NationStates Jolt Archive

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?

Wow, a church. In america.

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?

Baptists, it figures...

Haven't had that trouble in the Pentecostal church...

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?

Damn you Gauthier, you beat me to it.

This minister should be decloaked. As a christian myself, I find his behavior reprehensable.

Damn you Gauthier, you beat me to it.

This minister should be decloaked. As a christian myself, I find his behavior reprehensable.

It's "defrocked". The minister is not a Klingon, to my knowledge.

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?
Holy fuck she is a teacher of 54 years and they dismiss her for being FEMALE?

Idiots

Wow, a church. In america.

Yep. A babtist church no less: The First Baptist Church dismissed Mary Lambert on Aug. 9 with a letter explaining that the church had adopted an interpretation that prohibits women from teaching men. She had taught there for 54 years

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,209589,00.html

Wow, a church. In america.
No way ...

It's "defrocked". The minister is not a Klingon, to my knowledge.
Perhaps you didn't hear that a mekleth was found in the minister's office?

It's "defrocked". The minister is not a Klingon, to my knowledge.

I normally associate that with the catholic church. I came up with the word for this so called baptist minister.

It's "defrocked". The minister is not a Klingon, to my knowledge.
He could be a Romulan spy. Activate the tachyon detection grid.

Perhaps you didn't hear that a mekleth was found in the minister's office?
That explains everything.

Perhaps you didn't hear that a mekleth was found in the minister's office?
Clearly it was evidence planted by Tal Shiar operatives.

<.<

>.>

what it called a literal interpretation of the Bible says :rolleyes:

I knew Gauth was gonna be all over this as soon as I saw it I'm like "should I make a thread outta that?" "nah, leave it for Gauthier"

Since when did anyone say that there is never any discrimination by christians anyway?

They must have just thought she was a particularly camp man, but someone walked in on her in the vestry (if they have those there)...
"hey man, you need to work out or something, those man boobs are really hanging there..."

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?

I bet this douchebag priest would be up in arms if he were fired from city council as part of 'separation of church and state'! *seethes* This is yet another example of the danger of organized worship.

I bet this douchebag priest would be up in arms if he were fired from city council as part of 'separation of church and state'! *seethes* This is yet another example of the danger of organized worship.hey...

it's a danger of Idiocy... not Organized Worship. *huff* ;)

This is why smart christians don't take the bible literally. Pity being smart isn't a requirement for becoming a minister.

hey...

it's a danger of Idiocy... not Organized Worship. *huff* ;)

Idiocy is to be expected. To paraphrase a very wise man, half of the people in the world are dumber than average. The problem is that they are led in their worship of God by other people. Based on the writings of other people, translated by othe people and chosen based on their 'importance and accuracy' by still other people. While I have no problems with believing in God and Jesus Christ (considering that I do myself), I have a real problem with submitting to the will of powerful men past and present who 'serve' God.

what it called a literal interpretation of the Bible says
:rolleyes:

Agreed. When will people learn that:
a. A translation is not the same as the original text
b. Hebrew is not a language one can take literally. If God wanted his words to be taken literally, he would have used another language more suited to the conveying of literal orders.

Baptists, it figures...
wow. Baptists are evil

Haven't had that trouble in the Pentecostal church...
I haven't had that trouble in my baptist church either, must be one of those weird alternate dimension things.

Idiocy is to be expected. To paraphrase a very wise man, half of the people in the world are dumber than average. The problem is that they are led in their worship of God by other people. Based on the writings of other people, translated by othe people and chosen based on their 'importance and accuracy' by still other people. While I have no problems with believing in God and Jesus Christ (considering that I do myself), I have a real problem with submitting to the will of powerful men past and present who 'serve' God.
Agreed then you have idiocy intermingled with the force of an un provable un verifiable deity…. The potential for abuse is enormous

wow. Baptists are evil


I haven't had that trouble in my baptist church either, must be one of those weird alternate dimension things.

I've had most of my problems in church with Baptists and Methodists, go figure.

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?


The difference is not that she isn't being beheaded or stoned, although, if that was the difference then being told you can't teach Sunday School is not on the same level as being beheaded.

The difference is the reaction and support or more correctly, lack of support.

Christians will react negatively to this news and a very large majority will not support it.

You can find abberations in every faith or non-faith community.
When people criticise Muslims for oppression of women, they are not criticising the exceptions, they are referring to behaviour that is culturally accpeted and widely promoted by religious and social leaders.

Firing someone based on gender. Stupid and ignorant.

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?
Awesome!!!!

I love it when the superstitious buggers go all Biblical-literalism on their sheeple.

I'm methodist.
I also have a problem with Darbyites.

I've had most of my problems in church with Baptists and Methodists, go figure.

I'm methodist.

I've had most of my problems in church with Baptists and Methodists, go figure.
huh, I have had most of my problems with Catholics, and Presbyterians.

weird..

Jolt's doing the thread order mess up thing again?

Jolt's doing the thread order mess up thing again?

Yeah i've probably seen that at least 10 times today. Somone should report it.

Anyone have that guys email address?

http://www.xsltblog.com/archives/24805BP~The-Simpsons-Mr-Burns-Excellent.jpg

I've had most of my problems (sexism-wise) with Christians in general. I don't see any particular reason to distinguish between denominations, since they all cite the same Bible passages at me when they're trying to convince me that women are frail creatures who need big strong men to run their lives.

Meh. Christianity didn't invent misogyny. It's the same boring tripe that's been written into holy books for thousands and thousands of years. At least the Greeks had Zeus go around in the aspect of a swan or a bull when he wanted to rape mortal women. The Christian stuff is just plain dull.

I've had most of my problems (sexism-wise) with Christians in general. I don't see any particular reason to distinguish between denominations, since they all cite the same Bible passages at me when they're trying to convince me that women are frail creatures who need big strong men to run their lives.

Meh. Christianity didn't invent misogyny. It's the same boring tripe that's been written into holy books for thousands and thousands of years. At least the Greeks had Zeus go around in the aspect of a swan or a bull when he wanted to rape mortal women. The Christian stuff is just plain dull.
Ever read any of Campbell's stuff on the emergence of religion from the Middle East and how it differs greatly from religions that come from hunter-gatherer societies or purely agricultural societies? Fascinating stuff, and it explains a lot of the mindset of both Christians and Muslims toward stewardship of the earth and treatment of women.

Ever read any of Campbell's stuff on the emergence of religion from the Middle East and how it differs greatly from religions that come from hunter-gatherer societies or purely agricultural societies? Fascinating stuff, and it explains a lot of the mindset of both Christians and Muslims toward stewardship of the earth and treatment of women.
I think When God Was A Woman had some interesting bits, too. (Merlin Stone, if memory serves.)

I found the last sentence to be interesting...


In a statement, the board said other issues were behind Lambert's dismissal, but it did not say what they were.

hmmmmmm.....

I think When God Was A Woman had some interesting bits, too. (Merlin Stone, if memory serves.)
Haven't read that, but I'll look it up.

I found the last sentence to be interesting...


In a statement, the board said other issues were behind Lambert's dismissal, but it did not say what they were.

hmmmmmm.....
Perhaps they found out that she is also left-handed? A pox on the harlot and her sinful ways!!!

I found the last sentence to be interesting...


In a statement, the board said other issues were behind Lambert's dismissal, but it did not say what they were.

hmmmmmm.....

man boobs, I tell you

Haven't read that, but I'll look it up.
As somebody who doesn't give two figs about "feminine spirituality," I found a lot of it to be goofy or irrelevant, but there was some interesting material as well.

Ever read any of Campbell's stuff on the emergence of religion from the Middle East and how it differs greatly from religions that come from hunter-gatherer societies or purely agricultural societies? Fascinating stuff, and it explains a lot of the mindset of both Christians and Muslims toward stewardship of the earth and treatment of women.
[who] Campbell, please? I've heard the gist of that argument, but never known who's it was. I'd like to read that.

Without having read through the entire thread, I'd like to comment that most sensible women have concluded that men are unteachable anyway, so what's the big deal?

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?

My goodness. Intolerant Christians. Whatever will they think of next.

My goodness. Intolerant Christians. Whatever will they think of next.

Intolerant Jes and Intolerant Muslims? :D

Yeah, dem Baptists are loco. I go to a baptist school, I know.

Without having read through the entire thread, I'd like to comment that most sensible women have concluded that men are unteachable anyway, so what's the big deal?
Wait, what's this about "sensible" women? Where can I buy one of those?

Ever read any of Campbell's stuff on the emergence of religion from the Middle East and how it differs greatly from religions that come from hunter-gatherer societies or purely agricultural societies? Fascinating stuff, and it explains a lot of the mindset of both Christians and Muslims toward stewardship of the earth and treatment of women.

I read a lot of stuff about how hunter gatherer religions tend to shape up, and how agricultural ones work. But always seperatly. Then I went and read some of the OT stories again, and for some reason, the whole thing just spelled itself out to me as "lower taxes for the meat farmers, make life miserable for the grain growers. Sensible farming is an abomination before God, even if avoiding it means turning the Middle East into a desert.

Things like prohibitions on wearing two different fabrics. Using the same piece of land for two different crops. The pastorialist Able having the more pleasing sacrifice because apparently, God hates vegetarians.

