Bigotry

[FundiMentalist]

Well, if anyone thinks that the teaching of the New Testament (Christian motivated legislation, etc.) impedes too much on our personal freedoms, try taking a look at countries that are not Christian.

It's a mix.

The most religious, most Christian societies now are often in the Global South. If that's a point, I certainly also recognize the counter point of countries under significant influence of the former atheistic Soviet Union. Yet, however, China, at least in the cities, is greatly ascending in quality of life, and to a lesser degree, personal freedoms.

This argument is dated by a number of decades given recent shifts in religion, politics, demographics.

Besides this is more a proof for belief in belief.

Believing something is true not because it is true in and of itself is a different thing from believing something to be true because the benefits derived.

Here's an interesting article by Dan Dennett discussing the potential follies which might be useful to take under consideration when dialoging on these topics.

All of this said, don't get me wrong. I cherish the personal freedoms. While governmentally in many ways they are intact, there is also the sad element in my society where I do face very strong negative bias in being an atheist. In this way, I must admit to myself that my personal freedoms are greatly impinged in this land that I love.

I'm a closet atheist because of this. Kindly bear in mind that there are certain personal freedoms I may lack because I live in a "Christian country" full of individuals who want to inact "Christian legislation" where it is in fact often not selflessly Christ-like in its motives.

For all of these reasons, please consider my complete dismissal of your argument.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Ofcourse it's biblical.

Perhaps the author of Ecclesiastes would be a good place to start discussing the metaphysical views of Ancient Israel.

There's indeed nothing new under the sun.

 

[Jonathan95]

Perhaps the author of Ecclesiastes would be a good place to start discussing the metaphysical views of Ancient Israel.

There's indeed nothing new under the sun.

Yes, there has never been anything new under the sun.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Yes, there has never been anything new under the sun.

Well, with a bit of hyperbole and poetic license I suppose.

The early solar system was quite different.

 

[ViaCrucis]

What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?

eg;
Marriage equality
Homosexuals
Abortion laws

Without disagreeing with you concerning those three; how would you feel about telling other people how to live their lives?

e.g violence, hate speech, discrimination against women, ethnic minorities and/or LGBT people

In other words, would it be ethical for me to, as a person, tell others to be non-violent, to be more tolerant, to be more kind and less self-serving?

Understanding, then, that not everyone shares the same ethical and moral framework then sometimes our particular ethos does not match with another's particular ethos.

While I'm sure that ethically, socially and politically I would agree with you concerning the three issues you mentioned; it is also worth pointing out the simple fact that when acting upon whatever moral framework we have we are bound to find conflict with those who do not share it.

In point of fact, you are working out from your own ethical and moral framework by suggesting the immorality of telling people how to live their lives in regards to marriage equality, homosexuality, and abortion laws. Thus it's not in and of itself immoral to tell someone how to live their life as general principle (or if it is, it would be immoral to do this even in suggesting another not do this otherwise we have inherent contradiction); but rather the issue is primarily concerning competing ethea.

Recognizing that much goes a long way to smoother exchange between different and differing people groups.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[FundiMentalist]

Recognizing that much goes a long way to smoother exchange between different and differing people groups.

-CryptoLutheran

Yes. This also has potential to create a foundation for genuine empathy.

 

[food4thought]

What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?

eg;
Marriage equality
Homosexuals
Abortion laws

Let me first say that I get my moral compass from God through the Bible and the Holy Spirit, and accordingly I am supposed to love everyone (Mat 22:38-39; Luke 10:30-37, etc) and protect the rights of those who are unable to protect themselves (Isaiah 1:17; Psa 82:3-4; etc).


In marriage equality, I believe you are mostly indicating a desire to allow same sex marriage. I believe that marriage has it's roots in faith, and has been defined historically in America as the union of one man with one woman. I am not against same sex civil unions to help the gay community become more monogamous, as that would be good for society and the health of the gay community; but I think that marriage should retain it's traditional definition because I do not believe that clergy should be placed in the position of facing potential discrimination lawsuites for following their moral conscience and refusing to marry same sex couples (a VERY REAL possibility should same sex marriage be legalized).


