Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The Flowers and the Wedding -- Just the FACTS, please

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    ...above all others, with absolutely no attempt to consider any kind of compromise whatsoever. Mind slammed shut.
    The group in question is no longer disenfranchised, and some of its members are doing their level best to reverse that.
    _____________________________________________

    Calling something bigotry does not make it bigotry. In this case, it is no more than an unfounded allegation intended to cow the target into submission.
    sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      ...above all others, with absolutely no attempt to consider any kind of compromise whatsoever. Mind slammed shut.
      The irony is that he's arguing in another thread for the abolishment of the electorial college on the basis that the majority has the inherent right to impose its will on the minority ("Majority rules," he says, "is a basic tenet of democracy."); but here he's arguing for the exact for opposite, for the will of the minority to be all powerful.
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        But you said it wasn't bigotry to take a moral stand. Will you make up your mind?
        No - I said bigotry was not based in two people having opposing moral views. In other words - you cannot say "you're a bigot because your morality is not the same as mine."

        You guys seem to have a predilection for misinterpreting the meaning of my statements, and then clinging to your interpretation, even when I explain the meaning. It doesn't really do much to advance the argument.
        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

        Comment


        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          no

          no

          jim
          First, thank you for being willing to answer my question. I'm going to take from your answer that both you and I agree that "religious freedom" is not absolute. There are boundaries. I would answer those two questions in exactly the same way. So our discussion is not about religious freedom per se, but rather about where those lines should be drawn. Do you agree?

          If you are willing to humor me, would you consider answering two similar questions?

          1) Would you defend the right the members of a religion who own a business (e.g., a diner on the town's main street) to have a "white's only" policy because they believe "god saves only the white person; it is sinful to have any interactions with a black person." This is what their holy book tells them.

          2) Would you defend the right the members of a religion who own a business (e.g., a diner located in a private commune accessible only to the members of the community) to have a "white's only" policy because they believe "god saves only the white person; it is sinful to have any interactions with a black person." This is what their holy book tells them.

          Michel
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            ...above all others, with absolutely no attempt to consider any kind of compromise whatsoever. Mind slammed shut.
            Actually - I have put forward several strategies for people of faith to follow their conscience, but they are rejected as "too onerous." I find myself curious as to when and where anyone was guaranteed that following one's conscience could not be made hard.

            CP, you are free to think of me as "close minded" if you wish. I know I'm not. I will respond to a well structured, rational argument. I always have. I always will. Sometimes I need to hear it more than once, but I make an effort to go where the argument takes me. If you think otherwise, I can only say, "you're entitled to your opinion."

            But resorting to ad hominem arguments doesn't strengthen your position. It's not a reasonable way to make a case.
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              ...you cannot say "you're a bigot because your morality is not the same as mine."
              But that's exactly what you are saying when you declare that a Christian business owner can't take a moral stand against providing services in a way that would violate his core values.

              Either taking a moral stand is bigoted, or it's not. You can't have it both ways.
              Last edited by Mountain Man; 06-10-2019, 09:37 AM.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by carp
                No - I said bigotry was not based in two people having opposing moral views. In other words - you cannot say "you're a bigot because your morality is not the same as mine."
                But that's exactly what you've been saying!! Christians are bigots, says Michel, because our morality is not the same as his!!

                You guys seem to have a predilection for misinterpreting the meaning of my statements, and then clinging to your interpretation, even when I explain the meaning. It doesn't really do much to advance the argument.
                We don't misunderstand you! You keep saying what you mean and then tell us it isn't what you mean!


                Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                  The group in question is no longer disenfranchised, and some of its members are doing their level best to reverse that.
                  If you actually think that, then you are not following the news. This is the siren song of the enfranchised. As those who have been disenfranchised for so long begin to gain parity, those who have held sway for so long must necessarily give ground. They generally see this as an "infringement on their rights." It's not. It is an attempt to rebalance and bring everyone into an equal place. The diner owner forced to take down his "white's only" sign and allow the black man to sit at his counter saw his rights being violated. They weren't. What was being corrected was his habit of oppressing those he did not like or see as equal. Society was saying, "no more - this is not what we want for our society." Separate is NOT equal. If you offer service in the public marketplace, you may not do so in a discriminatory fashion. You may not discriminate in hiring or compensation. These principals are well-established in our legal history. All that is happening is that the list of those covered by this protection is being expanded to include those not previously covered.

