US/Israel hypocrisy

[Dawkinsrocks]

Really sorry but I'm not great at mind reading

You may not be but most christians seek to discriminate against homosexuals for example.

Do you think gay people should be allowed to marry in a church?

Many discriminate against women, Muslims etc and the bible has stuff in that supports these views if you look hard enough and can ignore the other contradictory bits

 

[cashmcall]

Really sorry but I'm not great at mind reading

You may not be but most christians seek to discriminate against homosexuals for example.

Do you think gay people should be allowed to marry in a church?

Many discriminate against women, Muslims etc and the bible has stuff in that supports these views if you look hard enough and can ignore the other contradictory bits

Do you think gay people should be allowed to marry in a church?
i don't think Gay people should get married at all ...but one of my sons best friends " Leslie" is gay, I love her as if she was one of my own and I would trust her with my grandchildren.. and i can't say that about many of my friends...

 

[Dr.Who]

Do you think gay people should be allowed to marry in a church?
i don't think Gay people should get married at all ...but one of my sons best friends " Leslie" is gay, I love her as if she was one of my own and I would trust her with my grandchildren.. and i can't say that about many of my friends...

Maybe the question was phrased wrongly. Regardless of what any of us think anyone else should do would any of us stop gay people from forming a church and getting married in it? And if those gay people who formed a church decided that straight people would be better off getting married elsewhere then so be it because it is their church after all.

 

[dogtowner]

Maybe the question was phrased wrongly. Regardless of what any of us think anyone else should do would any of us stop gay people from forming a church and getting married in it? And if those gay people who formed a church decided that straight people would be better off getting married elsewhere then so be it because it is their church after all.

better not do it in Pennsylvania. any semblance to "marriage" gets the pastor in legal problems. I suspect this is true most places.

pastors are actually carrying out a legal chore (remember they say 'by the power granted to me by the state of...'). one guy who made it into the news was trying to do what he believed was a non-secular ceremony and got smacked.

there is a connotation to the term that cannot be ignored.

 

[Dr.Who]

better not do it in Pennsylvania. any semblance to "marriage" gets the pastor in legal problems. I suspect this is true most places.

pastors are actually carrying out a legal chore (remember they say 'by the power granted to me by the state of...'). one guy who made it into the news was trying to do what he believed was a non-secular ceremony and got smacked.

there is a connotation to the term that cannot be ignored.

Well, that is one more thing that needs to be changed. The pastors are forced to act as representatives of the state. I think the churches have made a bargain with the devil and they do not even realize that they have given up a bit of freedom of religion. The gays are right in one regard because in exchange for this loss of freedom the churches have accepted some level of endorsement of straight marriage. The individuals have also accepted a loss of freedom because they cannot get married in the first place without filling out the forms and asking for permission (a license). I know that you know all of this - much of what we write is for the benefit of those who will read in a google search...

 

[dogtowner]

Well, that is one more thing that needs to be changed. The pastors are forced to act as representatives of the state. I think the churches have made a bargain with the devil and they do not even realize that they have given up a bit of freedom of religion. The gays are right in one regard because in exchange for this loss of freedom the churches have accepted some level of endorsement of straight marriage. The individuals have also accepted a loss of freedom because they cannot get married in the first place without filling out the forms and asking for permission (a license). I know that you know all of this - much of what we write is for the benefit of those who will read in a google search...

their role technically is that of a witness. a minor requirement but significant. they cant act till a licence is produced and they are obligated to return an attestation that a marriage has occured.

you could make the case that the state has no business with religous matters and probably be justified to say. the other side if the argument is that people could declare themselves married and demand benefits without legal requirement by any sort of self declared religous person. its the recording of the contract at the courthouse thst makes it legal and without yhat standing there can be no claims in court. kind of why so few states habe common law ones anymore.

pribably a better way to accomplish this though.

 

[cashmcall]

Maybe the question was phrased wrongly. Regardless of what any of us think anyone else should do would any of us stop gay people from forming a church and getting married in it? And if those gay people who formed a church decided that straight people would be better off getting married elsewhere then so be it because it is their church after all.

Very well put..

 

[dogtowner]

Very well put..

well there are plenty of current churches that would be fine offering marriage were it legal where they are. there are also many who offer sort of general blessing for those places where it is not.

marriage has really always been a hybrid sort of thing and for good reason.

its natural to seek out church blessing and it simply has always been a contract. the blessing is optional if you feel no need of it but the contract has to be made legal in he manner of the society where it occurs.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Do you think gay people should be allowed to marry in a church?
i don't think Gay people should get married at all ...but one of my sons best friends " Leslie" is gay, I love her as if she was one of my own and I would trust her with my grandchildren.. and i can't say that about many of my friends...

So cash call, in answer to your question 'who am I prejudiced against?'

The answer is gay people.

You are homophobic. You discriminate against them on the grounds of their sexuality

I'm surprised you didn't know that

As for your 'some of my best friends are gay' routine....I just burst out laughing.