As for homosexuality in general, it is unambiguously partrayed in the Bible as a sin; as such, I am compelled to believe and say, when asked, that it's practice IS a sin. As I indicated in the opening paragraph my faith calls me to love everyone and fight for the rights of those who cannot fight for themselves. I do have love for homosexuals, as they are not greater sinners than anyone else and Jesus died for them just the same as for me; but it has become obvious over the last several decades that they have absolutely no problem defending their own rights and thus I do not feel the same responsibility to come to their defense as I would have in the civil rights movement of the 50's and 60's. Homosexuals are not denied the right to vote, are welcomed in our public schools, and are often elected into public office in a fair ratio to their demographics. As I mentioned above, I am not against civil unions, but only against same sex marriage. Because I believe that homosexual practice is a sin and therefore morally wrong, as well as being prone to many other types of harmful behaviors and habits, I have the same qualms about homosexual couples adopting children as I would have of any other couple who practices any other form of deviant behavior. That is my opinion due to my belief that it is a sin, but also due to the many studies that have shown that the homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy and unsafe. If over time it is shown that allowing same sex couples to join together in civil unions drastically reduces the risk factors that are common in the homosexual lifestyle today, I would have to take that into account and perhaps reconsider my stance on same sex couples adopting.


Abortion is a very different story. An unborn child in America has little to no rights. They are unable to defend themselves, and much like the the law once treated slaves, they are not even considered a person under current law. They cannot vote, never get a chance to even be born, let alone attend public schools, and thus are never elected into public office . The original Roe vs Wade decision was largely based on the medical knowledge of the day that believed they were not really human until birth. Recent advances in medical knowledge have shown beyond doubt that the unborn are very much people. They feel pain, are responsive to outside stimuli, and are very much human fairly early in the gestation process. If the Supreme Court had the balls to accept a challenge of the Roe vs Wade decision today, they would be forced to overturn the decision if they were honestly following the law and current medical knowledge. My position of faith is that human life begins at conception, so my ultimate goal would be to to stop all abortions; but I think the current medical science better supports a ban on abortions after a certain point in the unborn's developement (probably sometime in the middle of the first trimester). One final point: our federal law protects the eggs of endangered birds, recognizing that an unborn endangered bird is essentially still an endangered bird... why can't we give the same recognition to people?!?!

I don't care what you believe, if you like to believe impossible non-sense for no good reason then good for you, I just prefer facts.

You can SAY what you like (to an extent) but if you can't back it up you are not entitled to be believed.

I am not hypocritical, the thing I want to do is take the stick away that you are using to beat other people with.
Like it was said in a previous post, your right to swing your arm ends at another persons nose.

Believe what you want, think what you like, worship whatever version of a particular one-of-a-million gods you think best suits you.

But don't try to use your beliefs to tell other people that "you know better" and that they don't have the right to pursue happiness if it doesn't hurt anybody and doesn't encroach onto the rights of other people.

Please rethink your statement that I underlined in light of the ones I bolded... perhaps you need to have your stick taken away as well.

 

[aiki]

Fundimentalist:

The last time I checked, the rules prohibited non-Christians from contributing responses to the questions asked by the original poster of any particular thread. Please respect the rules.

What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?

eg;
Marriage equality
Homosexuals
Abortion laws

Prisons are for those who refuse to let other people tell them how to live. Do you have a problem with serial rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. being imprisoned?

People tell each other how to live all the time; it isn't just Christians who may do this. Employers demand their employees dress a certain way, and comport themselves in a particular fashion with customers, and perform their duties to a set standard. If employees don't "toe the line" in respect to these sorts of things, they get the boot. Do you have a problem with this? When I go to the gym there are a set of rules that govern how people may dress and behave while in the gym. If you don't obey, you're asked to leave. Does this offend you? Do you really think people should be free to do whatever they like whenever they like? I doubt it. I suspect there are points where you would feel justified in restricting other people's behavior.

In fact, you're question suggests that you aren't in favor of Christians telling other people what to do. But this means you are through your question, at least implicitly, trying to do the very thing you think Christians ought not to do.

Selah.

 

[drich0150]

What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?

eg;
Marriage equality
Homosexuals
Abortion laws

Has anyone asked you these questions yet?

What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?

eg;
Marriage equality
Homosexuals
Abortion laws

 

[FundiMentalist]

Fundimentalist:

The last time I checked, the rules prohibited non-Christians from contributing responses to the questions asked by the original poster of any particular thread. Please respect the rules.

I just accepted Jesus into my heart and updated my faith icon enabling me to engage in this discussion on Bigotry.

Please forgive me for not following the rules prior.