Things like prohibitions on wearing two different fabrics. Using the same piece of land for two different crops. The pastorialist Able having the more pleasing sacrifice because apparently, God hates vegetarians.
Can I sig that?

Intolerant Jes and Intolerant Muslims? :D

The point, of course, being that Christians think that they're the only ones left who demonstrate charity, tolerance, and compassion. In fact, they demonstrate mostly hypocrisy.

Also, I've never been a huge John Stamos fan. But I wouldn't say that intolerance was among "Uncle Jessie's" many faults.

Wait, what's this about "sensible" women? Where can I buy one of those?
That's what makes 'em sensible, they can't be bought.

The point, of course, being that Christians think that they're the only ones left who demonstrate charity, tolerance, and compassion. In fact, they demonstrate mostly hypocrisy.

Some do and some don't. Same as it is with Jews and Muslims.

[who] Campbell, please? I've heard the gist of that argument, but never known who's it was. I'd like to read that.

Joseph Campbell. His book along with Bill Moyers, "The Power of Myth" is absolutely fascinating.

I read a lot of stuff about how hunter gatherer religions tend to shape up, and how agricultural ones work. But always seperatly. Then I went and read some of the OT stories again, and for some reason, the whole thing just spelled itself out to me as "lower taxes for the meat farmers, make life miserable for the grain growers. Sensible farming is an abomination before God, even if avoiding it means turning the Middle East into a desert.

Things like prohibitions on wearing two different fabrics. Using the same piece of land for two different crops. The pastorialist Able having the more pleasing sacrifice because apparently, God hates vegetarians.

Vegetarianism is a sign of the end times.

Vegetarianism is a sign of the end thymes.
Edited for correctness. :D

Edited for correctness. :D
Aarrgghh! :eek:

I read a lot of stuff about how hunter gatherer religions tend to shape up, and how agricultural ones work. But always seperatly. Then I went and read some of the OT stories again, and for some reason, the whole thing just spelled itself out to me as "lower taxes for the meat farmers, make life miserable for the grain growers. Sensible farming is an abomination before God, even if avoiding it means turning the Middle East into a desert.

Things like prohibitions on wearing two different fabrics. Using the same piece of land for two different crops. The pastorialist Able having the more pleasing sacrifice because apparently, God hates vegetarians.
Actually, the point Campbell makes is that the religions that come out of the Middle East are neither hunter-gatherer or agricultural--they're nomadic, herder religions which use up the land and move on to the next place. They're very bloody, with a focus on dominance and destruction. It explains a lot.

Typical Baptists.

15 minutes after I replied to this thread my Baptist principal rang my doorbell and tried to get me to join there church. I'm kinda freeked out...

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?

These things are equivalent to you?

Im not nearly so upset about one woman firing another woman as I am about beheadings and stonings. Im not as cheerful about it as your smiley leads me to believe that you are either.

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?
This isn't good, but it's stupid to claim that this is as bad as stoning.

Why do you feel the need to protect Muslims so much? And who the hell pretends that only Muslims do bad things?

Why are most of your posts based on the assumption that those who criticise oppressive fundamentalist Islam support oppressive fundamentalist Christianity?

Yes this is bad and shows that all fundamentalists need to be criticised, not just Christians and not just Muslims.

What confuses me is, how the heck are they getting away with this? I mean, sure it's terrible, and beheading/stoning would be worse, but, what I can't grasp is - how the heck are they not being crucified for this?!? I mean, this is America! You can't have your literal interpretations of the bible affect hiring/firing decisions in America.
Still, beheading and stoning are worse... and the muslims have some of their governments doing those things, while we just have looney religious nuts doing the... being prejudiced. We still have the moral high ground.

Baptists, it figures...

Haven't had that trouble in the Pentecostal church...
What does the "pente" mean? Five of what?

This is why smart christians don't take the bible literally. Pity being smart isn't a requirement for becoming a minister.
Reading any very old document literally is stupid. The meanings of words change greatly over the centuries.

I'm methodist.
Büsch is a methodist.

I've had most of my problems (sexism-wise) with Christians in general.
What other religions have you encountered in the same depth as Christianity?

The point, of course, being that Christians think that they're the only ones left who demonstrate charity, tolerance, and compassion. In fact, they demonstrate mostly hypocrisy.
Where are you getting this BS from? Most Christians aren't hypocrites.

What confuses me is, how the heck are they getting away with this? I mean, sure it's terrible, and beheading/stoning would be worse, but, what I can't grasp is - how the heck are they not being crucified for this?!? I mean, this is America! You can't have your literal interpretations of the bible affect hiring/firing decisions in America.
Still, beheading and stoning are worse... and the muslims have some of their governments doing those things, while we just have looney religious nuts doing the... being prejudiced. We still have the moral high ground.
Freedom of religion. I think they're wrong but they have the right to be wrong.

What does the "pente" mean? Five of what?

I believe you're cutting the word off too early--it's a reference to Pentecost, the day that the holy spirit supposedly appeared to the early christians in the locked room and gave them the power to speak in tongues.

This isn't good, but it's stupid to claim that this is as bad as stoning.

Never said it was bad as stoning or beheading. That remark is aimed at people who will excuse any religiously justified sexism with "But... but... they don't behead or stone people!"

Why do you feel the need to protect Muslims so much? And who the hell pretends that only Muslims do bad things?

Because the current fashion is to lump every Muslim in with the Jihadists as if they were all part of an Islamic Borg Collective and most statements otherwise get swept under the media coverage rug. Not to mention with all the recent flood of "m0zl3mz r 3b1l" themed threads here in NS General you think nobody pretends only Muslims do bad things?

Why are most of your posts based on the assumption that those who criticise oppressive fundamentalist Islam support oppressive fundamentalist Christianity?

Because there's a double-standard in display where if something unsociable or simply horrific happens and the perpetrator was either connected to a Christian religion or even declared doing it in the name of God, Western society automatically dismisses him as a lone nutcase. But if the individual was Muslim, then it becomes yet another plot by t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz to destroy all that is good, establish t3h ©al1phat3 and kick puppies. Plus there's the disingenuous and disgusting All or Nothing stipulation people attach to Muslims condemning terrorism: "Either they all condemn it or in fact they all support it." Yet when shit like Oklahoma City, Atlanta or Westborough Baptist Church happens, there's no massive outcry from Christians as a whole and nobody even holds them to that same ridiculous standard.

Yes this is bad and shows that all fundamentalists need to be criticised, not just Christians and not just Muslims.

But in today's climate t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz are the Enemy en Vogue that everyone can feel free to criticize, dehumanize and disenfranchise. There's plenty of moderate Muslims all over the world who are productive members of society and yet they get swept under the "liberal" media coverage rug in favor of the beheading, stoning, "Death to America" Jihadists and their disenfranchised supporters. Christians have never been held to that same unfair standard, ever.

Never said it was bad as stoning or beheading. That remark is aimed at people who will excuse any religiously justified sexism with "But... but... they don't behead or stone people!"
Those people are morons, I think most of us can agree on that. "Christian" right wing = :(

Because the current fashion is to lump every Muslim in with the Jihadists as if they were all part of an Islamic Borg Collective and most statements otherwise get swept under the media coverage rug. Not to mention with all the recent flood of "m0zl3mz r 3b1l" themed threads here in NS General you think nobody pretends only Muslims do bad things?
There are a few, but I wouldn't call it the current fashion. It seems that most of the media here are rightly emphasising that 99% of Muslims are fine, only the extreme 1% is to be feared.


Because there's a double-standard in display where if something unsociable or simply horrific happens and the perpetrator was either connected to a Christian religion or even declared doing it in the name of God, Western society automatically dismisses him as a lone nutcase. But if the individual was Muslim, then it becomes yet another plot by t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz
That's because attacks by Christian extremists tend to be isolated and rarely committed by groups that are linked, or share a common goal.

But in today's climate t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz are the Enemy en Vogue that everyone can feel free to criticize, dehumanize and disenfranchise.
Other than DK and other few assorted right-wing nuts, there isn't much dehumanising of Muslims in general. I really think you're paranoid.

But in today's climate t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz are the Enemy en Vogue that everyone can feel free to criticize, dehumanize and disenfranchise.
You portray it as if all Western society besides an admirable minority are rising up in hatred against Muslims. If this was true the people of Denmark would have burned down Mosques in response to protests against their cartoons. In reality, they held peace vigils.

Are there not sex discrimination laws in the US that would cover this sort of thing?

Awesome!!!!

I love it when the superstitious buggers go all Biblical-literalism on their sheeple.

SHEEPLE, indeed!!!! It's like 1946 all over again. As a crunchy fern, indeed I am morose!!! EVIDENTLY, King George caused hurricane KATRINA by devouring the outsourced ATHEISTS in Portugal!!?

Are there not sex discrimination laws in the US that would cover this sort of thing?

It is a possibility but how do you fight something that was done on religious grounds? It would be a tough fight.

But in today's climate t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz are the Enemy en Vogue that everyone can feel free to criticize, dehumanize and disenfranchise. There's plenty of moderate Muslims all over the world who are productive members of society and yet they get swept under the "liberal" media coverage rug in favor of the beheading, stoning, "Death to America" Jihadists and their disenfranchised supporters. Christians have never been held to that same unfair standard, ever.