                  Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                  Calling something bigotry does not make it bigotry. In this case, it is no more than an unfounded allegation intended to cow the target into submission.
                  I agree with the first part - but not the second. Calling something bigotry does not MAKE it bigotry. I would also add that saying something is NOT bigotry does not make it so either. A thing is or is not "bigotry" if it matches the definition of the term. So let's look at that.
                  • Bigotry (Merriam Webster): obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices.
                  • Bigot: (Merriam Webster): a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
                  • Prejudice (Merriam Webster): injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights, especially - detriment to one's legal rights or claims
                  • Discrimination: prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment


                  With some qualification, these terms appear to apply to the discussion at hand. The issue is sex and sexual orientation, not race. I also don't think all Christians experience "hatred" towards the LGBTQ community, except in so far as they feel their own rights are being "violated" because they are increasingly being told, "your behavior will no longer be permitted." There is significant anger there, in my experience.

                  But in general, I think most of those Christians who continually express these views are genuinely trying to follow their bible and obey what they believe is the will of their god. They are not intentionally being malicious. That does not change the simple fact that their bible is telling them to engage in actions and attitudes that are rife with bigotry, prejudice, and discrimination - as defined above. I have outlined why/how this is so several times, and the core argument continues to be ignored. I'll post it again in the event that someone wants to take it up.

                  A same-sex couple is being told that an action (sex) or state (married) that is perfectly legal/moral for two people with one genetic make-up (male-female) is immoral for two people with a different genetic make-up (male-male, female-female). A person's gender is genetically determined, it is not under their control. Since the ONLY difference between these two situations is genetic, it is not the ACT that is the issue, it is the genetics of the two people involved. The same act is moral in one context, and immoral in another, for no other reason than the specific combination of XY chromosomes of the two people involved.

                  I submit that genetics is NOT a basis for morality. It was not a basis for morality when it was about a black person marrying a white person. We have long since labeled THAT prohibition an act of bigotry and prejudice. Today, inter-racial marriages are commonplace as a result of the work to haul that bigotry/prejudice/discrimination into the light. We are in the midst of the same process today with attitudes towards the LGBTQ community.

                  It is not my words that make the position bigoted/prejudiced/discriminating. It is the simple fact that people are attempting to label other people "sinful" and "bad" and "immoral" for a reason that reduces to genetics.
                  Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-10-2019, 10:08 AM.
                  The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                  I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    But that's exactly what you are saying when you declare that a Christian business owner can't take a moral stand against providing services in a way that would violate his core values.
                    No - people here have been attempting to twist what I am actually saying into that message - but it's NOT what I am saying, despite all those attempts.

                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    Either taking a moral stand is bigoted, or it's not. You can't have it both ways.
                    "Taking a moral stand" (in general) is not a basis for an accusation of bigotry. It is not an act of bigotry to have the moral position "it is immoral to steal." It is not an act of bigotry to have the moral position "it is immoral to randomly kill."

                    That does not mean a moral position is never bigoted.

                    "It is immoral for a black person to have sex with a white person" is a moral stand, and it is a bigoted one.
                    "It is immoral for a woman to be the head of a household" is a moral position, and it is a bigoted one.
                    "It is immoral for a man to have sex with a man" is a moral position, and it is a bigoted one.

                    All three are bigoted for basically the same reason: they determine morality on the basis of the genetic identity of the people involved. In other words, they differentiate inappropriately by race or gender, ignoring the individual capabilities and situations of the individuals and simply lumping all members of a group into a class and applying a moral label.* In other words, it is not the difference between two moral positions that makes it bigoted - nor is it the fact that it is a moral position. It is the nature of the specific moral position that determines if it is or is not bigoted.

                    *As I write this sentence, it dawns on me that this is exactly what the right objects to so vociferously as "identity politics." Some irony there.
                    Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-10-2019, 10:12 AM.
                    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                      But that's exactly what you've been saying!!
                      No - I have never said that, nor do I think it. Having different moral positions is NOT a basis for a claim of bigotry.

                      Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                      Christians are bigots, says Michel, because our morality is not the same as his!!
                      No on two counts.

                      First, I have never said "Christians are bigots." That would be an untrue statement and would be itself a form of bigotry. Unless the group is devoted to bigotry (e.g., the KKK), saying "a member of group X is a bigot" is itself a form of bigotry. My statements have always been about the specific position held (i.e., anti-gay positions). Indeed, I have explicitly acknowledged that some Christians do not hold these views. If you think otherwise, then please point me to where I have said "Christians are bigots." I do not believe that, and I do not believe I have said it. If I have - then I owe everyone here a HUGE apology. THAT would make me a bigot.

                      Second, I have never said that the claim of bigotry is rooted in the fact that you don't agree with me. It is rooted in the specific nature of the moral claim being made. See my response to MM for more detail and some examples.