 

[cashmcall]

So cash call, in answer to your question 'who am I prejudiced against?'

The answer is gay people.

You are homophobic. You discriminate against them on the grounds of their sexuality

I'm surprised you didn't know that

As for your 'some of my best friends are gay' routine....I just burst out laughing.

Wrong.. I am not homophobic..But I am a Christian..

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Which explains your ignorance

You do discriminate against people on the grounds of their sexuality so you are sexist and you only do it against gay people

You are a bigot

Like all Christians

To be fair I have no idea why gay people want to stand in a church making promises to someone who doesn't exist but unlike you I don't seek to prevent them from engaging in this ludicrous process

You do because of some arcane reference in a work of fiction written before the dark ages

How bizarre is that?

 

[Dr.Who]

Which explains your ignorance

You do discriminate against people on the grounds of their sexuality so you are sexist and you only do it against gay people

You are a bigot

Like all Christians

To be fair I have no idea why gay people want to stand in a church making promises to someone who doesn't exist but unlike you I don't seek to prevent them from engaging in this ludicrous process

You do because of some arcane reference in a work of fiction written before the dark ages

How bizarre is that?

I usually don't respond to post that are just ridiculous but just to be clear you accused a member of being homophobic and engaging in discrimination and when asked for an example you gave none but added that since he is a Christian he must automatically be a bigot "like all Christians".

There is zero doubt that you are engaging in discrimination against all Christians and little evidence that Cashmcall is a bigot or engaging in harmful discrimination. Just to be thorough I will go back a few clicks to see if Cashmcall said anything to justify what appears to be an outrageous claim.

Looking back I see that Cashmcall said he/she does not believe gay people should get married at all. This is possibly a discriminatory statement but also quite possibly just an example of one using a different definition of marriage than you or might even be based on a completely different chain of logic. Survey says: Ding Ding Ding - not discrimination unless more evidence is presented.

P.s. cashmcall did not say gay people should be prevented from marrying only that he/she does not think they should - big difference.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

There is so much wrong with your post I don't know where to start

I don't need to cite an example of discrimination

Cash call offered it by saying that gay people should be discriminated against in the marriage stakes

And discriminating against Christians is a totally different thing

Gay people are born gay and being gay does no harm to anyone

Christians opt to believe their vicious mythology and seek to impose it on everyone. In fact Christianity is the ultimate in discrimination suggesting that millions of people should be burned for ever for not buying the ludicrous story of god. Christians just think that they have the right to discriminate but not be discriminated against which is totally in synch with their hypocrisy

So maybe you should follow your own advice and return to not posting if the drivel you write above is an example of your ability

 

[Dr.Who]

There is so much wrong with your post I don't know where to start

I don't need to cite an example of discrimination

You were asked to cite an example and your failure to do so is most likely because your argument is too weak to find support.

Cash call offered it by saying that gay people should be discriminated against in the marriage stakes

Marriage stakes? Cashmcall did not say they should be discriminated against. You are the one who offered that intepretation of what was actually said.

And discriminating against Christians is a totally different thing

Lets see how it might be different: discrimination against Christians is clearly unconstitutional while discrimination against gays is only said to be unconstitutional by a later court ruling that twists the 14th amendment. Both should be avoided but disc against any religious views be they christian, muslim, agnostic or atheist all have the rule of law to condem it.

Gay people are born gay and being gay does no harm to anyone

The scientific evidence about being born gay has always indicated that there is both a genetic aspect and an aspect of environmental influences. The apa has even withdrawn their statement on the issue. The best evidence we have for gays being born that way is that they say they feel like they always have been that way. Christians likewise claim that God elects them so it is God who chooses who will be christian. If you beleive one groups statement then to not be prejudiced you should beleive the other groups.

Christians opt to believe their vicious mythology and seek to impose it on everyone. In fact Christianity is the ultimate in discrimination suggesting that millions of people should be burned for ever for not buying the ludicrous story of god. Christians just think that they have the right to discriminate but not be discriminated against which is totally in synch with their hypocrisy

You understand so little.

 

[TheJPRD]

Funny isn't it that when you hear all the talk and posturing about the importance of stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons you never hear anyone suggesting Israel decommissioning theirs as an example and show of good faith do you?

Your logic is flawed. You must be a progressive Democrat? Israel has never threatened to wipe a nation and its citizens off the map. Iran has. Your logic is much like saying, "We hear all this talk about how evil the Ku Klux Klan is, but nobody ever says that African Americans should give up their guns and other means of self-defense first as a sign of good faith". Fairly stupid logic in my opinion!

The truth is that the US and Israel have no fear about being attacked by a nuclear capable Iran.

The US has little or no fear of being attacked by a nuclear-capable Iran, but Israel would be insane not to fear the possibility. One moderately-well-aimed SCUD missile with a Hiroshima-sized nuclear warhead on it and a quarter or more of Israel's population could be dead! You should upgrade your thinking processes, kid!

They are scared they might be able to fight back

You seem to be a dedicated hater of Jews!