Christians are here and now held to even less fair standards by you. For less egregious behavior. Why?

It is a possibility but how do you fight something that was done on religious grounds? It would be a tough fight.

Religion counts as a valid reason for discrimination?

Religion counts as a valid reason for discrimination?

No it does not. I am curious though of what these other reasons were for dismissing her. It does seem like they are trying to cover their butts.

Religion counts as a valid reason for discrimination?

Inside a church it does. Or at least is a gray area

i want to know if they are going to enforce the rest of that bit of paul's mad rantings - are they kicking out women who braid their hair or wear jewelry? do they encourage slaves to work harder and be more repsectful to their masters?

Religion counts as a valid reason for discrimination?


Yes - otherwise those dreadful catholics would need to allow gay priests, frightful jews and muslims wouldn't be able to circumsize their children, and appalling presbyterians couldn't... um...be... well, anyway, you get the picture! It's a private club that is entitled to make its own decisions, good or bad.

Christians are here and now held to even less fair standards by you. For less egregious behavior. Why?

If I had any position of power in government, you might have a point. As is it, that's a straw man.

If I had any position of power in government, you might have a point. As is it, that's a straw man.
Well, haven't you posted this thread as a straw man? Somehow implying that all Christians would do this?

No it does not. I am curious though of what these other reasons were for dismissing her. It does seem like they are trying to cover their butts.

There's probably another reason they don't really want publicised, so go for some vaugue biblical backing...

First, big deal. It was Sunday school. I don't think she supported a family of five on that. Second, it's between her and the church. There's no real employment as a Sunday school teacher. If she doesn't like it, find another church to teach at. I hear the Methodists are fairly liberal when it comes to women in leadership roles.

There's probably another reason they don't really want publicised, so go for some vaugue biblical backing...

If a case of wrongful termination is brought, that is going to have to come out and if it does not, she will win the lawsuit.

First, big deal. It was Sunday school. I don't think she supported a family of five on that. Second, it's between her and the church. There's no real employment as a Sunday school teacher. If she doesn't like it, find another church to teach at. I hear the Methodists are fairly liberal when it comes to women in leadership roles.

Now this here is a very true statement.

What other religions have you encountered in the same depth as Christianity?

Jews. I grew up in a town that was mostly Jewish and had mostly Jewish friends all the way until I hit college (whereupon I was going to a university out in the "real world" where statistics resulted in my having fewer Jewish friends simply because there were far fewer Jews around).

And, just to be clear, when I say that I've had more trouble with sexism from Christians than any other demographic, I'm talking about PERSONAL experiences. I'm not talking about the institutionalized sexism that has become entrenched in our culture. I happen to believe that much of said sexism comes directly and clearly from the Christian influences in this country, but I am choosing not to include that in my tally of Christian sexism because I am a very nice person who has some very nice Christian friends.

Instead, I'm just including the times when I, personally, have had to deal with another individual who specifically behaved in a sexist manner toward me in particular. The overwhelming majority of these experiences have not only been with a Christian individual, but have actually been tied specifically to their Christianity (via them quoting Bible versus or making Christian religious arguments as to why their sexism is appropriate).

Personally, I don't blame Christianity for the fact that sexism exists. I think very dull and very cowardly people tend to be sexist, and I think dull cowardly people also often find Christianity to be a very handy way to cover for their own inability to function like grown ups.

They aren't sexist because they're Christian, in other words, any more than KKK members are racist because they're in the KKK. People who aren't racist don't join the KKK. People who aren't sexist don't join sexist organized superstitions. But people who are racist usually can't wait to get around some other racists and convince each other that they're really cool for being racist. And sexist jackasses can't wait to join patriarchal religions that tell them there's a great big manly man in the sky who will slap them a giant holy high-five if they oppress them some womenfolk.

I normally associate that with the catholic church. I came up with the word for this so called baptist minister.

Even the Catholic Church lets women teach and hold positions of authority; they just can't be priests.

Timothy wasn't even an Apostle. He was a misogynistic jerk who followed Paul; any legitimacy they (Paul and Timothy) have comes from men and not any deity Christ, if he existed, would have been appalled at this idiocy, since he's the one who said people should use their gifts and talents in the service of God.

I found the last sentence to be interesting...


In a statement, the board said other issues were behind Lambert's dismissal, but it did not say what they were.

hmmmmmm.....


Can you say "damage control"?

Even the Catholic Church lets women teach and hold positions of authority; they just can't be priests.

Timothy wasn't even an Apostle. He was a misogynistic jerk who followed Paul; any legitimacy they (Paul and Timothy) have comes from men and not any deity Christ, if he existed, would have been appalled at this idiocy, since he's the one who said people should use their gifts and talents in the service of God.



Which is why I'm not particularly fond of Paul or Timothy. IMHO, the first examples of men perverting the Gospels.

<snip>
Where are you getting this BS from? Most Christians aren't hypocrites.
Most people are hypocrites, so, since Christians are people...

Lovely. I'm not surprised, somehow, but it's still rather appalling when this kind of thing happens.

Also, I need sleep. I initially thought the title of this thread was "church fries teacher for being female" - I thought it was going to be about a church of cannibals or something.

it's between her and the church

no, it isn't. any and all cultural institutions ought be confronted when they are stupid, evil, or just wrong on some front. it's how we make progress.

no, it isn't. any and all cultural institutions ought be confronted when they are stupid, evil, or just wrong on some front. it's how we make progress.
Ah, but Gauthier doesn't want you to confront any Muslims for anything they ever did or ever will do.

Because, he doesn't want to hold "the white man's burden" to the same level of responsibility as himself - to him, it wouldn't be fair at all. Probably some racist ideas in his head preventing him from seeing Muslims as ordinary people under the sway of a religion that is intolerant at its core.

Ah, but Gauthier doesn't want you to confront any Muslims for anything they ever did or ever will do.

Because, he doesn't want to hold "the white man's burden" to the same level of responsibility as himself - to him, it wouldn't be fair at all. Probably some racist ideas in his head preventing him from seeing Muslims as ordinary people under the sway of a religion that is intolerant at its core.

Why is it that when he criticizes one religious group for something they've done wrong, you leap up and say OMG BUT THE MUSLIMS DO IT TOO. Yes, Muslims do this sort of thing as well. Almost all groups have this problem - we can argue about the degree of the problem, but it's true that conservative Jewish, Christian and Muslim traditions all make women subservient.

Because the Islamic world is at this point in history much less liberal than its Jewish and Christian counterparts, the problem there is somewhat worse. What's needed is liberalization. Not what you're suggesting.

Why is it that when he criticizes one religious group for something they've done wrong, you leap up and say OMG BUT THE MUSLIMS DO IT TOO. Yes, Muslims do this sort of thing as well. Almost all groups have this problem - we can argue about the degree of the problem, but it's true that conservative Jewish, Christian and Muslim traditions all make women subservient.

Because the Islamic world is at this point in history much less liberal than its Jewish and Christian counterparts, the problem there is somewhat worse. What's needed is liberalization. Not what you're suggesting.

Maybe you need to read the thread. Gauthier says he made this thread in response to all the Muslim threads, not the other way around.

He doesn't want Muslims criticized AT ALL. Or held to the same standards as other religions.

Maybe you should ask Gauthier why he considers it racist to even question the motivations of Muslims.

Maybe you need to read the thread. Gauthier says he made this thread in response to all the Muslim threads, not the other way around.

He doesn't want Muslims criticized AT ALL. Or held to the same standards as other religions.

Maybe you should ask Gauthier why he considers it racist to even question the motivations of Muslims.

Here here.

DK, Corny, you two really need to do something about this unhealthy obssession of yours. It has long since ceased to be entertaining. Yes, the world's better off without Saddam Hussein. Yes, it would be better off without bin Laden. I disagree with the way this war has been run, but that's just opinion. But really, I've seen you advocate slaughtering 1 billion people. I've seen you viciously attack and jeer at anyone who dares to disagree with you. Do you not see something wrong with this behavior? Does it not seem infantile at all?

DK, Corny, you two really need to do something about this unhealthy obssession of yours. It has long since ceased to be entertaining. Yes, the world's better off without Saddam Hussein. Yes, it wolud be better off without bin Laden. I disagree with the way this war has been run, but that's just opinion. But really, I've seen you advocate slaughtering 1 billion people. I've seen you viciously attack and jeer at anyone who dares to disagree with you. Do you not see something wrong with this behavior? Does it not seem infantile at all?
I wouldn't be on it so often if I hadn't been hammered for a whole year by Gauthier calling me a Bushevik - way before I ever said anything about genocide.

Just really, really tired of people thinking that militant Islam is harmless fun.

Maybe you need to read the thread. Gauthier says he made this thread in response to all the Muslim threads, not the other way around.

He doesn't want Muslims criticized AT ALL. Or held to the same standards as other religions.

Maybe you should ask Gauthier why he considers it racist to even question the motivations of Muslims.

Reading between the lines again eh? Glad to see Pyongyang has a wonderful literacy program.

Did I ever say I wanted any religion to have special treatment? No. The point which you miss in your wet dream fetish to see every Muslim take a Zyclon-B shower is that people shouldn't hold their own beliefs as enlightened and superior to another, especially when shit like this happens. Finger pointing can be fun when three are directed right back at you.

