WARNING: Do NOT read this if you are easily offended!

[theFijian]

I'm not secular I'm just not anal.

...nor particularly interested in logic or the facts

 

[theFijian]

Companies exist to make money.

If you want products with the Lord's Prayer on them, go to a Christin bookshop. I'm not sure why you'd expect to find it on something from anywhere else.

Why do you expect freedom and civil liberties to be restricted?

 

[Armoured]

Why do you expect freedom and civil liberties to be restricted?

No one's freedoms or civil liberties are being restricted. A private commercial company made a decision that applies to its business model. I don't see the problem. If it was treating one religion differently to another, then we might have an issue.

 

[theFijian]

No one's freedoms or civil liberties are being restricted. A private commercial company made a decision that applies to its business model. I don't see the problem. If it was treating one religion differently to another, then we might have an issue.

Lol, but discriminating against *all* religion isn't discrimination. I guess if you buy into this oarticular Secularist's logical Fail then you'll buy into such errant nonsense.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

...nor particularly interested in logic or the facts

My disinterest in your primary response is only dwarfed by the disinterest in your secondary one. Your inability to see me as anything other than you prejudicial little mind can fabricate is rather humorous. It shows the same inability to see past your own nostalgia that the Sanhedrin showed in their condemnation of Christ.

People who love Christ don't need to be so insecure in their faith of him to have it emblazoned over a public theater system or to get upset that others would rather live their lives without having it shoved down their throats.

 

[theFijian]

My disinterest in your primary response is only dwarfed by the disinterest in your secondary one. Your inability to see me as anything other than you prejudicial little mind can fabricate is rather humorous. It shows the same inability to see past your own nostalgia that the Sanhedrin showed in their condemnation of Christ.

People who love Christ don't need to be so insecure in their faith of him to have it emblazoned over a public theater system or to get upset that others would rather live their lives without having it shoved down their throats.

So seeking equality is a sign of insecurity? Talk about a prejudicial mind, not to mention the anti-hero of any civil rights movement

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

So seeking equality is a sign of insecurity? Talk about a prejudicial mind

Equality with what? How many times have those who claim to be Christian have denied others the same equality as those who are more in attune with their understanding of reality? Gay Marriage coming first to mind.

I'd say that if these so-called disciples of Christ want equality, they should show it themselves before calling others to support them. If you haven't figured out the backlash of intolerance for what we believe in is the direct result of the intolerance of those same so-called disciples intolerance of others.

 

[Armoured]

So seeking equality is a sign of insecurity? Talk about a prejudicial mind, not to mention the anti-hero of any civil rights movement

Who's equality is being diminished by the theatre declining to show ANY religious adverts?

 

[theFijian]

Equality with what?

If you can't see how preventing any and every religious organisation access to a particular product or service isn't discrimination then that just shows your state of either confusion or .

How many times have those who claim to be Christian have denied others the same equality as those who are more in attune with their understanding of reality?

Oh I see, so it's intolerance in the name of tolerance. Up is down. Black is white. So much for a tolerant liberal society.

Gay Marriage coming first to mind.

But when it comes to a business run by Christians with a similar policy it can be forced by law to go against its policy. No double-standard there.

I'd say that if these so-called disciples of Christ want equality, they should show it themselves before calling others to support them. If you haven't figured out the backlash of intolerance for what we believe in is the direct result of the intolerance of those same so-called disciples intolerance of others.

Again a demonstration of the intolerance of our so called inclusive tolerant liberal society, showing it to be anything but (unless you happen to be a sheep who goes along with the mob).

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

Who's equality is being diminished by the theater declining to show ANY religious adverts?

Those who think they have a right to irritate others as they have the general public because of their public condemnation of those they don't approve of. Somehow they are blind to the idea of discrimination being a universal bad thing.

 

[theFijian]

Those who think they have a right to irritate others as they have the general public because of their public condemnation of those they don't approve of. Somehow they are blind to the idea of discrimination being a universal bad thing.

Your anti-religion bigotry shows precisely why the current trend of secularism is inherently illiberal, intolerant and does all the things it purports to be against. That's secularist logic for you, because discrimination is bad we'll practice discrimination ourselves and champion those who do it.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

If you can't see how preventing any and every religious organisation access to a particular product or service isn't discrimination then that just shows your state of either confusion or .

