Our bigotry comes from love, not hate!

Page 2 of 4 [ 55 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

21 Jul 2011, 1:47 pm

Christians are here.

Christians are in focus in the press.

Thm other are not.

That is how it was explained to me.

Back in the 50s all the talk was Commies, you never heard about possible threats from Islam.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

21 Jul 2011, 2:02 pm

The Bible never tells people to prevent others from sinning, because such would be impossible. Should those who believe God and take Him at His Word, the Bible, attempt to influence people positively, and steer others toward the Bible, which will give those people greater understanding of both themselves and their Creator? Yes. Can -- and should -- righteousness of the heart be enforced by some people onto others? No, and no. Seeing people sin against God does grieve right-hearted Christians -- sometimes to the point of trying to interfere more than they really are able to, and called to. We are here to urge, not force, those who do not know God to get to know Him. Salvation is a free, universally-offered gift, but in every case it is either willingly received by a person, or it is rejected by them. There is the personal friendship that is only between an individual and God, and then there is the mutual social relating among people. The boundaries of each can be easily confused. As Luther wrote, Scripture is indeed clearer than its interpreters, so Christians, like non-Christians, are bound to err, and run with that error unaware, sometimes to the pain/damage of themselves and others. That's a sad thing, but the concept it shows is clear: The person, not God's message, is in error.

Really, the person who vexes non-Christians the most is God Himself. But it's easier to punish and blame His followers instead, so they opt for that. Everyone has their faults and makes mistakes, so anyone who singles out "Christians" specifically has a chip on his/her shoulder against Jesus, not people. Otherwise, they wouldn't blame Christians, specifically, for the errors of mankind, which in reality have universal pedigree.

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

21 Jul 2011, 3:37 pm

ruveyn wrote:

------------------

Are you saying that that what we say has nothing to do with what we are?

ruveyn

No.

Tempting to stop there. Tempting to assume you know well what I mean - as you should.

But - thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.

So then: our choice to speak and our choice of form and content are in part conditioned by what we are - how not?

Natheless:

Just two examples: the reality of Mount Everest is not significantly changed [I neglect speech related climate change and the erosion from speech related sound waves and gas flows; evolution is not more real nor less real if it it not talked about or if it is talked about positively or negatively.

Nor does it change my reality if saying this I am right or wrong.

sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 70
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

21 Jul 2011, 3:59 pm

Philologos wrote:

This is something my program chairman could not understand. Lets see if Wrong Planeteers can be smarter than a jerky professor.

Imagine a bigot. A genuine, no question, everybody will agree and he is proud of it bigot. Picture him.

He says something that he thinks supports his bigotry.

What he says happens to be true.

His bigotry does not change the truth of what he says.

Saying something true does not change that he his a bigot.

Now inagine a righteous Mensch. A genuine, even the bigot cannot deny it, upholder of Justice.

He says something that he considers a righteous thing to say.

What he says happens to be hilariously, even sjockingly false.

His righteousness does not change the falsehood of what he says.

The falsehood does not change the fact he is righteous.

------------------

Some partisan people cannot go there.

Truth is biased topic

I would be analyzing the so called "truth" this bigot was sputtering. If it was more controversial than the statement "The present President of the US is a male" I will be skeptical of anything the bigot espouses. :twisted:

_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

21 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm

emuman100 wrote:

So it's the Christians that are at fault here? What about Muslims or members of other religions that don't support gay marriage? They don't matter?

Christians are at fault for Christian churches being bigots. Muslims are at fault for Islam sects being bigots.

_________________
.

WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

21 Jul 2011, 5:30 pm

Well, let me repeat what I have said so many times before:

Hell will freeze over before I accept living under one law while someone else lives under another. You can't have one law for gay people and another one for straight people and expect everyone to get along. I will not be quiet about it, and I will not be nice about it. It's not up for discussion.

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

21 Jul 2011, 7:47 pm

WilliamWDelaney wrote:

Philologos is going to whine about how you are a meany for not being nice to people who want to deny you equal rights.

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

21 Jul 2011, 7:52 pm

YippySkippy wrote:

Quote:

The falsehood does not change the fact he is righteous.

I was with you until this line. Doesn't it depend on the falsehood spoken?
What if the righteous man said, "Race A is inferior to Race B."?

If he's a righteous man, then presumably it would be a righteous statement.

I think your sample statement could be consistent with him being a righteous man.

If he said, "Race A is inferior to Race B, so people of Race B should always make a special effort to be kind to those unfortunates in Race A" then he might be ignorant, but not unrighteous.

If he said, "Race A is inferior to Race B, so let's all get together and kill that scum" then that would definitely be unrighteous.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

21 Jul 2011, 7:53 pm

marshall wrote:

WilliamWDelaney wrote:

Philologos is going to whine about how you are a meany for not being nice to people who want to deny you equal rights.

