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

Another One Bites The Dust!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Can you quote me where I said they were 'inherently bad' or are you attacking piles of burning straw because you don't want to deal with the logic of your own argument? If violence is a measurement of if a movement shouldn't be supported, your logic would say that the abolitionist and civil rights movements were both 'bad' movements since both of them attracted violent elements.
    Violence is not a measure of if a movement shouldn't be supported. Violence is a measure of if an arbitrarily decided tenet with no truth value should be tolerated.

    Originally posted by Joel View Post
    Can you explain the distinction you are making? I'm not sure I understand you.
    Freedom of thought/speech only matter in a government/citizen or contractual (as per regulations) relationship. They do not matter when it comes to association, non-contractual relationships between citizens, or a matter between two citizens in one's own home.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
      Freedom of thought/speech only matter in a government/citizen or contractual (as per regulations) relationship. They do not matter when it comes to association, non-contractual relationships between citizens, or a matter between two citizens in one's own home.
      Okay, so you are not saying it should be illegal to hold such views, but rather you are just saying that you want to exercise your freedom of association by not associating with people who hold such views, or your freedom of speech in criticizing those views. Fair enough.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        Doesn't that pretty much describe the looney left?
        Well, he is honest anyhow. He has a lot of tolerance for people who believe the same as he does. That is liberal diversity in action.
        Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Joel View Post
          Okay, so you are not saying it should be illegal to hold such views, but rather you are just saying that you want to exercise your freedom of association by not associating with people who hold such views, or your freedom of speech in criticizing those views. Fair enough.
          Exactly.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Joel View Post
            I hadn't heard of that. Wow, I wonder if the bishops will engage in civil disobedience and refuse, and take the fine/imprisonment/whatever?
            I do certainly hope so.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
              Exactly.
              Sooo you supported the florist and baker then.

              Oh wait ...
              The State. Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

              sigpic

              Comment


              • And once again for the record I am consistent - I would have had no issue selling flowers, baking the cake or taking pictures.
                The State. Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

                sigpic

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  Doesn't that pretty much describe the looney left?
                  No, its just the opposite CP, its the right wing looney's like yourself, not the left, who are the thought police. Even though you go around calling yourselves libertarians and whining about big Government taking your personal freedoms from you, its guys like the two brothers here in question and you who want to deny the same personal freedoms to others whose lifestyles don't agree with yours. The non religious could live with the religious in peace and with respect, but the religious can't seem to do the same, they have this self righteous need to stick their noses into the private affairs of people who don't comport with their way of life. But if you are employed by a company and you put on display your self righteous bigotry towards the customers of that company, then that company is going to fire you. How about your secretary, the looney athiestic lesbian jew, as you described her, what if she was out continuously protesting the evils of Christians like yourself, hurting your business, would you continue to employ her?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren View Post
                    Sooo you supported the florist and baker then.

                    Oh wait ...
                    I support anti-discrimination laws regulating business-customer interaction.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Joel View Post
                      But then you run into a contradiction. The only reason you think it is self hatred is because you think it is false. But surely it would be self hatred only for someone who thinks it is false, and not for someone who thinks it is true. Thus defeating your claim of self hatred.
                      It would have caused less confusion if you had, in the first place, stated that your objection is just that you think it is false.
                      Also, when you ask, "If this a loving act?," what do you refer to by "this"? Do you mean "teaching their children"? I should think that teaching truth to a child is loving (or certainly not hateful). Thus again, it seems your only real objection is that you think that it's not true.
                      You make a good point but I hope it is clear that The Fall is not a trivial thing. If you take it a particular way, it has a subtle but pervasive effect on your thinking about the world and everything in it (Westboro Baptish Church being the extreme example of a destructive logic of The Fall at work). I get the impression that most modern Christians are moving away from the sort of thinking that says this island earth is corrupted (just try living somewhere else). So how do you square the idea of The Fall with an appreciation of the beauty of nature? Or is it just us homo sapiens that are corrupted?

                      I found this helpful short essay on the subject:
                      http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/bron/p...ristianity.pdf
                      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                      “not all there” - you know who you are

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                        I support anti-discrimination laws regulating business-customer interaction.
                        So you want people to be forced to serve you and to get fired if they don't agree with you. It's been pretty clear all along.

                        I support, as has the history of this country, religious liberty, even when I think it fundamentalist. As I do in the case of those vendors and certain Muslims who ironically have been able to refuse without this witch hunt. I don't have to forceeople to agree with me and serve me.

