history, the romans crucified anyone who threatened their power, it's just what they did. Jesus threatened his power through is influence and all of his followers.
<JIMHF> yes i realize that   but   constantine changed that
<JIMHF> he made Rome a christain empire
<haunted> Constantine was Post-Jesus buddy, he brought religion to the empire.
<JIMHF> thats right he sure was
<haunted> so that doesn't apply.
<haunted> Roman leaders wanted Jesus dead.
<JIMHF> nero was evil   but the roman in charge of Jesus crucifiction was pontious pilate. and he found no wrong with Jesus
<JIMHF> now the soldiers that scurged Him , mocked Him, and crucified Him   were very evil
<haunted> I think your faith is too much for my common sense and historical facts.

[DaHanG]

<JIMHF> read the new testimate please? b4 u blaspheme the Word any more

"testimate"....

[metaL]

<JIMHF> the Word of God refutes what you have said

 

[Whirlingdervish]

LOL.



who whipped the man and forced him to wear crown of thorns?

Romans.

Who forced him to walk up the road to golgotha bearing a wooden cross on his back after beating him?

Romans.

Who nailed him to that wooden cross?

Romans.

Who poked him open with a spear to see if he was dead?

Romans.


What did the jews do? Not a damn thing other than voicing their opinion.

I find it sickening that people will swear oaths on a book full of mythology, when they can't even figure out how to interpret what it says.

[QuakeDuke]

But I've never heard of people going to jail for expressing opinions only, no matter how harsh - in America. I would like to learn about such cases if they exist.

Here just one.....  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929  and there are more.

I did point out there are more cases - they just don't seem to make the "main stream media"

I don't think some Christian protesters being arrested and jailed for less than a day can be extrapolated into a universal imbalance of treatment.

Again, I mentioned there have been more cases and some have spent much longer that a few days in jail - this isn't an isolated case, just one that did happen to make main stream media coverage.

The relevant question would be: Are more Christians being arrested purely because of their worldview than any other group protesting (in the absence of lawbreaking behavior such as violence/rioting)?
I haven't seen the evidence to suggest this is the case.

If I send you a link to a PDF map of the entire world showing this would that suffice?

Countless people from all backgrounds have been wrongfully arrested for protesting.

Granted. Been there, done that in the '60s - still, when my draft notice came, I went - why? It was the right thing to do. I did my time so we could have the freedom for these types of discussions, and you better believe the saying - freedom ain't free.

Sometimes such a protest by the gay movement is not directly for the advancement of their own civil liberties, but to send a message to those who disagree with them: They will never change so stop wasting your time protesting our lifestyle. In this case, I think most would agree that an angry message is more effective than a quiet, peaceful message (even if it's less pleasant).

Yet if - when Christians present themselves "angrily" in a message such as you say in this one, they are considered bigoted, racists, etc, and vilified by just about everyone. Why is it considered to be effective and OK for one group and not for another?

I think if we are to intelligently look at these phenomenon we are going to have to set aside the reactions to these "social" hot button issues that constantly divide - or perhaps it is these very things themselves dividing everyone and there is basically no way to find a common ground? I can't believe that.

If this is so, we are destined to have a conflagration that will make the American civil war look like a picnic and it will come down literally to brother against brother, race against race and that, my friend, is something I would not like for my grandchildren and great-grandchildren to experience.

QD

[The Dreaming Dragon]

im sure ive seen a flying spaghetti monster logo posted in this thread a couple times 

Possibly from me.

I see "God" most accurately in the metaphore of the Flying Spagetti Monster,which is not some anthromorphized explanation of natural laws and physics,nor some conjured logo of a priesthood pushing its agenda in the form of interpreting Divine Will.

It is a Perspective. Aloof,omniscient and unaligned,subtley tweaking the percentages probabilities and potentials of what we call Reality,all it touches merely statistics to it,and as meaningful and meaningless to its ultimate purpose. It may not even have one: all is wishful thinking of monkeys comforting each other in the long dark of  the Unknown,be it in the next cave,hill or quantum state. And if it has an Opinion,cheering on one aomeba over another in its fight for survival,I believe its most interested in seeing how this experiment plays out. It may be learning about our lives and  our world alongside us,cheating for and against us as it sees fit. And that quality of "fitness" only It knows.

(way past my bedtime,so this ends here...)

 

[DaHanG]

The relevant question would be: Are more Christians being arrested purely because of their worldview than any other group protesting (in the absence of lawbreaking behavior such as violence/rioting)?
I haven't seen the evidence to suggest this is the case.

If I send you a link to a PDF map of the entire world showing this would that suffice?

It doesn't matter to me what form I receive the data, as long as the claim is consistent with it.

Countless people from all backgrounds have been wrongfully arrested for protesting.

Granted. Been there, done that in the '60s - still, when my draft notice came, I went - why? It was the right thing to do. I did my time so we could have the freedom for these types of discussions, and you better believe the saying - freedom ain't free.

"Freedom is not free" - oh so true.

Sometimes such a protest by the gay movement is not directly for the advancement of their own civil liberties, but to send a message to those who disagree with them: They will never change so stop wasting your time protesting our lifestyle. In this case, I think most would agree that an angry message is more effective than a quiet, peaceful message (even if it's less pleasant).

Yet if - when Christians present themselves "angrily" in a message such as you say in this one, they are considered bigoted, racists, etc, and vilified by just about everyone. Why is it considered to be effective and OK for one group and not for another?

I think if we are to intelligently look at these phenomenon we are going to have to set aside the reactions to these "social" hot button issues that constantly divide - or perhaps it is these very things themselves dividing everyone and there is basically no way to find a common ground? I can't believe that.

If this is so, we are destined to have a conflagration that will make the American civil war look like a picnic and it will come down literally to brother against brother, race against race and that, my friend, is something I would not like for my grandchildren and great-grandchildren to experience.

I think it's worth noting the different contexts to which these so called "angry" Christians and "angry" gays protest. We do not need to loop in words like bigoted/racist/etc. to the latter group, because there's nothing bigoted/racist about it on a meaningful level. As unpleasant and ultimately destructive in nature such (angry) gay protests may be, they are opposing a worldview that is at odds with their own private (victimless) lifestyle. The only sense in which homosexuals are being a "bigot", is that some have a strong dislike for those who actively condemn gays (themselves) in the first place. 

Is a black person a bigot for being intolerant of a KKK member's opinions?
(no need to infer that I'm actually comparing fundamentalist Christians to Klan members. It's the concept of being the repressed/targeted group. Many Christians don't view homosexuality as a major issue.)

"Angry" Christians as mentioned are indeed singling out a group of people: claiming they shouldn't marry/need to change their sinful lifestyle/etc.

Although I think "angry" gay protesting is politically ineffective, this is why there appears to be more sympathy on their side. It's not just the manner in which voicing opinions takes place, but the context also.