I wouldn't be on it so often if I hadn't been hammered for a whole year by Gauthier calling me a Bushevik - way before I ever said anything about genocide.

Just really, really tired of people thinking that militant Islam is harmless fun.

Not as much as we're tired of hearing you say each and every single Muslim is a member of the Jihadist movement and that they all need to be wiped clean from existence.

I wouldn't be on it so often if I hadn't been hammered for a whole year by Gauthier calling me a Bushevik - way before I ever said anything about genocide.

Just really, really tired of people thinking that militant Islam is harmless fun.



Nobody thinks that. I have naver seen a single person on this board say anything of the sort. Saying things like that just make you look asinine.

DK, Corny, you two really need to do something about this unhealthy obssession of yours. It has long since ceased to be entertaining. Yes, the world's better off without Saddam Hussein. Yes, it would be better off without bin Laden. I disagree with the way this war has been run, but that's just opinion. But really, I've seen you advocate slaughtering 1 billion people. I've seen you viciously attack and jeer at anyone who dares to disagree with you. Do you not see something wrong with this behavior? Does it not seem infantile at all?
For it to seem infantile to them, they would first have to admit once and for all that they do this. They are the kings of backpedaling away from their own extremist statements. You can't really expect people to say, "Yes, now that you mention it, that does seem infantile" when all the while they've been saying "I never said to kill all the Muslims" in the same threads where they called for genocide and forced sterilization against all Muslims. :rolleyes:

DK, Corny, you two really need to do something about this unhealthy obssession of yours. It has long since ceased to be entertaining. Yes, the world's better off without Saddam Hussein. Yes, it would be better off without bin Laden. I disagree with the way this war has been run, but that's just opinion. But really, I've seen you advocate slaughtering 1 billion people. I've seen you viciously attack and jeer at anyone who dares to disagree with you. Do you not see something wrong with this behavior? Does it not seem infantile at all?

When people bash me, I will bash back. When people make fun of others, I will do the same. When I get insulted for my opinions, I will insult back.

When people bash me, I will bash back. When people make fun of others, I will do the same. When I get insulted for my opinions, I will insult back.


C'mon. I've seen you both start things. You're not always responding. (and yes, I realize that occasionally you are just responding).

Nobody thinks that. I have naver seen a single person on this board say anything of the sort. Saying things like that just make you look asinine.
Really? Then why do so many people think the UK bomb plot is fake, made up by the government - and they forecast that shortly the government will be forced to confess it was all a big mistake, and that the "plotters" are completely innocent?

C'mon. I've seen you both start things. You're not always responding. (and yes, I realize that occasionally you are just responding).
Ocean thinks militant Islam is a joke, and not real.

Really? Then why do so many people think the UK bomb plot is fake, made up by the government - and they forecast that shortly the government will be forced to confess it was all a big mistake, and that the "plotters" are completely innocent?


No idea. I've not heard anyone say that.

No idea. I've not heard anyone say that.
You aren't on often enough. And I'm tired of hearing people deny they said it. Tired of people saying no one ever said it. Tired of having to quote it again and again and again.

And tired of Gauthier saying Muslims aren't to blame - they most certainly are, and their religion most certainly is.

Ocean thinks militant Islam is a joke, and not real.

OD is a fool and anyone who agrees with him is also a fool.

And here's a bucket of cold water for people who're all worked up nice and hot from their assertion that only t3h 3b1l m0zl3mz oppress women and that every other religion in the world is enlightened and egalitarian:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/church-fires-teacher-for-being-female/20060821083709990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001

But since she's not being beheaded or stoned it's perfectly acceptable, riiiight?

Christianity and Islam are both guilty of horrible conduct regarding women. As are other religions as well.

This is ridiculous, though it really doesn't surprise me.

She's not being stoned to death, but that's still some pretty backwards thinking, especially considering how long she had been a teacher, and that her replacement will probably some inexperienced guy not half as good.

Any one of those people on NationStates posted such thing? If not, you're just looking forward to taking a bath with Halal soap.
They sure did post it. Maybe you should read back through all the bomb plot threads and see for yourself.

Really? Then why do so many people think the UK bomb plot is fake, made up by the government - and they forecast that shortly the government will be forced to confess it was all a big mistake, and that the "plotters" are completely innocent?

Any one of those people on NationStates posted such thing? If not, you're just looking forward to taking a bath with Halal soap.

Ocean thinks militant Islam is a joke, and not real.
Ocean isn't in this thread so far, is he? So his opinions hardly seem relevant to the present conversation, do they? And how many posters can you name who agree with him? I haven't seen many. In fact, I can't think of any, off hand.

Ocean isn't in this thread so far, is he? So his opinions hardly seem relevant to the present conversation, do they? And how many posters can you name who agree with him? I haven't seen many. In fact, I can't think of any, off hand.

Tell you what.

I'll make a thread tomorrow morning, with a poll - a public poll, to show who voted for what.

With no options except:

1. Militant Islam is a threat to the West.
2. Militant Islam isn't a threat to the West.

We'll see once and for all, won't we?

You aren't on often enough. And I'm tired of hearing people deny they said it. Tired of people saying no one ever said it. Tired of having to quote it again and again and again.

And tired of Gauthier saying Muslims aren't to blame - they most certainly are, and their religion most certainly is.
I think you might not be on the forum as often as you think you are. In other words, I think you dream a lot of these things.

Yes, there are a FEW paranoid people who have suspected that the UK bomb threat was a fake. They are the same as or similar to the people who think 9/11 was perpetrated by the US or Israel, and possibly the people who think the moon mission was faked, too. So what? There are always a few nuts rolling around -- especially when you show up (zing!) -- but I defy you to show that this is a widespread view on this forum.

Tell you what.

I'll make a thread tomorrow morning, with a poll - a public poll, to show who voted for what.

With no options except:

1. Militant Islam is a threat to the West.
2. Militant Islam isn't a threat to the West.

We'll see once and for all, won't we?

Right. Of course your definition is "Militant Islam" is "Muslims as a whole" while most people think of "Militant Islam" as "Those crazy extremists who make the rest of the Muslims look bad to where you have certain people calling for them to be shipped off to Allah-schwitz for good."

You aren't on often enough. And I'm tired of hearing people deny they said it. Tired of people saying no one ever said it. Tired of having to quote it again and again and again.

And tired of Gauthier saying Muslims aren't to blame - they most certainly are, and their religion most certainly is.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Deep Kimchi finally fesses up to the truth: He's a lifetime subscriber to the Billy Graham/Pat Roberson/Jerry Falwell/Oh WTF everyone in the PTL Ministries theory of "Islam is a Wicked and Evil Religion - even more than Paganism."

For someone who claims to be amoral you certainly have a masturbatory obcession with seeing each and every Muslim dead.

Tell you what.

I'll make a thread tomorrow morning, with a poll - a public poll, to show who voted for what.

With no options except:

1. Militant Islam is a threat to the West.
2. Militant Islam isn't a threat to the West.

We'll see once and for all, won't we?
See what? How many loons are on NS at the given moment? Go right ahead. If a majority pick option 2, I'll just have to lengthen the "Loon" column in my catalogue of people to avoid. (You're in that column, btw.)

I don't expect that a majority would pick option 2, but be that as it may. I still don't see how that crazy opinion is relevant to this conversation. No one here is pushing it, so why are you bringing it up? Why are you trying to invalidate our opinions by comparing them to an opinion we do not believe in? Eh? And let's dive into your fantasy and say, for the sake of argument, that a majority of NSer's would pick option 2 -- what does that have to do with those of us in this thread who do not think that way?

Ladies and Gentlemen, Deep Kimchi finally fesses up to the truth: He's a lifetime subscriber to the Billy Graham/Pat Roberson/Jerry Falwell/Oh WTF everyone in the PTL Ministries theory of "Islam is a Wicked and Evil Religion - even more than Paganism."

For someone who claims to be amoral you certainly have a masturbatory obcession with seeing each and every Muslim dead.
Please, anyone who needs that truth shown to them now, just hasn't been paying attention.

OD is a fool and anyone who agrees with him is also a fool.
Change that to "agree with him on all things" sometimes I can agree with him on certian points as I can almost any poster

They may be few and far between but they are there

Some do and some don't. Same as it is with Jews and Muslims.

But there's no equivalency here.

Groups of intolerant Christians are a powerful force in American politics. Intolerant Jews have only recently formed a strange alliance with WASP neo-cons, and Muslims have very little power to speak of.

To say that intolerance within American Christian groups is the same as individual intolerant Jews and Muslims in America is absurd.

Why is it that when he criticizes one religious group for something they've done wrong, you leap up and say OMG BUT THE MUSLIMS DO IT TOO. Yes, Muslims do this sort of thing as well. Almost all groups have this problem - we can argue about the degree of the problem, but it's true that conservative Jewish, Christian and Muslim traditions all make women subservient.

Because the Islamic world is at this point in history much less liberal than its Jewish and Christian counterparts, the problem there is somewhat worse. What's needed is liberalization. Not what you're suggesting.
Most importantly, the overwhelming majority of posters on this forum live in countries where fundamentalist Muslims have precisely zero chance of holding power within their lifetime.

