Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christian Group has bank account removed due to "unacceptable views"
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 31 of 291 (219747)
06-26-2005 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
06-26-2005 1:17 PM


Re: for what reason?
quote:
The idea of "love and tolerance" that you have is not Christ's love and tolerance. He died for our sins, He never condoned them -- they cost Him His life for our sake. Love and tolerance in a society may certainly mean efforts to keep the society in obedience to the Law of God for exactly the reason Steve Green says - God's wrath will come upon that nation for its abandonment of Him, and this revisionist definition of His love and tolerance is one of the greatest offenses, putting good for evil and evil for good (Isaiah 5:20).
So sad to hear Green refer to the former Christian identity of England, its dependence on the God of Christianity in the world wars -- not that long ago but what an eternity ago ideologically -- and his fear for his nation's now coming under God's judgment.
America is certainly ripe for God's judgment for exactly the same violations of God's Law. I think the WTC blow was just a warning, but nobody's heeding it so something worse will no doubt eventually follow.
I seem to remember something in the bible that goes, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Or something like that.
Are you without sin, Faith?
After all, to hear you talk you are the only real Christian in the entire world.
At least, you are the only one who is 100% correct in all matters regarding Christianity.
Right?
Gosh I am so glad that I know some Christians who really do live a Christ-like life of generosity, kindness, joy, and love for their fellow human beings.
It would truly be sad if I thought that you and your delight in revenge and persecution were representative of most Christians.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 06-26-2005 02:29 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 06-26-2005 1:17 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Faith, posted 06-26-2005 7:47 PM nator has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 32 of 291 (219748)
06-26-2005 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Faith
06-26-2005 2:07 PM


Countinguing the practice of misquoting.
And now you are accusing me of racism too?
Please point out where I accused you of racism?
What I said was that in the past Religious Bigots opposed equal rights for Blacks just as today they are opposing equal rights for homosexuals.
Fortunately, through a combinations of education and legislation, those bigoted practices were curtailed.
Those bigoted beliefs were wrong then and are still wrong today. Bigotry against homosexuals is wrong today and will be wrong in the future. Hopefully through a combination of education and legislation such bigotry will be curtailed.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 06-26-2005 2:07 PM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 33 of 291 (219749)
06-26-2005 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CK
06-26-2005 11:41 AM


Well I listened to the interview.
Since Stephen Green said that Christian Voice wouldn'thave taken out th account in the first place if they had known that the Cooperative Bank was involved in Gay Pride marches I really don't see much of an issue. Neither side really wants to do business with the other, and Christian Voice have 30 days to set up a new account with someone else.
I also find it itneresting that Green described simple participation in Gay Pride marrches as "aggressively pro-Gay" but apparently didn't bat an eyelid when it was pointed out that Christian Voice had claimed that homosecual police officers were automatically unfit to take part in corruption investigations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CK, posted 06-26-2005 11:41 AM CK has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 34 of 291 (219750)
06-26-2005 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Faith
06-26-2005 2:23 PM


Re: Persecute those who persecute
Not the Branch Davidians, not the murderers of abortionists, not the killers of Matthew Shepard. All misrepresentations.
That's not what they say. How can I judge? You yourself have made it clear that I'm not equipped to truly understand the Bible.
At any rate, it's clear that they've simply taken the hate-filled invective you continually spew here and translated it into action. Your attempt to distance yourself from the ultimate result is amusing, but nobody's fooled, faith. If you really want to distance yourself from these kooks, then you need to stop employing their rhetoric. It's your choice, but as long as you show up here and continually voice your support for the same justifications they used for these actions, we're going to rightly assume that you're with them.
It's impossible to distinguish your rhetoric from theirs. The bank was right to disassociate with those who have made it pretty clear that violence is their next course of action.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Faith, posted 06-26-2005 2:23 PM Faith has not replied

  
Entomologista
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 291 (219754)
06-26-2005 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Faith
06-26-2005 1:07 PM


Re: for what reason?
Stop whining. Conservatives control the U.S. government. Or won't you be satisfied until your specific brand of Christianity is America's state religion and all the infidels are converted or dead?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 06-26-2005 1:07 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by DrJones*, posted 06-26-2005 5:00 PM Entomologista has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 36 of 291 (219760)
06-26-2005 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CK
06-26-2005 11:41 AM