How stupid can you be?

A. I do not whine.

B. I do not spend much time on meanies - I concentrate on dolts and demagogues.

C. Master Delaney has a right to talk - though he tends to make more use of it than most - and a right to dislike what he disapproves of. I MAY have to talk to him if he gets unreasonable sand emotional in discssion.

D. But the above is commendably short and straightforward and in respectable English.

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

21 Jul 2011, 8:31 pm

Philologos wrote:

marshall wrote:

WilliamWDelaney wrote:

Philologos is going to whine about how you are a meany for not being nice to people who want to deny you equal rights.

How stupid can you be?

Why do you insist that I am stupid? You certainly haven't presented any objective evidence that I am intellectually inferior to yourself. Or am I to assume this is intended as a slur because you are upset that I disagree with you?

Quote:

A. I do not whine.

Yes you do.

Quote:

B. I do not spend much time on meanies - I concentrate on dolts and demagogues.

You can't tell the difference. According to you anyone who refuses to take crap from society for being born different is a demagogue. (Please don't bother to criticize my use of the colloquial phrase "take crap" like I know you will if I fail to inform you that nobody is interested and that it would be a waste of your precious time.)

Quote:

C. Master Delaney has a right to talk - though he tends to make more use of it than most - and a right to dislike what he disapproves of. I MAY have to talk to him if he gets unreasonable sand emotional in discssion.

Yes, just have a fatherly talk with him if he gets unreasonably emotional. You could mention how God "hates the sin but loves the sinner" and make him feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

21 Jul 2011, 8:52 pm

marshall wrote:

Why do you insist that I am stupid? You certainly haven't presented any objective evidence that I am intellectually inferior to yourself..

I have not needed to. Your post provides any requisite evidence, totally missing my every point because you are so preoccupied with your sense of injustice.

Look up please the definition of "whine".

Ad for Master Delaney - he will attest that I have spoken to him about his injudicious expressions on occasion. While he is by my standards unnecessarily vehement and voluble, he has shown that he CAN listen and respond to input from others, and he is I think less mean-spirited than you are.

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

21 Jul 2011, 10:51 pm

Philologos wrote:

marshall wrote:

Why do you insist that I am stupid? You certainly haven't presented any objective evidence that I am intellectually inferior to yourself..

I have not needed to. Your post provides any requisite evidence, totally missing my every point because you are so preoccupied with your sense of injustice.

Be specific on where I have missed your point.

Quote:

Look up please the definition of "whine".

I don't' need to. You complain all the time about people's language use and tone.

Also, whenever people vent their disgust with certain politicians of a certain persuasion you call them stupid and unthinking for doing so. You don't understand why some people get emotionally worked up over politics, so they must just be stupid or mindless drones. Sorry, but that isn't a sound logical deduction. People are not unthinking or unintelligent just because they don't express themselves in the way you would like them to.

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

21 Jul 2011, 11:14 pm

marshall wrote:

Also, whenever people vent their disgust with certain politicians of a certain persuasion you call them stupid and unthinking for doing so..

I was not going to respond - but rereading I think a la Agathon I need to say:

If there is any greater frequency of "politicians of a certain persuasion" that has to do with the fact that most ranting here against politicians goes one direction [no, not all, just most]. I do not care about the politician - I like and trust none of them of any persuasion. I do not even care about the opinion - though the rationale is not always clear.

But - as you will have seen - people who rant tend to use poor reasoning and inordinate expressions. Which I do tend to care about.

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

21 Jul 2011, 11:31 pm

Just a reminder that the reason I don't directly address philogos' posts is that I can't read them as , out of every poster in WP, he is the only one who managed to get on my ignore list.

Me not addressing his posts should in no way be considered me agreeing with them.

_________________
.

emuman100
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 555

22 Jul 2011, 12:06 am

Vexcalibur wrote:

emuman100 wrote:

So it's the Christians that are at fault here? What about Muslims or members of other religions that don't support gay marriage? They don't matter?

Christians are at fault for Christian churches being bigots. Muslims are at fault for Islam sects being bigots.

And athiests are not at fault for being bigoted against Christians and Muslims?

_________________
EOF

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

22 Jul 2011, 12:09 am

Philologos wrote:

marshall wrote:

But - as you will have seen - people who rant tend to use poor reasoning and inordinate expressions. Which I do tend to care about.

I suspect you are mistaking the deliberate use of hyperbole, satire, and terms of ridicule for poor reasoning. Just because such things serve no function in your mind doesn't mean they serve no function in other minds.

Page 2 of 4 [ 55 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Jump to:

Our bigotry comes from love, not hate! Post Reply New Topic

Our bigotry comes from love, not hate!