Knight's pick 10-08-2011

[Lighthouse]

We agree then LH that clearly you, me and everyone else is fallible, and there is nothing very presumptive about that imo.
What would be presumptive however imo would be in you presuming that you are somehow empowered to speak for God perhaps simply by proxy from words written in the Bible maybe. Those who do not happen to share your own personal or Biblical absolutist views nor think that you speak for God I rather think should be allowed to do so without any interference from you or from any "Christian" Taliban.

But from what you say here it seems that perhaps you do only offer your own fallible opinion?
Nevertheless apparently you continue to advocate that practising gays be jailed or even executed while others are denied a chance of living this life in a way that suits them, even though you are fallible and could well be wrong.
What is not presumptuous about that, twit?

The presumption was your accusation that I made myself equal with God by my statement that He is neither fallible nor wrong.

And my personal views conflict with the views of God.

 

[alwight]

Many of us do indeed enjoy flying kites with our children, children we are trying to raise in a world that is increasingly hostile to Godly principles.

At least you think you are moral apparently, but happily those wanting to lock people up or worse for being gay are not in the majority even in home of the brave and the land of the fundies it seems.

As do we. We expect that those we elect will represent our interests. That includes reversing the coarsening of our culture.

That's also when intolerance of others and bigotry rather begins to show imo.

It harms us all, as a society, to allow abortion, pornography, homosexuality, adultery and other perversions to become accepted as "normal".

I'm sorry then that you can't quite seem to have the exact society that suits you in every detail but that's when showing a bit of tolerance and compromise would be helpful, not that absolutist religious fundie folk would know what the hell I'm talking about.

 

[alwight]

The presumption was your accusation that I made myself equal with God by my statement that He is neither fallible nor wrong.

And my personal views conflict with the views of God.

And God's views are unquestionably as written in the Bible or do you perhaps have another more direct way of knowing them?

 

[Poly]

This reply from an honest and respresentative woman of American Christianity, reveals the inroads and horrors of the homosexual agenda within our societal minds, hearts, and wills.

Bybee admits to being moral and not understanding of this perversion, but she has been brainwashed to believe she must be tolerant of what she cannot explain . . . despite her natural moral inclinations.

Her only hope, is that those who are immoral, will not flaunt their wickedness and ugliness in her face, so that she can continue to be "tolerant" and non-judgmental.

But they will not do so.

Wicked and perverted human beings will only grow more and more invasive and in our face, due to Christian silence and hopes to avoid confronting their evil acts.

I am not a reconstructionist nor a domionist, but I am a moralist, and I refuse to condone Sodom and Gomorrah.

Homosexuals act the way they do because they are reprobates and discarded from God's favor. Christians must accept this judgment from God upon them, and oppose any government actions to protect them.

If we do not, they will corrupt and taint our children and grandchildren, to the point that our offspring will suffer the same judgments from God.

It is the sin of omission for Christians to not speak up and oppose moral perversion of every sort. For if the salt of this earth loses its savor, all the meat of mankind will rot.

Nang

:first: POTD Well said, Nang!

Couldn't agree more. I for one, refuse to hold one's hand on his way to hell simply because confrontation is too uncomfortable and turning a blind eye, pretending things aren't so bad is just so much easier. That's not loving at all but we trick ourselves into believing it is. That's only caring about yourself and hardly being loving to your neighbor.

If an idiot is purposely standing in the middle of the highway, thinking all is safe with him and a semi truck is headed straight for him, you can bet that making sure I don't hurt his feelings or get too confrontational will be the last thing to enter my mind while I'm screaming at 'em, "Quit being stupid and get your flippin' moronic butt to safety or you're gonna end up a flat, pathetic piece of freeway dead pancake!!" :dead:

 

[Lighthouse]

And God's views are unquestionably as written in the Bible or do you perhaps have another more direct way of knowing them?

They are unquestionably as He has spoken them.

 

[alwight]

They are unquestionably as He has spoken them.

Spoken to you personally or how?

 

[MaryContrary]

No, but the abuse of democracy does when it is used as a tool to oppress a minority, as you would like to do it seems.

That's neither abusing the system nor oppressing the minority, alwight. Else, every law ever passed without any dissent whatsoever were likewise abusing the democratic process and the minority vote.

Look the words up if you need to. Or don't. I really don't think you can argue this point.

 

[some other dude]

homosexuals are a "minority"
adulterers are a "minority"
pedophiles are a "minority"



Thank goodness, eh?

 

[alwight]

That's neither abusing the system nor oppressing the minority, alwight. Else, every law ever passed without any dissent whatsoever were likewise abusing the democratic process and the minority vote.

Sorry Mary not so, the majority deciding to oppress a minority (as clearly you do want to oppress gays if they won't comply) even by a democratic process simply doesn't magically make it somehow right and proper. And of course it's even more wrong when the democratic process allows the largest minority to oppress smaller ones, as often it has done.

Look the words up if you need to. Or don't. I really don't think you can argue this point.

I see, so winner takes all then is a good Christian value? :sherlock:

 

[alwight]

homosexuals are a "minority"
adulterers are a "minority"
pedophiles are a "minority"



Thank goodness, eh?

Ginger people are a "minority"
Left handed people are a "minority"
Colour blind people are a "minority"
Down's syndrome people are a "minority"
Atheists are a "minority"
Gay people are a "minority"

Which specific minority are you in?
Watch out that the largest minority might decide to lock you up or execute you for it.

Thankfully though right wing Christian fanatics are only a shrinking minority.

