Christian-phobic speaker walked out on by student journalists

[myotch]

(04-30-2012 10:39 PM)Qrayze Wrote:  ...

BTW, there is another forum outside the "believer's safespace" where this event is being discussed. http://www.stufffundieslike.com/forum/sh...5#pid88645

The angles of this discussion here are, well, intended for believers.

I don't want to be "that guy". But right now, I'm being "that guy".

[Qrayze]

(04-30-2012 11:17 PM)myotch Wrote:  

(04-30-2012 10:39 PM)Qrayze Wrote:  ...

BTW, there is another forum outside the "believer's safespace" where this event is being discussed.

The angles of this discussion here are, well, intended for believers.

I don't want to be "that guy". But right now, I'm being "that guy".

wow. just wow. last I checked, I was still a believer. but I guess since I'm not a bigot (or religious conservative) that means I can't post here?

once again, this further confirms my opinion that religious conservatives are unable to comprehend anything outside of their narrow minds.

[Qrayze]

also, when did "being a believer" mean "being anti-gay"??? IT DOESN'T!!! booyah

[myotch]

Um, Qrayze, it wasn't meant at you in particular, though I thought your participation in the other forum was...well, anyway.

I take a little offense at your inference of my being anti-gay. That is not who I am, and that is not the topic or scope of the discussion here. I agree that being a believer does not necessitate being anti-gay.

FTR, I am libertarian, with the small "l", because being part of a party is a little too close to belonging to a collective I am for equal rights for everyone, fiscal conservatism, and only stray from classical liberal when the issue is a matter of pro-life, or the political redefinition of words, which I find repugnantly Orwellian.

My only stances, politically, which could be construed as "anti-gay" is in regards to "gay marriage", which seeks to redefine what a traditional understanding of marriage is (I prefer "civil union"), and I don't cotton too well to special protected classes, such as protecting specifically gay people from bullies. (I'm against hate crime legislation in all it's forms, not because I want there to be victims of hate crimes, but because defining "hate" as a special aggravating and motivating factor is, in essence, creating a "thought crime", which is another hallmark of Orwellian dystopia.) I guess I'm also for a private business's right to discriminate against whoever they want to discriminate against, because I believe that the free market will eventually punish those who deserve it. I don't mean gays in particular. If a private business does not want to employ Catholics, for instance, or bald guys, or even provide products and services to Catholic bald guys, or whatever "group" I can be put in, then let them do what they want. The market will correct them.

So there you have it. I am a libertarian who deplores Orwellian government tactics. I'm for gays in the military. I don't much care what people do in their bedrooms as long as it is consensual. I'm all for every civil right and access to the courts available to me to also be available to gays or any other citizen.

I suppose I should be totally cliche and mention the homosexuals I have in my family, friends, and sphere of influence, and whom I admire and love very much. I won't step quite down to that level and pander to you in the impossible hopes that I may receive some of your passing, trite approval.

Before you go on about finding confirmation of some narrow stereotype you have about "religious conservatives", use the forums to find out exactly who you are talking to and what they actually believe. I also hope that you see there are more than enough believers here that would stand up for the speaker and have no qualms about criticizing the teens who walked out. We Christians are definitely not a lock-step group of fanatics.

I do apologize for thinking you are not a believer. I really thought your participation in the other forum was indicative of your beliefs.

[myotch]

(04-30-2012 10:24 PM)Ricardo Wrote:  Thanks for the clarification. Yes, I would now agree with your characterization of this guy as a hypocrite.

Now if you could explain how that makes anyone else on the left a hypocrite I would appreciate it.

Political dichotomy is something that both sides of the aisle are guilty of, to be sure - publicly espousing one set of ideals while utilizing a conflicting set of ideals.

For example, and only for example, Reagan used many public speeches to espouse a balanced budget, but the inconvenient fact is that he never submitted a balanced budget, nor did he as POTUS ever signed one.

The shorthand for political dichotomy is "hypocrisy".

And this kind of hypocrisy is, some believe, quite a bit more glaring on the left side of the aisle. Like I said, both sides are hypocrites. But the left's hypocrisy generally takes some strange turns, yet seems to hold to a quality that can only be described as "typical".

The democrat House and Senate pass a bill protecting women from sexual harassment, signed into law by President Clinton. Yet, when Paula Jones makes her accusations, suddenly the law that the Dems and the Prez publicly supported "wasn't meant for a case like Paula's".

OK, that's old and tired news.

How about Gore's environmentalism vs his lifestyle. He has a home that consumes more electricity than practically the combination of everyone who lives within a 5 mile radius of his property line. He flies all over the world on private jets. His carbon footprint has been suggested to far outweigh that of hundreds of regular citizens. This is hypocrisy.

OK, he's a public figure with a cause celebre. Surely we can overlook this hypocrisy.

Warren Buffet comes out as Obama's protagonist in the effort to tax rich people more. But Buffet's company owes millions in back-taxes.

Feminist lawmakers Sheila Jackson Lee and Jan Schakowsky refuse to condemn Bill Maher's calling Gov. Palin a "cunt" and a "dumb twat". But if Rush Limbaugh calls a college student a "slut" for saying she spends her whole summer wages on birth control for two semesters of school, these two lawmakers have seizures.

The left talks of politics of peace. Left wing activism has a long and varied history of incredible violence. Bill Ayers and the Weathermen, Occupy, KKK (southern democrats), union thuggery.

Ted Kennedy supported research and development of wind farms as energy policy. Actually putting the wind farms over the horizon 6 miles away from his Nantucket Sound compound? Well, it would ruin one of his family's favorite yachting spots.