                        And as is clear to everyone you would agree that religious leaders, Christian or Muslim, should be forced to marry people that it goes against their religious convictions to do so. You already support forcing vendors to do so.

                        I equally support the rights of Muslims in these regard. I disagree vehemently, on many levels, but it is called TOLERANCE, diversity, and the American tradition of religious liberty.

                        And I would never want a Muslim or Hindu or whatever fired for expressing their faith tradition, no matter how backwards or oppressive I think it is.
                        Last edited by Darth Xena; 05-13-2014, 06:59 AM.
                        The State. Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          No, its just the opposite CP, its the right wing looney's like yourself, not the left, who are the thought police. Even though you go around calling yourselves libertarians and whining about big Government taking your personal freedoms from you, its guys like the two brothers here in question and you who want to deny the same personal freedoms to others whose lifestyles don't agree with yours. The non religious could live with the religious in peace and with respect, but the religious can't seem to do the same, they have this self righteous need to stick their noses into the private affairs of people who don't comport with their way of life.
                          Ignoring this first part because it's even goofier than your normal drivel.

                          But if you are employed by a company and you put on display your self righteous bigotry towards the customers of that company, then that company is going to fire you.
                          OK, Jimmy -- now try REALLY HARD to think through what you just said... yes, if I don't treat my CUSTOMERS right AT WORK, that's a WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT than having personal opinions I express OUTSIDE of work. I bet you don't realize you just said that.

                          How about your secretary,
                          Executive Assistant, thank you... you're showing your judgmental sexist nature.

                          the looney athiestic lesbian jew, as you described her,
                          I never said she was loony, you dishonest dolt. She was honest and hard working. I actually got along with her and LIKED her. That's part of the point you missed.

                          what if she was out continuously protesting the evils of Christians like yourself,
                          She was, CONSTANTLY, but only to us internally -- she took care of customers quite well.

                          hurting your business, would you continue to employ her?
                          She was a real asset to our business, which is why I kept her.

                          You REALLY REALLY have a problem with this logic thingy, Jimmy.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Wow, I can't believe Jim was so sexist that he had to assume that a female was a Secretary. I have been a Secretary, it is a very hard job, but wow, to just assume. And CP has been nothing more than respectful about this lady who he obviously values and Jim name-calls her. What a crappy thing to do.
                            The State. Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren View Post
                              Wow, I can't believe Jim was so sexist that he had to assume that a female was a Secretary.
                              Yeah, and I never referred to her as such, because she was executive level. But, hey, she's a girl, so she HAS to be in a lower level job!

                              I have been a Secretary, it is a very hard job, but wow, to just assume. And CP has been nothing more than respectful about this lady who he obviously values and Jim name-calls her. What a crappy thing to do.
                              Isn't that a hoot? And she and I were on FAR opposite ends of the political spectrum, but could always discuss things without the constant "you dummy, you idiot, you moron...."

                              Jimmy is just a bigot.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                Ignoring this first part because it's even goofier than your normal drivel.
                                Really, who is it tells a certain segment of the population, because they don't comply with their lifestyle, that they don't deserve the same rights as they themselves enjoy?


                                OK, Jimmy -- now try REALLY HARD to think through what you just said... yes, if I don't treat my CUSTOMERS right AT WORK, that's a WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT than having personal opinions I express OUTSIDE of work. I bet you don't realize you just said that.
                                First off, we are not discussing your actions CP, we are discussing your employee. Second, if you will lose customers as a result of demonstrations and continued bigoted and offensive remarks by your employee concerning them, then what are you going to do about it?


                                Executive Assistant, thank you... you're showing your judgmental sexist nature.
                                No I'm not, you are, since i am just paraphrasing you. Apparently you look down at secretary's, I don't.


                                I never said she was loony, you dishonest dolt. She was honest and hard working. I actually got along with her and LIKED her. That's part of the point you missed.
                                Like i said, i'm only paraphrasing you. So you didn't use the word looney, she was a atheistic lesbian Jew.


                                She was, CONSTANTLY, but only to us internally -- she took care of customers quite well.
                                Well, there you go then, thats a big difference isn't it?


                                She was a real asset to our business, which is why I kept her.

                                You REALLY REALLY have a problem with this logic thingy, Jimmy.
                                Well thats real nice CP, but that doesn't answer the question does it? What if her continued actions were a liability to the business?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                157 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X