3 3
brenthutch

Brittney Griner

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, kallend said:

It is beyond me why anyone would take the cherry picked words from a flawed translation describing the prejudices of a band of neolithic goat herders some 2000+ years ago as a guide to moral rectitude in the 21st Century that they wish to impose on everyone else..

 

Oddly enough, the descendants of said goat herders to a large extent regard the untranslated writings as having merit on a par with the Greek myths.

Admittedly Haredim take it verbatim, but I'm not sure how they deal with mitzvot mandating genocide or slavery.

The significance of mitzvot, as I understand it, is that 'the law' was thus not whatever the King du jour felt it should be ('we answer to a higher authority' and all that).

As Clarence Darrow noted, "in the beginning God created man.  Man, being a gentleman, returned the favor."

The Bronze Age writings rather reflect that reality.

As an aside, I'd love to know how our neighbors to the West built the pyramids.  Regardless of the budget, I'd no-bid that contract.

 

BSBD,

Winsor 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, kallend said:

It is beyond me why anyone would take the cherry picked words from a flawed translation describing the prejudices of a band of neolithic goat herders some 2000+ years ago as a guide to moral rectitude in the 21st Century that they wish to impose on everyone else..

 

'Cuz it says what they want to hear.

All the shit about who to hate, that if they say the 'magic words', they go to heaven forever, while the people they don't like burn for eternity. I think they like the latter part of that sentence more than the former.

Just now, BIGUN said:

I'm really beginning to wonder what you got against neolithic goat herders. Some of my best friends are neolithic goat herders.

If it comes to tending goats, camping out, really good campfire stories, great.

Morality, legal issues, tolerance and acceptance of those different from me?

Not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

If it comes to tending goats, camping out, really good campfire stories, great.

Morality, legal issues, tolerance and acceptance of those different from me?

It was a joke, Joe. Choose love. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, kallend said:

It is beyond me why anyone would take the cherry picked words from a flawed translation describing the prejudices of a band of neolithic goat herders some 2000+ years ago as a guide to moral rectitude in the 21st Century that they wish to impose on everyone else..

 

Why wouldn't they? Moral principles are no different now then they were long before 2K years ago. The key is right there in your post, "cherry picked". Despite any religion in the world dominating the local area and claiming to follow god the reality is that all of us are subject to the laws of man as enforced where we happen to live. God has no enforcement mechanism and therefore no power.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kallend said:

It is beyond me why anyone would take the cherry picked words from a flawed translation describing the prejudices of a band of neolithic goat herders some 2000+ years ago as a guide to moral rectitude in the 21st Century that they wish to impose on everyone else..

 

Because some people don't have the mental acuity to think and work these things out for themselves, and need to be told what their opinions should be. And that's fine, until they try and legislate it, or push other people to follow those same opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2023 at 8:51 PM, Coreece said:

And I think there are many out there that want such a relationship.  So let it be.

The problem you have is that religionists do not see their relationship with secularists as a two way street. Worse, they selfishly can not see that already, and without further erosions of secularists freedoms, they have the upper hand. For religionists too much is still not enough; there is no credible pretense of equity and most certainly there is no ethos of live and let live. Now, you are right to be concerned about the opposition. They are eager for actual fairness; a fairness that will cost you and your tenets. Secularists desire strongly to erode the power of religionists to force their beliefs on their children. They want their wives and daughters free from the yoke religionists hang on their necks, like it or not. They are offended that a tax system we should all be subject too equally confers senseless benefits on religious organizations that must be made up out of the pockets of non believers. The list goes on and on. So really, Coreece, thanks for the advice but as do the religious, we don't want to "let it be".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kallend said:

It is beyond me why anyone would take the cherry picked words from a flawed translation describing the prejudices of a band of neolithic goat herders some 2000+ years ago as a guide to moral rectitude in the 21st Century that they wish to impose on everyone else..

 

Because some people just plain need guidance from outside; they don’t (or shouldn’t) trust themselves. 
Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Because some people just plain need guidance from outside; they don’t (or shouldn’t) trust themselves. 
Wendy P. 

Given the quotations from that fatally flawed document often quoted in these forums. Used as justification for hatred, racism, bigotry, prejudice, etc.

