[Toshi]

how about the opposite question, how many self-described conservatives (who may or may not be christian) contribute regularly to charity? we already have one data point of zero for BS, altho he now falls into the student category like me.

 

[Andyman_1970]

how about the opposite question, how many self-described christians contribute regularly to charity? we already have one data point of zero for BS, altho he now falls into the student category like me.

BS never claimed to be a Christian.

 

[Silver]

I don't see that it's moot, at least not on this thread. Several statements were made regarding Jesus and His liberalness, specifically referring to His giving and doing for others. The implication being that giving and doing for others (charity work) is a liberal characteristic..............so I posed the question: how many monkeys that consider themselves liberal give to charitable organizations................

My point was, if you're going to quack like a duck are you going to act like a duck...................

I don't think that was the point. The point was illustrating the disconnect between Jesus' philosophy and that of the Republican party.

 

[Silver]

Noted the obligatory "anti-Jesus" statement from Silver.

Interestingly, I know a church that went to sub-Sahara Africa to minister to this exiled group of Muslims. For 3 years they brought food and school supplies for the kids, and because this was a Muslim community, there was absolutely no mention of Jesus or Christianity............quite an unusual "mission" trip. The crazy thing is that when the "president" of these people came to visit W, he specifically asked to visit this church (in MI), and told them when they get their homeland in Lybia (in the next year or two), he is going to make sure there are Christian churches avaliable to his people so they have a choice. His point was these folks from MI took care of his people when other Muslims wouldn't...........all without handing out a single gospel tract.

I would say "giving" with an agenda is not love, true love as defined by Jesus has not agenda.

That's an exception, and a rare one at that. Is it admirable? Hell yes.

For every one of those though, I'll up you a Catholic boarding school in Eastern Canada where the godless natives were re-educated in the glories of our Lord and Savior.

 

[Toshi]

BS never claimed to be a Christian.

good point, it's too easy to conflate conservatives and "christians" these days

 

[Andyman_1970]

I don't think that was the point. The point was illustrating the disconnect between Jesus' philosophy and that of the Republican party.

3

Yeah, and then the discussion started on Christian charity groups and how much they do........blah blah blah.

My point, and I'll articulate it again, it seems that those who have a liberal philosophy hold the tenant that charity and giving to those less fortunate is a cornerstone to their beliefs, almost to the point of thinking this is "exclusive" to those who have a liberal point of view.

This is fine, I'm not argueing whether giving and charity are liberal or conservative, or whether there is some Jesus/republican disconnect.........I could careless.

I'm curious how many self confessed liberal types on here give, and how much they give...............are they practicing what they preach?

Now, I have thrown around the "liberal" word, and I'm sure coming from a relative conservative to the majority on here, I'm sure that sounds a bit antagonistic. It's not meant that way, I just could not think if a better word, so please know I'm not all "fangs out" with this line of questions.............again I'm just curious.

 

[Toshi]

My point, and I'll articulate it again, it seems that those who have a liberal philosophy hold the tenant that charity and giving to those less fortunate is a cornerstone to their beliefs, almost to the point of thinking this is "exclusive" to those who have a liberal point of view.

i actually think this is backwards. my conception of the liberal view is that charity should be a function of the state,via welfare, universal health insurance, government-run food banks, not of the individual. if this is true then your original question won't come up with anything worthwhile since my prototypical liberal would rather have everyone's taxes hiked $1000 instead of contributing the $1000 himself.

 

[Transcend]

i actually think this is backwards. my conception of the liberal view is that charity should be a function of the state,via welfare, universal health insurance, government-run food banks, not of the individual. if this is true then your original question won't come up with anything worthwhile since my prototypical liberal would rather have everyone's taxes hiked $1000 instead of contributing the $1000 himself.

Eaxctly. The liberal idea of the redistribution of wealth is done through the state.

 

[BurlyShirley]

man, I ****ing hate that idea.

 

[Silver]

Be careful what you include here. The fact that I think universal health care is a good thing has zero to do with wealth distribution (unless you're a CEO at a insurance company, I guess) and much more to do with efficiency.

 

[Andyman_1970]

For every one of those though, I'll up you a Catholic boarding school in Eastern Canada where the godless natives were re-educated in the glories of our Lord and Savior.

I just shared that story to reinforce your statement about not giving to an evangelical organization...................come on Silver rachet down the Jesus hate a notch.

BTW - I won't disagree with you on the "re-educated" deal, nothing should be forced on people, God doesn't force Himself on us.