 

[lightbringer]

Left handed people are a "minority

Don't forget that lefties where also considered "evil" at one time!

:think: Now what group believed that oh yeah, right...right wing... :idea: right wing religious fanatics :rotfl:

 

[Lighthouse]

Gay people are a "minority"

He already said that one.:dunce::duh:

 

[alwight]

Don't forget that lefties where also considered "evil" at one time!

:think: Now what group believed that oh yeah, right...right wing... :idea: right wing religious fanatics :rotfl:

Southpaws have, after all, wilfully chosen to be left-handed which I as a right handed person myself think is an abomination and an insult to God and all decent right handed people, stone them! :IA:

 

[lightbringer]

Southpaws have, after all, wilfully chosen to be left-handed which I as a right handed person myself think is an abomination and an insult to God and all decent right handed people, stone them! :IA:

Oh no! Ambidextrous people better run for the hills then or stop being so willful (X2) or hope there are a whole lot of lefties or very few rocks!:rotfl:

Wait! What God said that, I want undeniable proof!

 

[alwight]

He already said that one.:dunce::duh:

Yes LH that was rather the point, it being in my list too, it fits just as well as in SoD's you may notice, better in fact imo, ...or perhaps you won't. :doh:

 

[alwight]

Oh no! Ambidextrous people better run for the hills then or stop being so willful (X2) or hope there are a whole lot of lefties or very few rocks!:rotfl:

Wait! What God said that, I want undeniable proof!

Ask Lighthouse he has a direct line apparently.

 

[lightbringer]

Ask Lighthouse he has a direct line apparently.

Lighthouse? Ye jest!

 

[MaryContrary]

Sorry Mary not so, the majority deciding to oppress a minority (as clearly you do want to oppress gays if they won't comply) even by a democratic process simply doesn't magically make it somehow right and proper. And of course it's even more wrong when the democratic process allows the largest minority to oppress smaller ones, as often it has done.

Oppress gays if they don't comply? Comply with what? Not engaging in behavior that is illegal? Do we likewise oppress everyone who does anything else we've outlawed? Aren't they also failing to comply and wouldn't that also make all of us in favor of any law at all oppressors?

I think you have no argument here and you know it. Else you wouldn't pretend on this one issue that a majority ruling is somehow oppression.

Again, would you call every instance where the majority ruled democratically to legislate for/against something contrary to the will of the minority oppression? Or is it that the majority ruling to outlaw this one behavior against an opposing minority that's somehow oppressive?

Maybe you can explain why this would be oppressive and any other majority ruling is not?

...

You know, the only way out of this is to fall back to pretending we're advocating outlawing homosexuality, rather than homosexual sex. Like Lightbringer's left-handed thing, fr'nstance. Go ahead if you like. I'll consider that a win, as always. :idunno:

 

[lightbringer]

You know, the only way out of this is to fall back to pretending we're advocating outlawing homosexuality, rather than homosexual sex. Like Lightbringer's left-handed thing, fr'nstance. Go ahead if you like. I'll consider that a win, as always. :idunno:

Not pretending, it was a fact that lefties where persecuted due to the silly notion it was evil, people right here in the good ol US of A were training left handed children to switch over as late as the mid 1900's due to this perceived evilness. :rotfl: silly fanatics!

Oh, wait, were you referring to hand sex, if so, off with their evil hand, but only if it was a left hand!

 

[alwight]

Oppress gays if they don't comply? Comply with what? Not engaging in behavior that is illegal?

And who says it should be illegal, you and your buddies?
Want your cake and eat it much do you?
I'm not gay but you'd only have your way over my dead body I can assure you.

Do we likewise oppress everyone who does anything else we've outlawed? Aren't they also failing to comply and wouldn't that also make all of us in favor of any law at all oppressors?

Who else exactly does the state outlaw for doing in private what is simply a natural preference for them? Which after all has no actual difference, in effect, from hetrosexual sex as far as the non concerned are concerned, and is of particularly of no concern to the state imo.
I do however try to understand how your own religious views make this hard for you to accept, which is where some tolerance for other people's own views would come in handy perhaps. But sadly I rather suspect that your world is far too black and white for that.

I think you have no argument here and you know it. Else you wouldn't pretend on this one issue that a majority ruling is somehow oppression.

Nonsense, there is no pretence involved, do you actually believe that a majority can't oppress a minority, when clearly even the largest minority can do that in a democracy?
Do you really think that a majority opinion is automatically the right and proper position?
You'd not have your way in my society without a physical fight I can assure you because I for one am never going to accept gays being locked up or executed in my name just having gay sex in private, or indeed that they be forced not to just to suit the likes of you.

Again, would you call every instance where the majority ruled democratically to legislate for/against something contrary to the will of the minority oppression? Or is it that the majority ruling to outlaw this one behavior against an opposing minority that's somehow oppressive?

Maybe you can explain why this would be oppressive and any other majority ruling is not?

If the civil secular laws offend me enough then it really doesn't actually matter if it's called democracy or not on your particular ship of fools.

You know, the only way out of this is to fall back to pretending we're advocating outlawing homosexuality, rather than homosexual sex. Like Lightbringer's left-handed thing, fr'nstance. Go ahead if you like. I'll consider that a win, as always. :idunno:

I'm really not "in" anything Mary except in your own mind perhaps.
You are perfectly within your rights as a human being to not like homosexuals or what they do in private, but you have no right to stop them doing it in private, even if the thought of what they do deeply offends you or only because you happen to think from religious dogma that it offends your God.