Perhaps its a mistake to associate it with any form of guidance. Despite any representations of positive guidance  associated with that book/ religion. Given the posts in this forum. I can find only one SC Christian regular who seems to be absent those negative qualities. BIGUN. Perhaps he doesn't read it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

It was a joke, Joe. Choose love. 

We really need a sarcasm font.

Although I do actually believe what I said.

Just now, gowlerk said:

... Despite any religion in the world dominating the local area and claiming to follow god the reality is that all of us are subject to the laws of man as enforced where we happen to live. God has no enforcement mechanism and therefore no power.  

Well, that's one of the 'fun' things about religion.

'God' has the power of whoever speaks for him.

So the Pope has power over Catholics. If you look at some of the medieval practices, they used 'the power of God' to do some pretty awful things.

And it's not just Christians. The Ayatollah Khomeni did some truly cruel & vicious things in the 'name of Allah'. In fact those in power in Iran are still doing many of those things.

Now, I don't believe that 'God' actually exists, so the power isn't really 'his'.
It's just (mis)used in his name by some pretty nasty people to do some pretty nasty things.
This is not new. 

Nor is there any sign it's going to end anytime soon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kallend said:

It is beyond me why anyone would take the cherry picked words from a flawed translation describing the prejudices of a band of neolithic goat herders some 2000+ years ago as a guide to moral rectitude in the 21st Century that they wish to impose on everyone else..

 

Because it is an amazing business plan.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
29 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Because some people just plain need guidance from outside; they don’t (or shouldn’t) trust themselves. 
Wendy P. 

Wendy, that is what the law is for. The law of man. There is no law of god, only mankind's interpretation of how we should live.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, winsor said:

Oddly enough, the descendants of said goat herders to a large extent regard the untranslated writings as having merit on a par with the Greek myths.

Admittedly Haredim take it verbatim, but I'm not sure how they deal with mitzvot mandating genocide or slavery.

The significance of mitzvot, as I understand it, is that 'the law' was thus not whatever the King du jour felt it should be ('we answer to a higher authority' and all that).

As Clarence Darrow noted, "in the beginning God created man.  Man, being a gentleman, returned the favor."

The Bronze Age writings rather reflect that reality.

As an aside, I'd love to know how our neighbors to the West built the pyramids.  Regardless of the budget, I'd no-bid that contract.

 

BSBD,

Winsor 

Hi Winsor,

One of my philosophy instructors in college once said, 'If God did not exist, man would create him.'

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Because some people just plain need guidance from outside; they don’t (or shouldn’t) trust themselves. 
Wendy P. 

Hi Wendy,

That same philosophy instructor said that man created God because of his fear of the unknown.  Mankind wants something to hang onto.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Because some people just plain need guidance from outside; they don’t (or shouldn’t) trust themselves. 

Often true.  And these are the people who are most at risk for radicalization.  In that sense, religion (often) plays an important role in forcing morals on these people.  "Jesus wants you to not hit your wife or you'll go to hell and burn forever" can help keep people like that away from violence and crime, and a community of people all pushing the same message can provide a support system for such people who need that sort of human connection in their lives.  (Or he wants you to stop drinking, or be a good soldier, or a good father, or whatever.)

Unfortunately it also means that those people can be just as easily co-opted by charismatic belief systems that play a similar role in society.  The KKK was one such organization - as much a social organization as an anti-black organization, with close ties to Protestant churches, a well defined hierarchy for people within the organization, and even its own language for followers.  It, unfortunately, filled the same role in some people's lives that better churches did, and provided that same sort of support for people committing some pretty horrendous crimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
9 hours ago, jakee said:

I used your exact language. You said ‘the many people do XYZ’ so I said ‘the many people do ZYX’. If you think that means I’m being absolutist then you’ll have to explain why you weren’t. 

Then what's the point of merely repeating what I've just said?  You repeated it, albeit with additional assertions that go beyond my original comment.  While it may indeed be accurate that certain individuals are unconcerned with morality as it pertains to this issue, others may view morality as a necessary precondition for national prosperity and the avoidance of divine judgement. As I stated in the past, this perspective risks falling prey to the perils of moralism.

I recall expressing reservations about this, and if IIRC correctly Ron really didn't wholeheartedly agree with me - but I don't  remember specifically in what regard.  If individuals are apprehensive about the looming threat of judgement on the country,(and they shouldn't be if we look to psalm 37 for any sense of solace)  they would do well to preach the acceptance of Christ, a message which Ron appears to be promoting.  I don't see the part about homosexuals recognizing and addressing their sin as necessarily having to do with God's judgement on the country,  but rather a means of removing obstacles that may impede their reconciliation with God, should they so desire.