Bush's presidency practically rebirthed an anti-war movement in the US. Where are they now, while we are striking in countries we aren't even close to war with?? Where's that crowd of people who wanted GITMO closed and wanted Bush impeached because of GITMO policy? Did they finally understand that bringing terrorists to American heartland soil to stand trial was not a good idea because Obama said so?

The list goes on and on. Abusing tax loopholes. Special interests. A mountain of discarded campaign promises and soaring rhetoric about creating a better political environment in Washington DC. Much of it is humorous, some downright Animal Farm creepy (in that the pigs meant for slaughter end up controlling the the farm by consent of the manipulatable dumb animals, and resort to even worse behavior than what they said they "wanted" to address).

Yeah, the same can be said of the other side. I'm not going to make an apology for them. But the nature of their hypocrisy tends towards the established, expected set of sins - greed, lust, and pride. Even a certain amount of self-righteous hypocrisy on matters of morals, which makes everybody kinda laugh and cringe at the same time when exposed. And when exposed, those caught republicans just seem to fade away, soon a distant memory.

The left's self-righteous hypocrisy isn't that slow-motion train wreck of the republicans. Theirs never gets called out, punished, lefties are never run out of town, or quietly sleek away when caught, never to be heard from again. Lefties are brazen, and oft-times rewarded. And the lesson never seems to sink in that nobody, not even lefties, can live up to leftist ideology.

[Ricardo]

Myotech,

I would tend to agree with most, if not all your cases of leftist hypocrisy. I appreciate also you throwing in Reagan as an example of rightist hypocrisy.

I believe I could come up with just as many cases of hypocrisy on the right, just as we could find hypocrisy in the Libertarian camp and with the Greens. There is as much hypocrisy in Fox News as there is in CNN News.

On the other hand, we could also look for, and find members of all political persuasions who are trying, as best they can to live as true to their ideals as possible.

Same as with the public speaker in the video.

Is the glass half full or half empty? Shall we throw out the story of the Good Samaritan because he was a Heathen? (He went to Hell, no matter what he did, right?)

Reagan's administration still hold's the record for number of cabinet members convicted of crimes. Shall we characterize the Reagan administration as a bunch of crooks? Shall we dismiss the Clinton administration's accomplishments because of Bill's sexual problems?

I wish your idea about hate crimes laws not being necessary were true.

Your same arguments were used to fight against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Before this law, Negroes had to carry toilet paper when traveling in the South because they could drive for 12 hours at a time in the interstate highways without finding a place with public facilities they could use.

Check out the teen-age homeless shelter nearest you. The largest group of teenagers kicked out of their homes by their own families are gay. Check out the statistics on bullying, and violence in schools. The biggest reason for beatings are being perceived as gay, whether it is true or not. Look a little deeper into most of the school shootings stories.

There should not be a problem for Christians to consider Homosexuality a sin, just as we consider gluttony a sin also. But we don't see Christians openly and obviously avoiding gluttons, and directly or indirectly condemning any gluttons they happen to come across. There is a pervasiveness of persecution -by Christians-, against gays that does not occur with other groups of sinners.

[greg]

I see I'm needed.

Homosexuality is wicked perversion. God destroyed the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of this vile wicked sin. He has posted no apology, ahhh....but he has given us a remedy!

I am a vile wicked sinner, I caused the death of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, the Saviour of the world, because of my own wicked sins, which were just as wicked as the sins of homosexuality. But the difference is, I'm not running down to the local schoolhouse and telling everyone how wonderful my sins are.

Bullying is wrong! It's wrong to bully kids that "think" they are homosexuals. It's wrong to bully chubby kids, kids with disabilities, kids who talk funny. Bullying is wrong.

All anyone has to do, to see that God hasn't changed His mind on this filthy lifestyle is to read Romans 1. This is the believer safe place isn't it? Btw, have any christians invaded the non-believer's space like has been done to the believer's space? "God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another"........"God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged NATURAL relations for UNNATURAL ones. In the same way the men also abandoned NATURAL relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. v-28 "God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done."

Let it be said again, and I'm happy to say it anytime or anywhere. There is no ambiguity about what the bible teaches and what God thinks about the sin of homosexuality. The same can be said about adultery, murder, you name it. All "sex" outside of marriage between a woman and a man is clearly, unambigously, and definitely wrong and sinful. Tough ain't it? That friends, is why we have a Saviour.

[redbeardiam]

(05-01-2012 02:11 PM)greg Wrote:  I see I'm needed.

Homosexuality is wicked perversion. God destroyed the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of this vile wicked sin.... MORE STUFF

''Now this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, plenty of food, and comfortable security, but didn't support the poor and needy.'' - Ezekiel 16:49

P.S. I wish I knew how to quit you.

[myotch]

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 reinforced the founding document's spirit of equality, equal protection under the law, the rule of law instead of arbitrary rules.

The racial problem up to the 1960's, and the lingering problems we still experience today is/was not due to a lack of laws. It was because the laws were not applied and enforced equitably.

RE: hate crimes. Can you tell me one premeditated murder, one assault, one threatening letter, one case of malicious and malevolent harassment where someone was not riled up at least in part by personal hatred?

Yet "hate" has been redefined to have a specific political and legal meaning. And you know my revulsion to political redefining.

I stand by what I said. The right's hypocrisy tends to be extreme moral failings. The left's hypocrisy tends to be an egregious abuse of power which contradicts core leftist ideology and goals on an extreme scale.

I'm libertarian. I've come to appreciate religion as a personal liberty. i wish more people were religious, seeking harmony with God, nature, and neighbor. It doesn't do any good at this point to try to legislate religious precepts, though.

Ignore Greg. We're talking apples and oranges, and as usual, he's nuts and bananas.

[greg]

Begging your pardon, myotch, I gave the Precious Word of God and His opinion on the filthy sin of homosexuality.