-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
GoldenBoy89
We're Still Here
- Sep 25, 2012
- 26,933
- 29,749
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Lucky for you, theres no commandment to be a "good steward of the earth"
Oh wait.....
I can't think of anything more selfish than living out your life, using up the earth's resources and stating that you don't care if you leave any left for future generations. Oh, but as long as you get to go to heaven, it's ok.
Who cares about the earth?
This is just one of the many reasons I dislike Christianity. It breeds not only ignorance but also selfishness.
Upvote
0
I don't think I actually gave an answer to anything, and I don't think I was asked to provide any math. At least I hope I wasn't, because as I said recently in this forum, I suck at math.
Lucky for you, theres no commandment to be a "good steward of the earth"
Oh wait.....
I can't think of anything more selfish than living out your life, using up the earth's resources and stating that you don't care if you leave any left for future generations. Oh, but as long as you get to go to heaven, it's ok.
Who cares about the earth?
This is just one of the many reasons I dislike Christianity. It breeds not only ignorance but also selfishness.
Yeah I know this game:
Christian: We should love each other.
Atheist: There's no such thing as "love". It's just something for some reason biologically programmed into female monkeys who for some reason mysteriously "cared" for some reason about the survival of their offspring.
Christian: Okay, well then, we don't need to love each other.
Atheist: [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]! What a horrible person you are!
I can't win the game.
Upvote
0
I think this is the third or fourth stage of climate change denial. Can't remember which one it is.
Upvote
0
Funny thing is, I haven't actually denied anything in this thread. But several people are defenitely being "defensive". "Denial" and "defensiveness" are both conditions which may require psychiatric treatment. Why don't we let the science play itself out and later find who needs to go see the doc?
Upvote
0
Wow, way to completely dodge the point.
I completely agree with Crudo - I can't think of anything more selfish and unloving than saying you don't care for the world now or the world your children, grandchildren and their descendants inherit.
Caring for this amazing, beautiful yet fragile planet surely must be one of our top priorities not as Christians but just as human beings. We have already done astonishing damage - destruction of ecosystems, extinction of species etc. We are doing more and more harm, some of which is completely irreparable.
I found your post simply astonishing.
Upvote
0
Funny thing is, I haven't actually denied anything in this thread. But several people are defenitely being "defensive". "Denial" and "defensiveness" are both conditions which may require psychiatric treatment. Why don't we let the science play itself out and later find who needs to go see the doc?
I am just saying that it is about the 4th stage. The first stage is outright denial that the greenhouse effect even exists, and complete denial of the basic science. Second stage usually involves denial of our part in increasing CO2 levels, and a long list of cherry picked data that strains to show that temps are staying the same or getting cooler. The second stage also involves stuff you began to talk about, the infamous non-controversy of climatologists "lying" (which they weren't, by the way). The third stage doubts that an increase in temperatures will actually hurt anyone or seriously change anything. The fourth stage is to act as if you don't care if it destroys economies and farming regions since you won't be around to see it. Finally, the fifth stage. This is where you actually accept the scientific data and your humanity. You conclude that we have foolishly messed things up, but we can redeem ourselves by at least trying to clean it up for future generations.
Upvote
0
Okay, then turn off your computer, because coal was probably burned to generate the electricity you're using. If you want to respond to me use the Pony Express. But wait...horses eat food, which also hurts the planet. Oh my goodness, planet earth - can't live with it, can't live without it.
Upvote
0
CabVet
Question everything
- Dec 7, 2011
- 11,738
- 176
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
What fallacy is that again? Oh yeah, straw man:
Straw Man Argument: A subtype of the red herring, this fallacy includes any lame attempt to "prove" an argument by overstating, exaggerating, or over-simplifying the arguments of the opposing side. Such an approach is building a straw man argument. The name comes from the idea of a boxer or fighter who meticulously fashions a false opponent out of straw, like a scarecrow, and then easily knocks it over in the ring before his admiring audience. His "victory" is a hollow mockery, of course, because the straw-stuffed opponent is incapable of fighting back. When a writer makes a cartoon-like caricature of the opposing argument, ignoring the real or subtle points of contention, and then proceeds to knock down each "fake" point one-by-one, he has created a straw man argument.
In case you didn't know, there is a middle ground between what you say above and completely not caring for the planet. Nobody here is proposing that we stop eating, we are merely defending the sustainable use of resources.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