                      Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                      We don't misunderstand you! You keep saying what you mean and then tell us it isn't what you mean!
                      No - I keep saying X, and you keep repeating back Y. But let's put that to the test, shall we. Please find a place where, in my writings, I have said "Christians are bigots," either directly or by implication. I think you will not find it.
                      Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-10-2019, 10:13 AM.
                      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                        Actually - I have put forward several strategies for people of faith to follow their conscience....
                        I got news for you, Carpe. You're not the boss of the world, and for that, I am glad.
                        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                          No - I have never said that, nor do I think it. Having different moral positions is NOT a basis for a claim of bigotry.



                          No on two counts.

                          First, I have never said "Christians are bigots." That would be an untrue statement and would be itself a form of bigotry. Unless the group is devoted to bigotry (e.g., the KKK), saying "a member of group X is a bigot" is itself a form of bigotry. My statements have always been about the specific position held (i.e., anti-gay positions). Indeed, I have explicitly acknowledged that some Christians do not hold these views. If you think otherwise, then please point me to where I have said "Christians are bigots." I do not believe that, and I do not believe I have said it. If I have - then I owe everyone here a HUGE apology. THAT would make me a bigot.

                          Second, I have never said that the claim of bigotry is rooted in the fact that you don't agree with me. It is rooted in the specific nature of the moral claim being made. See my response to MM for more detail and some examples.



                          No - I keep saying X, and you keep repeating back Y. But let's put that to the test, shall we. Please find a place where, in my writings, I have said "Christians are bigots," either directly or by implication. I think you will not find it.

                          This entire thread is full of your insinuations that Christians are bigots, most recently right here:

                          "It is immoral for a man to have sex with a man" is a moral position, and it is a bigoted one.
                          But, it doesn't matter, because you will continue to claim that you've never said it or implied it and that every person here is not reading you right or misunderstanding what is clear to all of us in what you've said.

                          I'm going to take a page from scripture and wipe your dust off my feet as I leave the thread.


                          Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                            "It is immoral for a black person to have sex with a white person" is a moral stand, and it is a bigoted one.
                            "It is immoral for a woman to be the head of a household" is a moral position, and it is a bigoted one.
                            "It is immoral for a man to have sex with a man" is a moral position, and it is a bigoted one.
                            I don't suppose it has yet dawned on you that every single one of these examples is a begged question.
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                              This entire thread is full of your insinuations that Christians are bigots, most recently right here:
                              Then I submit that you are adding to my statements something I did not put there. The moral position you quoted is indeed a bigoted one, and someone holding that moral position is taking a bigoted position. That does not translate to "Christians are bigots." Those Christians who hold that moral position are adopting a bigoted position with respect to the LGBTQ community. Those who do not, are not. Those Russians who adopt that position are adopting a bigoted position. Those who do not, are not. I repeat, I have never said "Christians are bigots" and I do not think that. You are adding that to my statements.

                              ETA: it dawns on me that if you believe "anyone who does not agree that same-gender sex or marriage is immoral is not a real Christian," then you will see my statements as "Christians are bigots" because, to you, all "real" Christians have this belief. The distinction between "rejecting the moral position" and "rejecting Christians" is likely to be lost on you. That doesn't change my position. It is not all Christians and it is not all of Christianity that suffers from bigotry. It is those Christians who hold this position and specifically related to this position. The position is a bigoted one, to the person holding it is bigoted with respect to this topic.

                              Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                              But, it doesn't matter, because you will continue to claim that you've never said it or implied it and that every person here is not reading you right or misunderstanding what is clear to all of us in what you've said.
                              When people add to what I have said something I did not put there, I will point it out. What you choose to do with that information is entirely up to you.

                              Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                              I'm going to take a page from scripture and wipe your dust off my feet as I leave the thread.
                              You may do so if you wish, of course. It's a pretty common pattern.
                              Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-10-2019, 10:39 AM.
                              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                I don't suppose it has yet dawned on you that every single one of these examples is a begged question.
                                How are they begged questions?
                                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Electric Skeptic, Yesterday, 10:28 AM
                                0 responses
                                17 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Electric Skeptic  
                                Started by Whateverman, 10-29-2020, 05:50 PM
                                10 responses
                                104 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by LiconaFan97, 10-29-2020, 05:19 PM
                                3 responses
                                24 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Starlight  
                                Started by Kate22, 10-29-2020, 08:56 AM
                                26 responses
                                227 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Reepicheep, 10-29-2020, 08:06 AM
                                4 responses
                                68 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Reepicheep  
                                Working...
                                X