 

[GrayAngel]

What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?

eg;
Marriage equality
Homosexuals
Abortion laws

What do you think gives you the right to call someone a bigot just for disagreeing with you?

eg;
Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Anything else does not fit that description.
Homosexuals can do whatever they want with their lives, just like people who look at inappropriate content on their computers. Homosexual sin is no worse than heterosexual sin. Anyone who hates homosexuals (ie true bigots) fails to apply Biblical love.
Abortion laws legalize infanticide. It disgusts me that a nation like ours could try to justify it as anything less than cold-blooded murder.

 

[Jase]

Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Anything else does not fit that description.

Wrong. Marriage is a secular institution. Religion has no relevance, unless a couple chooses to. The United States (or any western nation for that matter) does not recognize religious marriage.

Homosexuals can do whatever they want with their lives, just like people who look at inappropriate content on their computers. Homosexual sin is no worse than heterosexual sin. Anyone who hates homosexuals (ie true bigots) fails to apply Biblical love.

Which seems to be just about every Conservative Christian i've ever interacted with.

Abortion laws legalize infanticide.

Since a fetus is not an infant, you would be wrong.

It disgusts me that a nation like ours could try to justify it as anything less than cold-blooded murder.

Please look up the definition of murder. And half of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion. Is God a cold blooded murderer?

 

[GrayAngel]

Wrong. Marriage is a secular institution. Religion has no relevance, unless a couple chooses to. The United States (or any western nation for that matter) does not recognize religious marriage.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Marriage was an institutions started by God, which Jesus later reminded the Pharisees who challenged Him.

Matthew 19:3-6 - Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

God created marriage. More than that, He created it for men and women. You can live with whomever you please, but I have no more reason to recognize a "marriage" between two of the same sex than I do for recognizing a marriage between a woman and the Eiffel Tower.

Which seems to be just about every Conservative Christian i've ever interacted with.

You need to get out more and stop watching so much CNN.

Since a fetus is not an infant, you would be wrong.

Oh, excuuuuuse me. Who gave you the authority to decide when a human being qualifies as a human life?

Please look up the definition of murder. And half of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion. Is God a cold blooded murderer?

Murder is the tacking of innocent life. The life of a helpless child, for instance.

And no. Spontaneous abortion does not make God a murderer. Only God has the right to decide when a person should die, with the exception of those He gave the authority to make legal decisions (and even they can be right or wrong, such as in the case of our nations politicians).

 

[Meissner]

to everybody posting here, i will be unable to answer any questions for a while due to a problem with my ISP, the only access I have to the net is via my cellphone and needless to say, I cannot post lengthy refutations to all these posts from a cellphone. One thing I will say is this, I have no problem with rules in general, as long as they dont discriminate one person from another for unjust reasons. Also one more thing, to the person who questioned the remark from me about harm somebody doesnt wish for, ever heard of BDSM?

 

[ElisaMC]

"What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?"

The only "right" that I have is to love my neighbor as myself and to live my life as an example to others around me. That is the only "right" I can handle - I am not judge or jury - that role is reserved for others higher than I - everything else is up to you!

We are all called to be Saints, may we all embrace the opportunity!

God bless you!

 

[GrayAngel]

Since a fetus is not an infant, you would be wrong.

Do you know what the word in the Bible is used to refer to a child in the womb? Go ahead. You know the answer. There is none. There is no distinction between a child in or out of the womb. A fetus is not a shrimp, not a goldfish, it is a human being. They have functional brains and even the basic survival instinct to protect one's own life. How can something without a life try to protect a life it doesn't have?

Reducing people to sub-human status... Where have I seen this before? Oh, yeah! I saw it in American history, when the white people treated black people like cattle. I saw it in Germany when the Nazis slayed countless Jews. The difference here? Fetuses can't speak for themselves. They can't fight back.

 

[Meissner]

Personally, I don't think I have that right. And when other people tell me how I should live my life, I'm never quite sure how to respond without violating the Golden Rule.

Perfect, you have a perfectly rational and fair view for your place in society, I commend you for being able to think for yourself.

 

[FundiMentalist]

Perfect, you have a perfectly rational and fair view for your place in society, I commend you for being able to think for yourself.

Much to be said for thinking for one's self, yet also much to be said to be able to get into the thoughts and heart of another and understand where they might be coming from too.

Can't speak for others, but I'd rather have a religion founded on compassion than venom.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

What do you think gives you the right to tell other people how to live their lives?

What gives anybody the right to anything at all?

 

[FundiMentalist]

What gives anybody the right to anything at all?

I can.

I can defend the rights of others.