 

[Andyman_1970]

i actually think this is backwards. my conception of the liberal view is that charity should be a function of the state,via welfare, universal health insurance, government-run food banks, not of the individual. if this is true then your original question won't come up with anything worthwhile since my prototypical liberal would rather have everyone's taxes hiked $1000 instead of contributing the $1000 himself.

True but the basic philosophy is those that have give to those that don't. Since we don't have forced redistribution of wealth (for the most part), it falls to the individual to do this themselves...........which lead me to my question.

BTW - I'm totally down with the concept of distributive jusitce.

 

[Silver]

I just shared that story to reinforce your statement about not giving to an evangelical organization...................come on Silver rachet down the Jesus hate a notch.

BTW - I won't disagree with you on the "re-educated" deal, nothing should be forced on people, God doesn't force Himself on us.

It's not Jesus, it's large portions of his fanclub.

 

[BurlyShirley]

It's not Jesus, it's large portions of his fanclub.

I dont get it.

By and large, the Christians I have met only want to do good. Your pointing out ****-ups by Catholics of 100 years ago IMO is irrelevant to the actions of these people today. Its also dumb to judge these same people of 100 years ago by today's standards. As GOD was the only truth people had available to them at that time. I think you're becoming a bigot yourself in your hatred of the religious.

 

[Andyman_1970]

I dont get it.

By and large, the Christians I have met only want to do good. Your pointing out ****-ups by Catholics of 100 years ago IMO is irrelevant to the actions of these people today. Its also dumb to judge these same people of 100 years ago by today's standards. As GOD was the only truth people had available to them at that time. I think you're becoming a bigot yourself in your hatred of the religious.

Good point BS.

The posts on various threads on here since the elections have really given me some insight into how divided, judgemental and prejudiced (which rarely have anything to do with race) alot of people are on here...........it's sad really.

 

[Silver]

I dont get it.

By and large, the Christians I have met only want to do good. Your pointing out ****-ups by Catholics of 100 years ago IMO is irrelevant to the actions of these people today. Its also dumb to judge these same people of 100 years ago by today's standards. As GOD was the only truth people had available to them at that time. I think you're becoming a bigot yourself in your hatred of the religious.

You really need current Catholic ****ups? There's plenty of those. Throw Cardinal Law and Boston into google, see what you get.

I looked up the definition of bigot...and I won't accept that charge. I am intolerant of religious groups, but that does not make me a bigot, unless you wish to term me a bigot in the sense that if you make extraordinary claims with no verifiable evidence, then I shall dismiss the claims out of hand. To steal from Bertrand Russell, if you tell me there is a china teapot in orbit around the sun and offer no evidence besides the fact that you feel there is one, I will dismiss your claims. If there is evidence, lets see it and test it.

I'm done with religion. I'm tired of the fact that it's the most divisive label with the the least amount of use that I can imagine.

I'm tired of people who have morals in the same sense that my dog has morals (they are afraid of punishment from a more powerful being) telling me that I cannot have morals because I don't believe in their particular fairy tale.

And I'm tired of people who attempt to make laws based on a gut instinct or the words of an ancient book that are supposed to be divinely inspired and taken on faith.

I'm tired of people who are too shortsighted to realize that by dragging their religion into politics, they not only endanger the concept of a state where people can worship freely, they also endanger what they claim to hold dearest.

 

[BurlyShirley]

I'm tired of people who have morals in the same sense that my dog has morals (they are afraid of punishment from a more powerful being) telling me that I cannot have morals because I don't believe in their particular fairy tale.

bigot

n : a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own

 

[Silver]

bigot

n : a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own

You're obtuse in your own special way, my friend.

Did you not notice this part of my post?

"I am intolerant of religious groups, but that does not make me a bigot, unless you wish to term me a bigot in the sense that if you make extraordinary claims with no verifiable evidence, then I shall dismiss the claims out of hand. To steal from Bertrand Russell, if you tell me there is a china teapot in orbit around the sun and offer no evidence besides the fact that you feel there is one, I will dismiss your claims. If there is evidence, lets see it and test it."

 

[BurlyShirley]

You're obtuse in your own special way, my friend.

Did you not notice this part of my post?

"I am intolerant of religious groups, but that does not make me a bigot, unless you wish to term me a bigot in the sense that if you make extraordinary claims with no verifiable evidence, then I shall dismiss the claims out of hand. To steal from Bertrand Russell, if you tell me there is a china teapot in orbit around the sun and offer no evidence besides the fact that you feel there is one, I will dismiss your claims. If there is evidence, lets see it and test it."