I listened to the interview as well and generally feel as PaulK does. The hatred is mutual so I don't quite see what the fuss is.
I suppose no matter what I think regarding banks dropping clients for beliefs, this seems to be a bit of justice. Did I say Justice? Maybe I should have said Humour.
I mean to have someone essentially say:
"We are being persecuted by this bank... a bank which we never would have done business with if we had known what their beliefs were beforehand... because they just found out what our beliefs are and they don't like them... those beliefs being that people should be persecuted based on their beliefs... when really the bank should have known what our beliefs were before we started doing business.",
...is to good to be true. Is this really true?
In any case the issue is raised. Should banks be able to deny service to people whose beliefs differ from them?
If they are private businesses then I guess the answer is yes they should be able to deny service for whatever reason they want. Have the "all straight rich white men" bank if you want. Big deal, as it would be that individual's (or group's) business to run as they see fit.
If they are actually supported or in some way backed by the state (which I believe they are in the US), then I would say no. As soon as any institution declares itself a public service, which banks really are, and get public money as a form of security, then denial of service based on anything save acts against the bank itself, is wrong. It has in a sense become a public utility and lost the right to discriminate.
Then again, who should the bank support? How many of you would accept a bank known for keeping accounts from drug dealers, prostitutes, or perhaps pedophilic organizations? Or if such groups were discovered to have been denied service, would you feel less about that bank?
I thought it was a bit of a sham (almost as much hypocrisy as the CV guy) when the bank rep said they were all for diversity and belief and blah blah blah. Well honestly that DOES include people who BELIEVE that others are wrong. Thus they SHOULD have kept the Xian account. That would be diverity. And my guess is they would not be closing the accounts of any organization protesting drug use, prostitution, or pedophiles. Those would be "good" bigots, compared to the "nasty" antigay bigots.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CK, posted 06-26-2005 11:41 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by crashfrog, posted 06-26-2005 4:27 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 37 of 291 (219761)
06-26-2005 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Faith
06-26-2005 2:23 PM


Re: Persecute those who persecute
Faith, if you feel that a class of person is bad and should be persecuted in some way for what they do, then you are by definition a bigot.
It doesn't matter if it comes from God, or your own brain. The definition is based on the position, not the source of the position.
It also doesn't matter if you just want them to stay away from you, or be jailed, or tortured and killed. The definition is based on the position, and not the nature of persecution you feel is appropriate as a result of your position.
If it makes you feel any better, everyone is a bigot about something. Those that say they are not and can prove it would certainly impress me. You need to accept the fact that you have a faith which demands certain bigoted attitudes. The question is then how do you live your life so that your bigotry does not conflict with the lives of others within this society.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Faith, posted 06-26-2005 2:23 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Lolo, posted 06-26-2005 4:16 PM Silent H has replied
 Message 40 by crashfrog, posted 06-26-2005 4:29 PM Silent H has replied
 Message 47 by Faith, posted 06-26-2005 7:25 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Lolo
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 291 (219766)
06-26-2005 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Silent H
06-26-2005 3:27 PM


Re: Persecute those who persecute
If it makes you feel any better, everyone is a bigot about something.
And what are you a bigot about, Holmes?
edited by AdminJar to fix quote
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 06-26-2005 03:31 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Silent H, posted 06-26-2005 3:27 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Silent H, posted 06-26-2005 6:09 PM Lolo has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 39 of 291 (219769)
06-26-2005 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Silent H
06-26-2005 3:16 PM


Should banks be able to deny service to people whose beliefs differ from them?
Yes. Employees, however, should not be able to deny service to persons their employer would have as customers.
In other words, a bank can refuse service to (say) a pro-homosexual organization, but a teller can't refuse service to a patron just because he's gay.
How many of you would accept a bank known for keeping accounts from drug dealers, prostitutes, or perhaps pedophilic organizations?
I would. But also I would support a bank for suggesting that organizations that promote illegal activities would be best served at another institution.
Well honestly that DOES include people who BELIEVE that others are wrong.
Do you think so? I honestly believe that the mantle of tolerance doesn't extend to those who are intolerant. I don't see that as inconsistent, I guess.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Silent H, posted 06-26-2005 3:16 PM Silent H has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 40 of 291 (219771)
06-26-2005 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Silent H
06-26-2005 3:27 PM


Faith, if you feel that a class of person is bad and should be persecuted in some way for what they do, then you are by definition a bigot.
I guess I don't understand. As written this suggests that a person who believes that criminals should be punished for misdeeds is a "bigot," a characterization that would be neither fair nor accurate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Silent H, posted 06-26-2005 3:27 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Silent H, posted 06-26-2005 5:55 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 41 of 291 (219774)
06-26-2005 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Entomologista
06-26-2005 2:43 PM