 

9 hours ago, jakee said:
11 hours ago, Coreece said:

Another major factor is parents trying to shield their children from these influences.  And I posted stats in another thread showing how even a majority of Democrats objected to Disney intentionally incorporating oversexualized or sexually suggestive content into children's entertainment.

Another factor in what? What does that have to do with anything we’ve been talking about? What are you saying - that when Christians claim to be taking their anti-gay stance from the bible they’re actually just mad at Disney? I don’t get it.

I'm saying It's a multifaceted issue and not as black and white as some are trying to make it out to be.  It cannot be fully understood without examining the complex interplay of social, political, cultural and various religious factors/beliefs. 

Perhaps some individuals and Christians alike do not hold strong convictions against homosexuality itself, but rather feel uneasy about the social messages that their children are being exposed to. And on top of that, political agendas often co-opt these issues and create narratives in order to garner votes and secure support for ones political and/or religious or non-religious affiliation.

It's no secret that politicians use divisive wedge issues to maintain power and influence. Republicans often appeal to religious voters while Democrats appeal to minority groups. However, once these groups become more fluid again, other emotional appeals will likely emerge and continue to divide us. 
 

9 hours ago, jakee said:
11 hours ago, Coreece said:

You've done this several times now already, stop putting words in my mouth.  I didn't say that's what I think Ron is doing. 

Then what do you think he’s doing, because he’s clearly not simply following the bible. Again, going back to that biblical paragraph you posted, we know that Ron approves of Trump because he’s a greedy swindler, so it’s absurd to suggest he’s against homosexuality just because the same bible passage says so. 

I already told you what I think he's doing.  And I haven't really been around this place over the past couple years so I'm not sure if that's the specific reason he approves of Trump or even believes that.  Part of me thinks that just an inference on your part as you often do,  and it isn't always fair or accurate.  

But anyway, given that this two-party system is often seen at as a choice between two evils, arguments like these can be leveled against Christians regardless of who they voted for.   It's a catch-22 scenario that poses a loaded question.

What's with your obsessive preoccupation with Ron anyway, lol.

It's not my intention/desire to discuss/judge specific posters openly in a public forum ad nauseam - I mean a little here and there is ok, but damn dude.

Edited by Coreece
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Coreece said:

Then what's the point of merely repeating what I've just said?  

Why are you saying I merely repeated what you said? You know that's not true and it's frankly bizarre to claim it is. I repeated the way you phrased something. So if you think I was being absolutist, why were you being absolutist?

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

I'm saying It's a multifaceted issue and not as black and white as some are trying to make it out to be.  It cannot be fully understood without examining the complex interplay of social, political, cultural and various religious factors/beliefs. 

Great, as long as we agree that most christians who rant about Christianity aren't really concerned about it for biblical reasons then we're saying the same thing. This is where everyone else has been this whole time.

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

Perhaps some individuals and Christians alike do not hold strong convictions against homosexuality itself, but rather feel uneasy about the social messages that their children are being exposed to.

What do you think these social messages are? What are the overly sexualised Disney messages that are any different from what they've always done? I'm genuinely curious.

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

I already told you what I think he's doing.  And I haven't really been around this place over the past couple years so I'm not sure if that's the specific reason he approves of Trump or even believes that.  Part of me thinks that just an inference on your part as you often do,  and it isn't always fair or accurate.

The search function is available. 

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

What's with your obsessive preoccupation with Ron anyway, lol.

You jumped right into the middle of a discussion people were having with Ron and provided the biblical justification for what Ron was saying, so it seemed safe to assume that's what you wanted to talk about. And in this case, he's the perfect example of all the Christians that you've told us are out there who don't really care what the bible says unless it backs up their human biases and preconceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Coreece said:

Perhaps some individuals and Christians alike do not hold strong convictions against homosexuality itself, but rather feel uneasy about the social messages that their children are being exposed to.

Social messages like . . . accept that some people are different from you?  Live and let live?  Stop hate crimes?  Everyone deserves the same rights?  Don't be ashamed of who you are?  Yes, children are being exposed to these messages, and have been for decades.  And that's a good thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

3 3