I think you've made yourself perfectly clear over the length of this debate on how you feel about religious people, well Christians anyway, Reject whatever you want. Its all plain to see. Im not offended, dont worry about what I think.

 

[Silver]

I think you've made yourself perfectly clear over the length of this debate on how you feel about religious people

How I feel about religious groups.

 

[BurlyShirley]

How I feel about religious groups.

Fine. Groups then.
How is that different than being intolerant of ethnic groups?

 

[Toshi]

Fine. Groups then.
How is that different than being intolerant of ethnic groups?

it's a choice

 

[BurlyShirley]

it's a choice

So is it ok if I hate Transgenders because they chose to switch?

 

[narlus]

well, one might argue it's a biological imperative, rather than a choice. have you known one? i have.

 

[BurlyShirley]

well, one might argue it's a biological imperative, rather than a choice. have you known one? i have.

**** cant you see this is going nowhere?

How about muslims, is it ok to hate them?

**** NO! You guys make me sick sometimes.

 

[Toshi]

well, one might argue it's a biological imperative, rather than a choice. have you known one? i have.

yup. iirc many "switchers" are the result of semi-arbitrary gender (re-)assignment surgery undertaken at birth, as some babies are born with missing, ambiguous or duplicate genitalia. others simply have screwy hormones. i doubt that many make the switch as a lark...

 

[narlus]

your thread had too many asterisks in it. please clarify yr thoughts in a non-profane manner.

 

[BurlyShirley]

your thread had too many asterisks in it. please clarify yr thoughts in a non-profane manner.

blow me

 

[Silver]

Ok to hate Muslims? I don't HATE anyone. You're throwing around some mighty big accusations now.

I'm just as intolerant of Muslim religiosity as a I am of Christian. Same extraordinary claims, same non-existent evidence. So anyone telling me that I need to do something because "Allah" demands it gets the same dismissal as someone who tells me that "Moroni" or "Jesus" demand I do something or think a certain way.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Ok to hate Muslims? I don't HATE anyone. You're throwing around some mighty big accusations now.

I'm just as intolerant of Muslim religiosity as a I am of Christian. Same extraordinary claims, same non-existent evidence. So anyone telling me that I need to do something because "Allah" demands it gets the same dismissal as someone who tells me that "Moroni" or "Jesus" demand I do something or think a certain way.

Good, you're intolerant of religious groups. That's all I was saying. You think what you think you know is obviously more informed and better. You discount the good of many for your intolerance of the group every day here and its becoming more and more obvious. Do I agree with everything Christians do? No. But I dont assume they're sheep, idiots or evil either as you do. Its just a different way of think. Its ideological preference as being gay is a sexual preference. Go off on your genetics rant or whatever, but its the same closed-mindedness in the end. You think you're superior to that train of thought.

 

[Silver]

Let me ask you a question then, arbiter of all that is tolerance:

Have I ever advocated making a religion illegal?

Have religions ever advocated making homosexual behavior illegal?

I'll leave you to judge.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Let me ask you a question then, arbiter of all that is tolerance:

Have I ever advocated making a religion illegal?

Have religions ever advocated making homosexual behavior illegal?

I'll leave you to judge.

Deflect all you want. This is over with.

 

[Silver]

Deflect all you want. This is over with.

Sure. I'm still waiting to hear back on what else the Dixiecrats were known for. Maybe you can get back to doing a bit of research on that.

 

[narlus]

blow me

shirley you jest.

is that banjo music i hear in the distance?

ink:

edit - can't believe i missed that icon the 1st time through...

 

[BurlyShirley]

Sure. I'm still waiting to hear back on what else the Dixiecrats were known for. Maybe you can get back to doing a bit of research on that.

Like you have any room to be calling Trent Lott anything.

 

[Silver]

Like you have any room to be calling Trent Lott anything.

Hey, I'm not the one pining for a segregationist president...

 

[BurlyShirley]

Hey, I'm not the one pining for a segregationist president...

No, you're the one whose intolerant of christians instead of blacks.

 

[Silver]

No, you're the one whose intolerant of christians instead of blacks.

Beautiful!

You've managed to equate the fact that I don't think that religions should be awarded automatic reverence to racism. That's an amazing stretch of logic, even for you.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Beautiful!

You've managed to equate the fact that I don't think that religions should be awarded automatic reverence to racism. That's an amazing stretch of logic, even for you.

:yawn:
good night.

You owe andyman an apology.

 

[jaydee]

Some people actually think Bush is a messenger of God.

He is. The message is "You humans are the most entertaining things I ever made. But man, are you dumb!"