How many times have there been those who have denied there services to gay couples who would bauk at that same defense

Oh I see, so it's intolerance in the name of tolerance. Up is down. Black is white. So much for a tolerant liberal society.

No the public has seen the ugly face that main who claim to be religious has placed upon religion and those who relish in this have fallen into the same trap that the media has set for all ridiculous ideals and have exploited it to the level of disgust

But when it comes to a business run by Christians with a similar policy it can be forced by law to go against its policy. No double-standard there.

Then sue them as they have done you. I'm not opposed to legal action.

Again a demonstration of the intolerance of our so called inclusive tolerant liberal society, showing it to be anything but (unless you happen to be a sheep who goes along with the mob).

No, it's the rejection of the rights ordinary citizens have in a secular world that has spurred on the rejection of those that have demonstrated their own brand of intolerance. Sometime in a incredibly visceral manner.

We are the representatives of Christ, not his police force and so many have embraced the latter idea that the world has rejected Christ because they only see these peoples disdain for others instead of the love of Christ.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

Your anti-religion bigotry shows precisely why the current trend of secularism is inherently illiberal, intolerant and does all the things it purports to be against. That's secularist logic for you, because discrimination is bad we'll practice discrimination ourselves and champion those who do it.

Your inability to see why the public sees this as irritation is the reason why it will remain an irritation. It is not my pointing out the general feeling the public has for religion that in any way makes me a bigot. though it does point a finger back at those who are blind to the bigotry of judgementalism that has tainted the name of religion

 

[Oafman]

Lol, but discriminating against *all* religion isn't discrimination. I guess if you buy into this oarticular Secularist's logical Fail then you'll buy into such errant nonsense.

Is a company that pays low wages to everyone discriminating against all genders?

Is a bakery which refuses to bake a cake, ever, for anyone, discriminating against everyone?

To discriminate, you need to treat one group differently to another. This company ran no ads for any religion (or for no religion!) so are not discriminating.

 

[theFijian]

To discriminate, you need to treat one group differently to another. This company ran no ads for any religion (or for no religion!) so are not discriminating.

In your desire to twist logic and facts to support your own prejudices, you perfectly outline the discrimination.

The 'religious' have been discriminated against as opposed to the non-religious. Religious bodies have been discriminated against as opposed to the non-religious. The fact that one is a religious body is enough to be discriminated against, this is de facto discrimination.

 

[Oafman]

In your desire to twist logic and facts to support your own prejudices, you perfectly outline the discrimination.

The 'religious' have been discriminated against as opposed to the non-religious. Religious bodies have been discriminated against as opposed to the non-religious. The fact that one is a religious body is enough to be discriminated against, this is de facto discrimination.

If they were running some sort of atheist advert, but refusing to run religious adverts, you might have a point. But they're not, so you haven't.

 

[theFijian]

Your inability to see why the public sees this as irritation is the reason why it will remain an irritation. It is not my pointing out the general feeling the public has for religion that in any way makes me a bigot. though it does point a finger back at those who are blind to the bigotry of judgementalism that has tainted the name of religion

I find many things irritating, by my irritation or offence is no reason to ban people from doing things. Your own pro-secular prejudices against religion are quite obvious. I'm amazed that so many Christians are quite happy to hitch their wagon to that of the secularists who in turn would be quite happy to silence any opposing voices including those of the acquiescing Christians.

 

[Armoured]

Add it to the armchair persecution list and move on.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I find many things irritating, by my irritation or offence is no reason to ban people from doing things. Your own pro-secular prejudices against religion are quite obvious. I'm amazed that so many Christians are quite happy to hitch their wagon to that of the secularists who in turn would be quite happy to silence any opposing voices including those of the acquiescing Christians.

I think I've explained this to you as much as possible. You seem to be so opposed to facing reality that you attack the messenger in some hopeless endeavor to alter that reality. I'm not here to be your pet whipping boy on this and I'm no longer going to respond to your accusations.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

If they were running some sort of atheist advert, but refusing to run religious adverts, you might have a point. But they're not, so you haven't.

He does so love that word prejudice, doesn't he?