At the same time, the overwhelming majority of posters on this forum live in countries where Christianity is pervasive and Christians hold a tremendous amount of power. Furthermore, the majority of NS General posters are from America, a nation in which the radical religious Christians hold increasingly terrifying amounts of sway over our system of law.

As an American woman, I am worried to the sum of ZERO about Muslims oppressing me. However, the increasing radicalization of the Christian right wing is a very real danger to me and to my freedoms. They have already infringed upon my freedoms and my rights, and they are poised to do even more damage in the near future.

Forgive me, but I worry about the burglar in my home before I go out and try to defend other people's houses. I am far more concerned about the creeping Christianity-based misogyny that is becoming routine in my own nation, than I am concerned with the shocking (shocking!) revelation that Islam is a patriarchal religion that treats women like crap. Gosh, really? An Abrahamic religion that regards women as less than men? Who'da thunk it?

It's pragmatism, not Muslim-o-philia. Muslims are no danger to me. Christians are a constant and growing danger to me. My priorities will reflect this.

no, it isn't. any and all cultural institutions ought be confronted when they are stupid, evil, or just wrong on some front. it's how we make progress.
That's silly talk. The only confrontation, in this case, should be between the church members and the deacons. This has harmed no one not associated with the church, thus it is a church matter and only a church matter.

15 minutes after I replied to this thread my Baptist principal rang my doorbell and tried to get me to join there church. I'm kinda freeked out...

Ill be right back, i have to respond to the Pamela Anderson thread....

That's silly talk. The only confrontation, in this case, should be between the church members and the deacons. This has harmed no one not associated with the church, thus it is a church matter and only a church matter.
I don't think anybody here is proposing that we be empowered to take legal action against the church. What people are doing is discussing the subject. That's totally reasonable and fair.

I also think it's good for people to know about this sort of thing, because it generally ends up becoming more of a public issue sooner or later.

For instance, in my home community there was a church which decided it was whites-only based on some obscure passage in the Bible. Hey, it's their church and their business, right? Well, a few years down the road we found out that a certain candidate for mayor of our town was heartily supported by said church. That information was very valuable to me, since it let me know what kind of person that candidate was, so I could help prevent such a person from getting elected (hooray for voting!).

I don't think anybody here is proposing that we be empowered to take legal action against the church. What people are doing is discussing the subject. That's totally reasonable and fair.

I also think it's good for people to know about this sort of thing, because it generally ends up becoming more of a public issue sooner or later.

For instance, in my home community there was a church which decided it was whites-only based on some obscure passage in the Bible. Hey, it's their church and their business, right? Well, a few years down the road we found out that a certain candidate for mayor of our town was heartily supported by said church. That information was very valuable to me, since it let me know what kind of person that candidate was, so I could help prevent such a person from getting elected (hooray for voting!).


Apparently, the pastor who decided to fire this woman is on the city council. One wonders what this will do to his political career.

Apparently, the pastor who decided to fire this woman is on the city council. One wonders what this will do to his political career.
Heh, I missed that part. So, in this case, the "church matter" is actually of great public interest.

So I should add to my reply to Myrmidonisia: If there were a city council member who (for instance) believed that black people shouldn't be allowed to hold positions in the church, don't you think that would be of public interest? Well, I consider it of interest that there is a city council member who doesn't think women should be allowed to work in church. That's a person who holds a secular political post, and I don't believe for one tiny instant that his religious beliefs will be kept tightly closed behind the church doors.

However, the increasing radicalization of the Christian right wing is a very real danger to me and to my freedoms. They have already infringed upon my freedoms and my rights, and they are poised to do even more damage in the near future.



Im curious, what rights specifically have you had violated by Catholics? Are Catholic Priests knocking on your door grabbing you by the hair and dragging you to the mines for slave labor? Reproduction Rights? The Catholic church is not a governmental organization. It doesnt have the power,ability ,nor authority to grant or remove rights to anyone beyond religious issues. Rights are rules that are followed by government institutions.Everyone has an opinion and in a democracy, everyone votes, Catholics included. If your viewpoint loses then you havnt "lost" any rights as i see it.

Im curious, what rights specifically have you had violated by Catholics? Are Catholic Priests knocking on your door grabbing you by the hair and dragging you to the mines for slave labor? Reproduction Rights? The Catholic church is not a governmental organization. It doesnt have the power,ability ,nor authority to grant or remove rights to anyone beyond religious issues. Rights are rules that are followed by government institutions.Everyone has an opinion and in a democracy, everyone votes, Catholics included. If your viewpoint loses then you havnt "lost" any rights as i see it.
First of all, I don't believe I directly singled out Catholics. I said "Christians." Some Christians are Catholic; many are not. When a person is blocking me from getting into my doctor's office and is screaming Bible verses in my face, I usually don't pause to ask them what denomination of Christianity they follow.

Secondly, the movement to strip me of my right to privacy is lead by the Christian right wing, including the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has directly supported a variety of efforts to strip me of my right to privacy. They have directly supported efforts to block me and my loved ones from enjoying the same legal rights as other Americans based exclusively on our gender and the gender of our romantic partners. Legislation backed by the Catholic Church is directly responsible for my aunts being unable to legally and jointly adopt my three cousins. I could keep going, if you like.

The Catholic Church most definitely DOES have the power and ability to help take away my rights and freedoms. They have done so many times, and continue to try to do so. Of course, the Catholics are losing stature and power pretty quickly these days, so hopefully I will be able to safely ignore them some day.

First of all, I don't believe I directly singled out Catholics. I said "Christians." Some Christians are Catholic; many are not. When a person is blocking me from getting into my doctor's office and is screaming Bible verses in my face, I usually don't pause to ask them what denomination of Christianity they follow.
Ah, so you are like me.

When Islamic terrorists blow up something, I don't pause initially to ask which part of the heterodoxy of Islam they follow.

That usually comes later.

Secondly, the movement to strip me of my right to privacy is lead by the Christian right wing, including the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has directly supported a variety of efforts to strip me of my right to privacy. They have directly supported efforts to block me and my loved ones from enjoying the same legal rights as other Americans based exclusively on our gender and the gender of our romantic partners. Legislation backed by the Catholic Church is directly responsible for my aunts being unable to legally and jointly adopt my three cousins. I could keep going, if you like.

The Catholic Church most definitely DOES have the power and ability to help take away my rights and freedoms.

I think your confusing influence with the power to make policy. First of all the Catholic Church does not make laws. Backing Legislation for a policy doesnt give anyone the power over anything. I back all sorts of legislation.
Legislation only works when a majority of lawmakers in Congress vote in favor of a policy. So if you have a problem with legislation, the proper place to place yourt critisizm is with the Congress, President and the Judicial Branch. All of which you have some control over. Are you suggesting that Catholoics shouldnt have the right to vote thier conciences despite the fact they disagree with you?

A guy yelling Bible passages at you is annoying but its not against your rights. And im willing to bet you managed to get inside your Doctors office just fine.

Heh, I missed that part. So, in this case, the "church matter" is actually of great public interest.

So I should add to my reply to Myrmidonisia: If there were a city council member who (for instance) believed that black people shouldn't be allowed to hold positions in the church, don't you think that would be of public interest? Well, I consider it of interest that there is a city council member who doesn't think women should be allowed to work in church. That's a person who holds a secular political post, and I don't believe for one tiny instant that his religious beliefs will be kept tightly closed behind the church doors.
That's different than what happens in the church. Like I said, if it isn't a public issue, it's church business. If there is an election or a public office holder involved, their participation is a public issue. But it's their participation that is the issue, not the church policy.

That's different than what happens in the church. Like I said, if it isn't a public issue, it's church business. If there is an election or a public office holder involved, their participation is a public issue. But it's their participation that is the issue, not the church policy.

The problem for him is whether or not the electorate in the town shares his views on women in positions of authority over men.

Ah, so you are like me.

When Islamic terrorists blow up something, I don't pause initially to ask which part of the heterodoxy of Islam they follow.

That usually comes later.
Yeah but unlike physical confrontation you have the time to think and analyze here and find out such stuff about their religion (I know both me and bottle try on the forums)

If you still don’t take the time despite you being comfortably in front of a computer without the physical immediacy then that is just lazyness

Im curious, what rights specifically have you had violated by Catholics? Are Catholic Priests knocking on your door grabbing you by the hair and dragging you to the mines for slave labor? Reproduction Rights? The Catholic church is not a governmental organization. It doesnt have the power,ability ,nor authority to grant or remove rights to anyone beyond religious issues. Rights are rules that are followed by government institutions.Everyone has an opinion and in a democracy, everyone votes, Catholics included. If your viewpoint loses then you havnt "lost" any rights as i see it.
I have had my rights removed by the catholic church … not legally removed but removed none the less

Yeah but unlike physical confrontation you have the time to think and analyze here and find out such stuff about their religion (I know both me and bottle try on the forums)

If you still don’t take the time despite you being comfortably in front of a computer without the physical immediacy then that is just lazyness

The pause is a few seconds. I know, I know, computers run faster than that.

The problem for him is whether or not the electorate in the town shares his views on women in positions of authority over men.
Sure. If he accepts the church policy, that's information that the electorate should know. What the deacons decide to do with their church isn't the issue. Now, if one of those deacons were to hold a public office, their acceptance or promotion of the policy would be an issue. And so on...

