Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,596 Year: 4,853/9,624 Month: 201/427 Week: 11/103 Day: 11/0 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christian Superhero Fred Phelps is no longer with us
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


(2)
Message 46 of 52 (722509)
03-21-2014 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Phat
03-21-2014 3:24 PM


Re: Free Will versus Submission
Phat writes:
Just because a man is attracted to another man does not necessitate sex.
Worrying about what another man does with his dick is the third gayest thing you can do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Phat, posted 03-21-2014 3:24 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
saab93f
Member (Idle past 1475 days)
Posts: 265
From: Finland
Joined: 12-17-2009


Message 47 of 52 (722517)
03-21-2014 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by DevilsAdvocate
03-21-2014 3:40 PM


I am not and would not like to group you with likes of Phelps, Falwell or Haggart. They do you great injustice.
What I was trying to do was invoke debate on whether religious moderates are able and willing to really distance themselves from the extremists even though that meant ackowledging that faith may take ugly shapes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-21-2014 3:40 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 882 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 48 of 52 (722524)
03-21-2014 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by DevilsAdvocate
03-21-2014 3:40 PM


No you missed my point. The logic fallacy sword you are using against Christianity is the same one you would have to use for atheism or non-believers. I don't agree with using this logical fallacy at all. That is my point.
If I am using a logical fallacy (I'm not), it's not the same one you are using. You are comparing made up people to real ones. You are trying to say we can't compare actual christians to actual christians because you made up a type of atheist. The closest you could come to doing the same thing I am doing is comparing all atheists to guys like Charlie Check'm. Except: atheists (that actually know who he is) are very vocal about either correcting his dumb ass or disowning him altogether. What doesn't happen, though, is saying "he's not a real atheist, so we don't have to worry about correcting him or making sure he doesn't seem to represent atheists".
I don't know if they or not.
That's funny because you are on record very recently as saying Phelps and Faith are not true christians.
You are angry because some Christians or supposed Christians commit wrongdoing and things that are morally objectionable. I agree with this moral outrage. A lot of other Christians disagree with this behavior and feel moral outrage at Phelps.
I'm not angry, pal. Pointing out flaws in your faith is not anger, no matter how tightly you hold it to your chest. I'm simply having a discussion and it happens to be at the expense of your faith. if you don't like it, bow out or don't put your faith out there.
Than if anyone states that all atheists are evil, you state you can't group all non-believers with Stalin, Mao and other notorious people who espouse atheism. It is a double edge logic fallacy sword and you are stabbing yourself with it. YOU Hooah, are being as illogical as Fred Phelps and others who denounce non-believers as "evil". I am not calling you an "evil, satanic baby-killers". I don't believe that. I am pointing out your logic fallacy of ascribing all Christians with the actions of a subgroup of Christians.
And you accuse ME of building up a strawman? When in this discussion have I done this? You are making shit up.
Look, the point of contention here as far as I am concerned is not that I lump you intogether with Phelps or Haggart (because I don't, actually, but making you accept them as christians causes you to feel that way), it's that you try to disassociate yourself from them by saying "they aren't real christians, so I they aren't our repsonsibility". it's the "they aren;t real christians" that is the problem. You should say "yes, they are christians, but they don't speak for the rest of us and we as a group should take more effort to make sure they don't represent us and make us look bad" (or something of the sort). But no, you try to hand wave them off by claiming them to not even be a part of the same group. News flash: they are part of your group whether you like it or not.
And to those atheists you strawmanned up? Yea, they are atheists alright. Won't deny that. The difference here and the reason the comparison doesn't work: there is no atheist dogma that binds us together. there is ONE question asked to newcomer atheists: do you believe in god. If the answer is anything other than no, welcome to the club. You, on the other hand, have a guide book and a club with rules. ANYONE can be a christian and they ARE is they say they are because none of you can get the rules right. Even the "I'm not religious, I just have a personal relationship with jesus" types. Yes, you have to own them too.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. We are eternal, the pinnacle of evolution and existence. Before us, you are nothing. Your extinction is inevitable. We are the end of everything.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-21-2014 3:40 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-21-2014 9:14 PM hooah212002 has not replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3182 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 49 of 52 (722529)
03-21-2014 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by hooah212002
03-21-2014 7:02 PM


That's funny because you are on record very recently as saying Phelps and Faith are not true christians.
I never said Faith was not a true Christian. I did criticize some of her behavior in another thread. That is not the same as saying she is not a Christian.
I did say I wouldn't consider Phelps a Christian based on his words and behavior but also qualified it by saying that his ultimate fate was between him and God.
it's the "they aren;t real christians" that is the problem
I don't know categorically what the state of their heart is. My point was that he and his group were conducting behavior that is not inline with Christian attributes described in the Bible. That was my whole point.
they are part of your group whether you like it or not.
Yep, he is part of your group too. He is a human being.
ANYONE can be a christian and they ARE is they say they are because none of you can get the rules right. Even the "I'm not religious, I just have a personal relationship with jesus" types. Yes, you have to own them too.
If he is a Christian by everyone's standards, that is fine. Problem is there are a lot of things Phelps did that undermines his stance as a Christian. Not by my standards but by standards as laid out in the book of rules as you state.
yes, they are christians, but they don't speak for the rest of us and we as a group should take more effort to make sure they don't represent us and make us look bad
I have no issue with this statement. Maybe I just didn't say it exactly you did. Honestly, I am in a rush alot with my posts and probably come off saying things imprecisely. The only problem with the "we as a group" is that there is no overarching Christian group that could make this statement. Very few of the denominations discuss things together as a collaborative group. That is the problem most of the time. Most Christians though that I have met disagree with Fred Phelps and his church. Many have tried to fight him legally and through other means.
For some reason it seems you may some sort of beef with me for whatever reason I am not sure.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by hooah212002, posted 03-21-2014 7:02 PM hooah212002 has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8593
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(1)
Message 50 of 52 (722533)
03-22-2014 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Phat
03-21-2014 3:24 PM


Re: Free Will versus Submission
Yes, people have a right to behave however they choose, but they have a responsibility to behave in a responsible manner.
Correct. And behaving in a responsible manner means not appointing oneself as thought police and means not insisting ones own views are the only ones allowed and means not forcing ones interference, often brutally so, into other people's otherwise happy lives where they have no business dictating conduct from any moral or social perspective at all.
Christians are not allowed to engage in homosexual activities because their priests say it is sin. Fine, they don't have to be faggots. They have met their responsibility to follow the dictates of their priests. Now, they can keep their threats and intimidation along with their inhumane immoral precepts in their church, not in our secular society's schools, not in our secular society's government and not in other people's homes. That is the expected code of conduct, the responsible way to behave, in civil human society.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Phat, posted 03-21-2014 3:24 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Faith, posted 03-22-2014 1:44 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1525 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 51 of 52 (722534)
03-22-2014 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by AZPaul3
03-22-2014 12:13 AM


Re: Free Will versus Submission
Straight from centuries of Christendom to militant Secularityland in a few short decades.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by AZPaul3, posted 03-22-2014 12:13 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by AZPaul3, posted 03-22-2014 7:36 AM Faith has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8593
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 52 of 52 (722539)
03-22-2014 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Faith
03-22-2014 1:44 AM


Re: Free Will versus Submission
And about 1000 years late.
Edited by AZPaul3, : change #

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Faith, posted 03-22-2014 1:44 AM Faith 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