Re: for what reason?
Y'know I dream of the day when America might dare to have a Christian president, or maybe 43 of them, consecutively.
stolen from The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Entomologista, posted 06-26-2005 2:43 PM Entomologista has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 42 of 291 (219778)
06-26-2005 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by crashfrog
06-26-2005 4:29 PM


As written this suggests that a person who believes that criminals should be punished for misdeeds is a "bigot," a characterization that would be neither fair nor accurate.
Sorry, my statement was also slightly incomplete in another way as well (not capturing enough). Let me try again...
If you feel that a class of person is bad and should be persecuted in some way for who they are or what they do, outside of directly injuring another in some way, then you are by definition a bigot.
I cannot simply write off people who believe criminals should be punished as something other than bigot per se. The fact is many crimes are based on bigotry. Otherwise antigay bigots would not have been bigots just a year or so ago when homosexual activities were indeed crimes.
Thus it is about causing direct injury to another in some way, which allows for some idea of retribution or revenge which is just and does not spring a priori from the "hater" regarding the "hated".

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by crashfrog, posted 06-26-2005 4:29 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 43 of 291 (219781)
06-26-2005 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Lolo
06-26-2005 4:16 PM


Re: Persecute those who persecute
And what are you a bigot about, Holmes?
You'd be suprised at the number and kinds of people I truly do not like. I'm surprised at the number and kinds of people I truly do not like.
Topping the list are:
1) Intolerant (which is not the same as bigots)
2) Willfully Ignorant
3) Hypocrites
4) Fake Liberals who use the pretense of knowledge, tolerance, and diversity to argue for policies that are the opposite. (essentially propagandists for radical "progressives")
5) Fake Conservatives who use the pretense of tradition, love (or faith), and freedom to argue for policies that are the opposite. (essentially propagandists for radical "fundemantalism" or "conservatism")
There are more, but then we are really reaching into the area of personal taste and I don't want to offend people on those kinds of issues. The above at least have a rational basis in that they can result in actions that actually harm, or in some way indirectly effect my life.
Well... I am sure that everyone can guess that I am a bigot regarding prudes.
In a slight irony, I really do love diversity and so in a perverse way I do like the fact that there are all these people I don't like. I just wish there less of them around, or at least not running the show.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Lolo, posted 06-26-2005 4:16 PM Lolo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by robinrohan, posted 06-27-2005 8:06 AM Silent H has replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 44 of 291 (219784)
06-26-2005 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CK
06-26-2005 11:41 AM


Should a bank or other private organization refuse service on the basic of religious viewpoints?
In this case I believe it’s much to do about nothing. Neither side wants to continue with each other so they part company, big deal. Where’s the harm?
OTOH, I don’t much care for a bank that embarks upon a public campaign to point out the cancellation of the accounts of one of their customers on the basis of their political or ideological viewpoints. I guess I'm just unaccostumed to an activist banker?
Listening to the radio interview, I heard Mr. Williams of the Bank Co-op state they were not opposed to customers who where religious and they didn’t even oppose the positions held by other customers that homosexuality was wrong. So why treat Christian Voice differently?
It seems to be a matter of degree. Christian Voice is more vocal in their opposition to homosexuality compared to other religious customers who hold anti-homosexual positions. So the bank made a judgement call. So what?
Despite complaints of discrimination, Co-op Bank is a private organization and has the right to do business with whomever they want to. Banks in the US reserve the right to terminate accounts of customers at any time without any stated cause.
I find it puzzling though, why the Bank made such a public announcement about why they were terminating the groups’ bank account . Why did any of this have to be in the public domain? The previous episode between Christian Voice and Jerry Springer — Opera seems to have been the impetus for the Banks actions.
If the Bank suddenly went public without prior notice after having Christian Voice as a customer for 3 years, then as a bank customer I would have concerns and might consider doing business with a more discrete organization.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CK, posted 06-26-2005 11:41 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Silent H, posted 06-26-2005 6:48 PM Monk has replied
 Message 46 by PaulK, posted 06-26-2005 6:49 PM Monk has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 45 of 291 (219787)
06-26-2005 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Monk
06-26-2005 6:27 PM


I do think the bank seemed oddly "active" in pursuit of this cancellation, however...
If the Bank suddenly went public without prior notice after having Christian Voice as a customer for 3 years, then as a bank customer I would have concerns and might consider doing business with a more discrete organization.
You don't think the CV enjoyed all the free publicity they just got? This total nonissue allowed them access to print and radio media.
Bank closes bank account client wants closed anyway, film at 11!

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Monk, posted 06-26-2005 6:27 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Monk, posted 06-26-2005 7:26 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024