I have had my rights removed by the catholic church … not legally removed but removed none the less

Please be clearer, if your going to counter my claim then you need a bit of supporting information ;)

Sure. If he accepts the church policy, that's information that the electorate should know. What the deacons decide to do with their church isn't the issue. Now, if one of those deacons were to hold a public office, their acceptance or promotion of the policy would be an issue. And so on...

He's the one who came up with the policy.

Not surprising;

I think perhaps that the Is militant Islam a threat to the West thread http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=496945 should be expanded to include should Are religions a threat to world peace?

That's different than what happens in the church. Like I said, if it isn't a public issue, it's church business. If there is an election or a public office holder involved, their participation is a public issue. But it's their participation that is the issue, not the church policy.
As I said, I think it's fine for people to want to discuss what a church is up to. It may not be their business to intervene in the situation, but that doesn't mean they can't talk about it if the subject interests them. That's what people are doing here.

Please be clearer, if your going to counter my claim then you need a bit of supporting information ;)
3 years of molestation of me and three friends in the 1990’s enabled by the Catholic Church playing hide the pedophile after his first committal in the 1970’s. He was a known molester and they put him in charge of a massive church and in charge of an K-6 Elementary school. Then they fought paying for real therapy (they wanted me to just go to some sort of priest to “Confess my sins” instead) for 8 years or so because it would be admitting guilt.

Through that one of the three committed suicide because unlike my parents (who drained their retirement funds) could not afford therapy for him.

In the end I call that removing someone’s rights … though maybe I am a bit hopeful that people have the right to not get molested, and to not be put in danger by an organization that knows someone is a threat to children.

I think your confusing influence with the power to make policy. First of all the Catholic Church does not make laws. Backing Legislation for a policy doesnt give anyone the power over anything. I back all sorts of legislation.

I said that my rights and freedoms are threatened by Christianity. That statement is simple fact, regardless of whether or not Christian organizations are empowered to pass laws.


Legislation only works when a majority of lawmakers in Congress vote in favor of a policy. So if you have a problem with legislation, the proper place to place yourt critisizm is with the Congress, President and the Judicial Branch. All of which you have some control over. Are you suggesting that Catholoics shouldnt have the right to vote thier conciences despite the fact they disagree with you?

I never said they didn't have the right to infringe on my freedoms. Our system of government gives them the right to vote to take away my freedoms, just as you say. The fact that it is perfectly legal for them to do so does not change the fact that they are reducing my freedoms and attempting to reduce my rights.

It is perfectly legal for a racist organization to lobby to try to get black citizens returned to slavery. I will defend a racist organization's right to do this, as it is protected by the Constitution. However, that does not change the fact that they are attempted to take away the rights and freedoms of black citizens.

The Catholic Church has been clearly and openly involved in numerous efforts to take away rights and freedoms that I currently enjoy. They generally do this through perfectly legal channels. The fact that it is legal does not change the fact that they are spending a lot of time, money, and energy trying to take away my rights and freedoms.

Does anyone else think this 'reverend' looks like grade-A prime Douchebag?
http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/0e/03/20060821120709990047
I assume he's one of those new fundies that take everything literally and has only recently taken over the parish. As a result, some poor old woman who's old enough to be his grandmother is booted out.
Someone should tell Fred Phelps that he's gay.
Also follow him around closely, and first time he bites into a ham sandwich, denounce him as a heretic and stone him.

The letter quoted the first epistle to Timothy: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."
I wonder: Does this mean if she did her classes in sign language she could come back?

Does anyone else think this 'reverend' looks like grade-A prime Douchebag?
http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/0e/03/20060821120709990047
I assume he's one of those new fundies that take everything literally and has only recently taken over the parish. As a result, some poor old woman who's old enough to be his grandmother is booted out.
Someone should tell Fred Phelps that he's gay.
Also follow him around closely, and first time he bites into a ham sandwich, denounce him as a heretic and stone him.


I wonder: Does this mean if she did her classes in sign language she could come back?
Yeah he looks like an ass

Yeah he looks like an ass
Looks awfully young to be a pastor.

He's the one who came up with the policy.
The deacons and congregation either support or oppose it. This wouldn't have been the first minister to be fired if this was an unpopular policy. That's church business. We don't question very many church policies, not bond drives, not missonary work, not song selections. This is just another one of those things that churches decide to do. Then people are free to stay or leave.

Incidentally, there are a large number of churches that don't allow women in leadership positions. It's not as if this were some isolated incident.

Looks awfully young to be a pastor.

Why? He looks like he is in his mid to late 20s.

Looks awfully young to be a pastor.
Ehh we have a few that come to campus that look that young or younger. I actually don’t know what denomination they are, I believe non denominational protestant but may be Baptist

They are asses though they are exactly like wesbrough (sp?) They come denouncing female collage students as whores (because they go to school) and all kinds of shit hoping to start a fight

Asses I don’t know what they really hope to accomplish

The deacons and congregation either support or oppose it. This wouldn't have been the first minister to be fired if this was an unpopular policy. That's church business. We don't question very many church policies, not bond drives, not missonary work, not song selections. This is just another one of those things that churches decide to do. Then people are free to stay or leave.

Incidentally, there are a large number of churches that don't allow women in leadership positions. It's not as if this were some isolated incident.
No but most of the time churches don’t change doctrine and fire someone that had been a teacher for twice as long then the pastor had been a live

No but most of the time churches don’t change doctrine and fire someone that had been a teacher for twice as long then the pastor had been a live
Like I said, it's not the pastor alone that sets church policy. I've been in more than one congregation that pushed for the deacons to fire a pastor that wasn't approved of.

I think I'll sit back and read now. We seem to be turning in circles.

1 Corinthians, 14:34-35: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

The Pastor probably found this passage and THEN used it to dispose of the woman and her "services"...

1 Corinthians, 14:34-35: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

The Pastor probably found this passage and THEN used it to dispose of the woman and her "services"...

IMHO, she's probably corrected him on Scripture (she's been teaching the Bible longer than he's been alive), and it pissed him off.

IMHO, she's probably corrected him on Scripture (she's been teaching the Bible longer than he's been alive), and it pissed him off.
I read elsewhere it could've been linked to internal politics and the letter was signed by the church clerk; the wife of the pastor.

Another quote that might've been used to justify the woman's dismissal.

Timothy 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.
2:13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
2:14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."

Now, I don't endorse this kind of BS, this is just probably the biblical quote they could've used. And, as we all know, there is a biblical quote for every situation... when taken out of context of course.

2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

Indeed. So shut your hole momma, your 5 year old son commands it !

Indeed. So shut your hole momma, your 5 year old son commands it !
Says you and what army?

Says you and what army?

Well.. 33% of the worlds population identifies itself as Christian. Surely they would rise up against a woman who ignores those rules written in Holy Book ;) ?

Well.. 33% of the worlds population identifies itself as Christian. Surely they would rise up against a woman who ignores those rules written in Holy Book ;) ?
Oh and what pecentage of that little statistic is "female"? That would reduce your number as woman don't always want to be submissive little lambs.

Oh and what pecentage of that little statistic is "female"? That would reduce your number as woman don't always want to be submissive little lambs.

But then they would violate the most holy words of the Bible ! ;)

But then they would violate the most holy words of the Bible ! ;)
Men do when they... touch themselves in the bathroom.

That's silly talk. The only confrontation, in this case, should be between the church members and the deacons. This has harmed no one not associated with the church, thus it is a church matter and only a church matter.

they harm me by existing, by trying to promote and maintain bad shit in my culture. the fact that i am not a member of their organization does not matter in the slightest. to say otherwise is to say that you want to live in a culture that approves of sexism and stupidity.

they harm me by existing, by trying to promote and maintain bad shit in my culture. the fact that i am not a member of their organization does not matter in the slightest. to say otherwise is to say that you want to live in a culture that approves of sexism and stupidity.

Are you also _equally_ anti-boy scouts for their lack of gay leaders, anti- race/gender quota system in govt. contracting/colleges for its lack of meritocracy, anti- Medicare/aid for its redistributive nature, anti- abortion clinics, anti- abortion abolitionists etc etc. There's a lot of 'bad shit' in a given culture; you've got to choose your battles carefully to avoid wasting your time and resources fixing them.

Some people making a fool of their religion isn't the worst by a long shot.

There's a lot of 'bad shit' in a given culture; you've got to choose your battles carefully to avoid wasting your time and resources fixing them.

Some people making a fool of their religion isn't the worst by a long shot.

well obviously. but since the amount of effort i've used here is negligible, it doesn't seem like an issue. i don't recall anyone organizing mass protests or general strikes over this.

Indeed. So shut your hole momma, your 5 year old son commands it !

Children, HONOR they MOTHER and thy father.

They aren't sexist because they're Christian, in other words, any more than KKK members are racist because they're in the KKK.
Not every Christian is sexist nor is every Jew or Muslim.

Most people are hypocrites, so, since Christians are people...
I don't know about that, and the fact that he highlighted Christians among all humans really says something.

Why does the US atheist left think that every Christian is an intolerant southern baptist?

Seriously, the US liberals on NS are one of the most virulently anti-Christian groups I've ever seen. It's like they're unable to differentiate between conservatives and Christians.

The point which you miss is that people shouldn't hold their own beliefs as enlightened and superior to another
You mean I can't hold the doctrine of human rights superior to patriarchy and forced rapings? Fuck that. How can you condemn anything without holding an alternative superior?

When I criticise war, I'm saying that peace is better than war and I believe that with all my heart.

Not as much as we're tired of hearing you say each and every single Muslim is a member of the Jihadist movement and that they all need to be wiped clean from existence.
You're both fucking irritants. DK's a maniac for obvious reasons. You're a paranoid, kneejerking freak who thinks that any criticism of Islamists is an attack on every Muslim.

When people bash me, I will bash back. When people make fun of others, I will do the same. When I get insulted for my opinions, I will insult back.
Cos Jesus was all about counter attack and revenge, right?

Not every Christian is sexist nor is every Jew or Muslim.


I don't know about that, and the fact that he highlighted Christians among all humans really says something.

Why does the US atheist left think that every Christian is an intolerant southern baptist?


Personaly have had more of an issue with Catholics then Baptists

Not every Christian is sexist nor is every Jew or Muslim.

Never said they were. Indeed, I have many non-sexist friends who are Christian, Jewish, or Muslim.

I happen to believe that certain religious denominations are more likely to attract sexist jackasses than others. Kind of like how the KKK is more likely to attract racist jackasses than, say, the International Federation of Frisbee Enthusiasts. This doesn't mean that those religious denominations are the CAUSE of sexism, any more than the KKK is the reason why racism exists.

There are religious denominations that are essentially all about patriarchy. That's really all they worship, when you cut through the magical fairies and other such BS. There are also lots of religious denominations that are NOT only about patriarchy. The existence of the one does not preclude the existence of the other.

I'm a big believer in do unto others as they would have them do unto you. I am also a big believer in an Eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

I'm a big believer in do unto others as they would have them do unto you. I am also a big believer in an Eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
Erm... 0_o

... You confuse me more and more each time I try to put a finger on you.

I'm a big believer in do unto others as they would have them do unto you. I am also a big believer in an Eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.



Sure, no conflict there. :rolleyes:

Not every Christian is sexist nor is every Jew or Muslim.


I don't know about that, and the fact that he highlighted Christians among all humans really says something.

Why does the US atheist left think that every Christian is an intolerant southern baptist?

Seriously, the US liberals on NS are one of the most virulently anti-Christian groups I've ever seen. It's like they're unable to differentiate between conservatives and Christians.


You mean I can't hold the doctrine of human rights superior to patriarchy and forced rapings? Fuck that. How can you condemn anything without holding an alternative superior?

When I criticise war, I'm saying that peace is better than war and I believe that with all my heart.


You're both fucking irritants. DK's a maniac for obvious reasons. You're a paranoid, kneejerking freak who thinks that any criticism of Islamists is an attack on every Muslim.


Cos Jesus was all about counter attack and revenge, right?
I want your children. That has to be one of the best posts on NS ever.

Sure, no conflict there. :rolleyes:

You heathen! There is no conflict! It's easy, just like saying you're against abortions because you value human life then advocating the Death Penalty.

You heathen! There is no conflict! It's easy, just like saying you're against abortions because you value human life then advocating the Death Penalty.


Forgive me. I see now the error of my ways. :D

You mean I can't hold the doctrine of human rights superior to patriarchy and forced rapings? Fuck that. How can you condemn anything without holding an alternative superior?

When I criticise war, I'm saying that peace is better than war and I believe that with all my heart.

Forced rapings? Gee, I didn't know there was such a thing as consensual rape.

:rolleyes:

You mean to say Christian-based faiths are superior because they don't have patriarchy and rape? Let's ask all those women and children who bailed out of Warren Jeff's Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter-Day Saints if they think Christians don't condone patriarchy and rapes. Or how about the women of the Branch Davidians? Oh wait, they're all dead.

You're both fucking irritants. DK's a maniac for obvious reasons. You're a paranoid, kneejerking freak who thinks that any criticism of Islamists is an attack on every Muslim.

Funny, when people criticize Islamists alone, I don't make much of a fuss. Of course when you see me comment on an attack, it's because somewhere along the line somebody implies that "Jihadists = All Muslims". That gets on my nerves. Plus all the "Christianity/Judaism is superior because they don't behead people" is the most trite and annoying apology line I've ever heard. So what? What happened to "He who has commited no sin cast the first stone?" Everyone's pitching rocks like it was the World Series. Just because an intolerant group doesn't stoop to murder it's okay for them to be intolerant? My aren't we selective.

At the same time, the overwhelming majority of posters on this forum live in countries where Christianity is pervasive and Christians hold a tremendous amount of power.
What is wrong with Christians holding power if they don't force Christianity on the population. This is more bullshit that makes out that radical Christianity is equally violent as radical Islam, despite the empirical evidence that indicates Islamism to be the more violent of the two.

Right-wing Christians may threaten our freedom but right-wing Muslims threaten our very lives.

Haven't you yourself said in the past that the winds of change are against the Christian right? Why worry?

Muslims are no danger to me.
In your post you're basically claiming that moderately conservative Christian policies like not being allowed to get an abortion are worse than being blown up in a building.

I have had my rights removed by the catholic church … not legally removed but removed none the less
If your rights were illegally removed, then you'll be able to sue the criminal who took them.

I said that my rights and freedoms are threatened by Christianity.

They're threatened to a greater degree by Islam. (see, notice how I said Islam and not "Islamism".... anyone can be bigoted)

Personaly have had more of an issue with Catholics then Baptists
Right, you think every Catholic is a peaodophile or an apologist for them.

I'm a big believer in do unto others as they would have them do unto you. I am also a big believer in an Eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
I don't believe in the latter and I don't think that can be compatible with the former.

I want your children. That has to be one of the best posts on NS ever.
Oh, no it isn't! :fluffle:

You heathen! There is no conflict! It's easy, just like saying you're against abortions because you value human life then advocating the Death Penalty.
Yeah, that's the bs I'm talking aboot.

snip

Right, you think every Catholic is a peaodophile or an apologist for them.


snip
Where the fuck did I say that?

I never ever EVER thought anything of the sort hell my whole frigging family is still catholic but me.

I ment what I said I have had more ISSUES with cathoics weather it be some of the crazys that broke into our city lan party to protest world of warcraft as a demonic game to the cathoic crazys that come to campus. its probably the simple fact that there are more of them in the area (Catholics that is)


And here I was thinking you were a reasonable poster …way to prove me way wrong

Forced rapings? Gee, I didn't know there was such a thing as consensual rape.
A trait of contemporary ultra-conservative Islamic societies, not ultra-conservative Christian societies.

:rolleyes:

You mean to say Christian-based faiths are superior because they
don't have patriarchy and rape?
Yes.

Let's ask all those women and children who bailed out of Warren Jeff's Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter-Day Saints if they think Christians don't condone patriarchy and rapes. Or how about the women of the Branch Davidians? Oh wait, they're all dead.
These groups are so obscure and tiny in number that they are negligible in the overall picture of tolerance that is western Christianity.

Of course when you see me comment on an attack, it's because somewhere along the line somebody implies that "Jihadists = All Muslims".
Actually, it's often when you think they do, even though they don't. When challenged about it, you say "well DK thinks so".

Plus all the "Christianity/Judaism is superior because they don't behead people" is the most trite and annoying apology line I've ever heard. So what?
Human rights. You think that not beheading people is just as bad as beheading people?

Just because an intolerant group doesn't stoop to murder it's okay for them to be intolerant?
No, it just makes them not as bad as the group that does kill. Is that hard to grasp?

Do you have any respect for universal human rights (http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm), or is that "bigoted cultural imperialism"?

My aren't we selective.
Yes, you are pretty fucking selective. You habitually dismiss Islamist atrocities with "well Christians do a less extreme form of this".

And here I was thinking you were a reasonable poster …way to prove me way wrong
If you and other US leftists don't oppose Christianity, then why do you invent conspiracy theories and blow the threat all out of proportion?

Why are you unable to differentiate between Christians and conservatives? Why do US liberals think that all Christians are right-wing?

snip
If your rights were illegally removed, then you'll be able to sue the criminal who took them.

snip
We did ... but you know how much money a farming family has in the middle of minnesota when the catholic church was intent on protecting its rep?

We ended up with a plea because we could not afford our time much less the rest of my parents money on it.

If you and other US leftists don't oppose Christianity, then why do you invent conspiracy theories and blow the threat all out of proportion?

Why are you unable to differentiate between Christians and conservatives? Why do US liberals think that all Christians are right-wing?
Way to snip everything else … you sit here and blindly classify me as a liberal and then project intents based on that classification yet the post I quoted you try to demonize me as the one that thinks every Catholic person acts certain ways :rolleyes:

We did ... but you know how much money a farming family has in the middle of minnesota when the catholic church was intent on protecting its rep?
I'm sorry to hear your story, there are way too many like this. Parts of the Catholic are corrupt but I don't see why you need to pin it on all of us, or politicise it.

Way to snip everything else … you sit here and blindly classify me as a liberal and then project intents based on that classification yet the post I quoted you try to demonize me as the one that thinks every Catholic person acts certain ways :rolleyes:
You are liberal (I've seen your posts), and that is a good thing. You're saving your country from the Busheviks.

I'm talking about the opinion I'm seeing expressed by several posters here that radical Christianity is less tolerant than radical Islam.

I think these people don't believe that. They're just disagreeing with DK and the like for the sake of disagreement.

A trait of contemporary ultra-conservative Islamic societies, not ultra-conservative Christian societies.

You're implying of course that no nation ever founded in history based off of Christian values were ever repressive.

Spanish Inquisition
England under Cromwell's Protectorate
American Puritan Colonies

Just a few examples. But of course that's in the past so it's okay to let it go. Again, very selective of you.

:rolleyes:

These groups are so obscure and tiny in number that they are negligible in the overall picture of tolerance that is western Christianity.

Another thing that disgusts me. The Numbers Game. "There isn't as much of them as those damn dirty 3b1l m0zl3mz so it's okay to keep them around and not count them against Christianity."

Actually, it's often when you think they do, even though they don't. When challenged about it, you say "well DK thinks so".

Can you provide a link where I've jumped on a case where they only criticized Jihadists alone and someone *didn't* slip in a remark or assumption that Muslims as a whole are in cahoots with them?

Human rights. You think that not beheading people is just as bad as beheading people?


No, it just makes them not as bad as the group that does kill. Is that hard to grasp?

Do you have any respect for universal human rights (http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm), or is that "bigoted cultural imperialism"?

"They don't kill people so it's okay to let them continue oppressing select groups." Another case of Major League Baseball in a glass house.

Yes, you are pretty fucking selective. You habitually dismiss Islamist atrocities with "well Christians do a less extreme form of this".

Nice way to distort and exaggerate my point. Did you take lessons from Karl Rove and Dick Cheney? The point is "Physician, Heal Thyself." If you're going to whine and bitch about the problems with another religion, then a good housecleaning in your own folds is in order beforehand.

I'm a big believer in do unto others as they would have them do unto you. I am also a big believer in an Eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

Sure, no conflict there. :rolleyes:

Well, there wouldn't be if Corneliu knew what he was talking about. Ever.

But in the Bible, "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth," is a mitagatory statement, not a compulsory one. Meaning if someone steals your goat, the worst penalty that the community can exact on him is to take away a goats worth of his stuff. Not chop off his hand, burn him, or hang him.

In other words, it's "No more than an eye for an eye," not "at least an eye for an eye."

But Corneliu believes in the Hamurabi version because he's a hypocrite.

Oh and what pecentage of that little statistic is "female"? That would reduce your number as woman don't always want to be submissive little lambs.

Well, the choice is theirs. They can just go to hell if they prefer. ;)

You're implying of course that no nation ever founded in history based off of Christian values were ever repressive.
The butchery of the past is irrelevant to the present.

Another thing that disgusts me. The Numbers Game. "There isn't as much of them as those damn dirty 3b1l m0zl3mz so it's okay to keep them around and not count them against Christianity."
I don't want to keep them around, but it does matter that literalist extremists are a disdained minority in Christianity, but that they are relatively mainstream, and even glorified in certain societies, within Islam.

Numbers matter. It's useful to judge the magnitude of crimes by how many people got killed.

Please stop putting word like "dirty evil Muslims" in my mouth. I'm not a bigot and I won't let you portray me as one.

Can you provide a link where I've jumped on a case where they only criticized Jihadists alone and someone *didn't* slip in a remark or assumption that Muslims as a whole are in cahoots with them?
Maybe I will go and find such a post. Just every post I see by you, involves your target being attacked by you for allegedly being racist against Muslims.

Here's (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11574731&postcount=26) an example of your usual paranoia:
Not too off-topic considering it's the boldest example of how the West perceives Muslims as a whole, lumping them together with Islamist groups like Al-Qaeda.
Westerners do not, as a whole, think that Muslims are terrorists. The opinions of DM and DK are regarded as extreme.

"They don't kill people so it's okay to let them continue oppressing select groups." Another case of Major League Baseball in a glass house.
Another thing I don't believe. I believe in criticism proportional to the level of human rights abuse. Human rights in certain Muslim societies are much greater than in Western secular societies, so I criticise proportionately. I am actually quite active in dismantling discrimination in my own country and the west in general.

You seem to believe that everyone who criticises Islamic fundamentalism never criticises the west.

Nice way to distort and exaggerate my point.
You do it all the time, why can't I?

The point is "Physician, Heal Thyself." If you're going to whine and bitch about the problems with another religion, then a good housecleaning in your own folds is in order beforehand.
Western Christians have mostly moderated, calmed down, abandoned literalism and embraced secular values.

In Middle Eastern Islam, however, literalism is still mainstream.

I'm sorry to hear your story, there are way too many like this. Parts of the Catholic are corrupt but I don't see why you need to pin it on all of us, or politicise it.
Please show me where I pinned it on all of you? Please. The only time I have used that past experience is to criticize the organization not the followers. Im sorry if you have a problem with that but I don’t see how it qualifies you to make the accusations that you have or put the words in my mouth that I never spoke.

You are liberal (I've seen your posts), and that is a good thing. You're saving your country from the Busheviks.

I'm talking about the opinion I'm seeing expressed by several posters here that radical Christianity is less tolerant than radical Islam.

I think these people don't believe that. They're just disagreeing with DK and the like for the sake of disagreement.
Yeah some people have done that

All I made was a simple observation that personally I have had more issues with Catholics then Baptist… that had very little to do with that molestation episode and more on the fact that this area is predominantly catholic instead Baptist.

Fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam are both intolerant, bigoted, hateful, and what not. Arguing about which is more so is pointless.

From the perspective of someone who is neither Christian nor Muslim, the fundamentalists in both look so very similar.

Fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam are both intolerant, bigoted, hateful, and what not. Arguing about which is more so is pointless.

From the perspective of someone who is neither Christian nor Muslim, the fundamentalists in both look so very similar.

THANK YOU! I get so sick of the "your religion is worse than my religion" debates, so negative and counterproductive

<snip>
I don't know about that, and the fact that he highlighted Christians among all humans really says something.
I think it says that, in the context of this particular thread, he was expressing a personal opinion about Christians.

Why does the US atheist left think that every Christian is an intolerant southern baptist?
I don't know. I'm not a member of that group.

Seriously, the US liberals on NS are one of the most virulently anti-Christian groups I've ever seen. It's like they're unable to differentiate between conservatives and Christians.
I think you should read people's posts more carefully. Yes, there are some very anti-religion people here who often deliver blanket condemnations, but there are also people who have more subtle opinions and express rather close and refined criticisms.

I'm a big believer in do unto others as they would have them do unto you. I am also a big believer in an Eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
So ... you want someone to put out your eye and knock out your teeth? :confused:

So ... you want someone to put out your eye and knock out your teeth? :confused:

A few have tried in real life. They failed.

What is wrong with Christians holding power if they don't force Christianity on the population. This is more bullshit that makes out that radical Christianity is equally violent as radical Islam, despite the empirical evidence that indicates Islamism to be the more violent of the two.
First off, there is nothing wrong with anyone of any religion being in a position of power IF they don't force their religion on the population. But your own use of the word IF undermines your argument, because the rightwing Christians who are seeking political power in the US are doing so for the express purpose of forcing their religion on the population by making national law conform to their interpretation of their scriptures.

Second, they don't have to be as violent as radical Islamic terrorists to pose a greater and more immediate threat -- just like Saddam Hussein posed no immediate threat to the US despite his extreme violence as dictator of Iraq. There are fewer terrorists in the US than there are radical rightwing Christians seeking policital power (we hope). The terrorists can kill me, but they have no power to make me afraid or to pervert my values or to take away my sense of pride in being myself and an American. Radical rightwing Christians seeking political power can do all of that by creating laws that will destroy my freedom as a woman and by turning my country into an authoritarian theocracy. If they succeed, that is.

Right-wing Christians may threaten our freedom but right-wing Muslims threaten our very lives.
I can't speak for Bottle or anyone else, but I personally don't think a life without freedom is worth living.

If you and other US leftists don't oppose Christianity, then why do you invent conspiracy theories and blow the threat all out of proportion?

Why are you unable to differentiate between Christians and conservatives? Why do US liberals think that all Christians are right-wing?
Why are you assuming that everyone who disagrees with you is a leftist?

A few have tried in real life. They failed.
You poor thing. You must be so disappointed, but at least they tried to give you something you desire.

Fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam are both intolerant, bigoted, hateful, and what not. Arguing about which is more so is pointless.

From the perspective of someone who is neither Christian nor Muslim, the fundamentalists in both look so very similar.
hear, hear.

You poor thing. You must be so disappointed, but at least they tried to give you something you desire.

They took a swing and missed me. They wound up on the butts.

The butchery of the past is irrelevant to the present.
<snip>
So, does that mean we can forget about the Holocaust and the US Indian Wars?

Numbers matter. It's useful to judge the magnitude of crimes by how many people got killed.
<snip>
Oh, but wait, does this mean we should never forget the 6 million and should remember Wounded Knee, too?

They took a swing and missed me. They wound up on the butts.
Another joke missed. :( Not surprising, considering the two biblical principles you try to hold in your brain at the same time. Poor, confused Corneliu.

Another joke missed. :( Not surprising, considering the two biblical principles you try to hold in your brain at the same time. Poor, confused Corneliu.

Ohh me not confused at all Muravyets.