tbrown 26
dbattman 0
Sheesh. What a bunch of overblown hype with that group. Hated for what? Standing around with a bunch of signs. Kinda reminds me of those annoying coworkers that do nothin but push your buttons to get a reaction and then run to HR. Whaa!
I think it's rather sad that they warrant even a fraction of that attention and organizations like this and this only warrant a footnote on the local news (occasionally).
I think it's rather sad that they warrant even a fraction of that attention and organizations like this and this only warrant a footnote on the local news (occasionally).
Skyrad 0
QuoteThat is fucking sick. I have my own beliefs but I don't believe in cramming them down peoples throats. I am not gay, never really met anyone who is gay. But its there decision to live that type of lifestlye. I don't think being gay is the root of all evil. Hitler was straight??!! I think this chick is fucked.
You never met anyone who is Gay????
Are you kidding? I can't imagine that even in Tofiled there aren't any gay people. Blimey!When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Skyrad 0
Ok so taking the picketing of soldiers funerals out of the equation (as thats just plain wrong IMHO) maybe we should be living more to the letter of the law. I mean whats the point of having laws if one doesn't abide by the letter of the law? I got a ticket for going 35 mph in a 30mph area if i'd had said as a defence, look I could have been going 55 mph your honor so I was adhering to the spirit of the law it would have been no defence at all. Why then would it be that if we live by the spirit of Gods law that he would be any more leniant? After all a law is a law isn't it? (Before someone starts finding old testament Biblical rulings on slaves of stoning to death I'd just like to point out I'm mearly debating the principle not suggesting that homosexuals be stoned to death here)
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Skyrad 0
QuoteQuoteI have read many good books....never the bible. Yes they do believe in cramming there beliefs down peoples throats. Picketing at a soldiers funeral is pretty fucking sick. I am not christian or religous but I also don't go around telling people they are narrow minded because they believe OR that negative things will happen because we have different beliefs. I never said you pick if you are gay or not. Your lifestyle is your decision.
I went to Parochial School and come from a religious family... I have read it.... and the part they use.. the OLD Testament also known as the Jewish Book of Fables in some circles... does justify some pretty screwed up stuff.. I wonder when the Phelps family is going to start picketing their neighbors who wear mixed fabrics.. and stoneing those who eat shrimp and crab etc. There has been a VAST amount of death, suffering and hypocrisy based on people like these idiots interpretations of the "good book"
I would say most of the Bible Belt does not get the message of love that Christ bought to all of us... they are more than willing to show the old hatreds though.
You sound like a normal Muslim talking about the extremists.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Skyrad 0
I've just watched the documentary again and found it interesting the second time to hear beyond my prejudice towards the group. Alot of their belifes are no different from any other evangelical Christian Church (including the belife that homosexuality is a sin) also they use the term Fag to cover any sexual act outside of wedlock. The following are belifes that I've also heard expressed at regular Christian churchs as well as at the WBC....
1) Fag doesn't just mean homosexual but any sex act outside of marriage.
2) Adhering to the rules of every mainline religion.
3) Friendship with the world is (agaisnt) God.
4) Dress modestly.
5) In the community but not corrupted by the community.
6) Anti dating.
7) Worship no idols.
8) honor thy parents.
Really so bad? If we all lived by those rules maybe the world would be a happier place.
An interesting link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6507971.stm
Its an interview with Louis Theroux (The interviewer in the documentry about what he made of the WBC) heres a couple of interesting quotes from him...
It was an interesting documentry.
1) Fag doesn't just mean homosexual but any sex act outside of marriage.
2) Adhering to the rules of every mainline religion.
3) Friendship with the world is (agaisnt) God.
4) Dress modestly.
5) In the community but not corrupted by the community.
6) Anti dating.
7) Worship no idols.
8) honor thy parents.
Really so bad? If we all lived by those rules maybe the world would be a happier place.
An interesting link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6507971.stm
Its an interview with Louis Theroux (The interviewer in the documentry about what he made of the WBC) heres a couple of interesting quotes from him...
QuoteThey go to school; you can have normal conversations with these people. They're intelligent, high achieving, have good jobs, and they're kind, for the most part, when they're not on pickets. They're easy to communicate with and deal with too. It's just this one area - their pickets. They will even - so I'm given to understand and I have no reason to doubt it - work alongside gay people very happily in the work place. If a gay person goes along to talk to them outside the church or if a gay person even turned up to the church to attend a service, they wouldn't humiliate them or be rude to them; they'd shake their hand and welcome them in.
QuoteLouis: Yes. In some ways they're a model family. All these things that you associate with the breakdown of families, like the dad's gone to the pub all the time or they just watch TV and the parents don't talk to the kids, well you can't put that on this family. They spend all their recreational time together and they all look out for each other. They don't really have friends outside the church because all their best friends are in the church. It's important to recognise the good qualities of the family as it helps explain why so many of them have stayed in it and embraced the hateful stuff.
It was an interesting documentry.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
I couldn't watch more than a few minutes of the first installment, I just don't feel like ruining my morning coffee. But this above quote is most interesting and worthy of some comment.
I don't know a whole lot about Jewish history, but the intersection of the Pharisees with the early Christians and what became of them both is fascinating, and the portrayal of Pharisees in Christian scripture and literature not altogether accurate, even though it has become part of our usage in modern English.
As I understand it, the Pharisees came about as a sect of devoted Jews who sought to turn the nation of Israel, under Roman occupation at the time, back to God by observing scriptural law. They were very devoted to this and dedicated their lives to it, often at great personal expense.
There is the New Testament story of the Pharisee and the Publican praying in the Temple, and we've always been taught that the Pharisee was this fat rich dude in silk robes, sort of a "Jerry Fallwellstein" character, while the Publican was this poor wretched little schlub. In historic fact, the Publican tax collector would've been the fat rich dude and the Pharisee more likely to be a the poor, ragged, starved looking guy.
We also read about frequent confrontations between Jesus and the Pharisees, where Jesus lashes into the Pharisees as hypocrites and "sepulchres" who look good on the outside, but are dead within. Two points about this are 1.) The Pharisees and early Christians were two competing Jewish sects and the debate between them was often brutal, as the Christians were one of the millenarian sects who wanted to rise up, drive the Romans out and establish God's Kingdom on earth. They were one of the active ingredients in the rebellions against Rome that brought about the destruction of Jerusalem and wholesale slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Jews in A.D. 70. Point 2.) is that the Gospels were written AFTER the rebellion of A.D. 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem. The Gospel's authors by then were truly Christian, in that they no longer identified with ever having been Jewish. In fact many of them were former pagan Gentiles from all over the Roman Empire, and some of them, especially John, were Greeks, who did not like the Jews at all for whatever reason. So it more than suited their agenda to defame the Pharisees in whatever terms they chose.
And what became of the Pharisees ? After the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70, Judaism as a state religion, with animal sacrifice, came to an end and has never returned. The Pharisees "re-invented" Judaism and took it all over the world as they were forced out of the Holy Land. Modern Judaism as we know it is descended from the Pharisees. And so it's quite understandable why Jews would take offense at the Christian portrayal of Pharisees as religious hypocrites.
Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !