[Shrike]

Kazan, you're making yourself look like a close-minded ass.  Stop it.  

[Warlock]

You know....IF Lib had "stepped up to the plate" and said he was wrong.... all it would prove is that he wasn't a relgious person after all. Why? Because the entire concept of any religion is based on FAITH[/i][/u]. By shear definition it can not be 'logical' and can not be proven. I could see being pissy with someone who is trying to force his or her religious belief on you, but someone who is defending that belief, as that right, whether you think they're wrong or right is meaningless. Debating the issue is one thing. Showing that you're a spoiled ass is another. Let the man have his faith, for some ppl faith is all they have. If you want to debate it with him, have some human decency and at least fake being civil,....curse out loud if you must,...call him childish little names that make you feel better,.. that may be reactionary...but you don't have to type it.

I have to say....while I may not agree with Lib...I respect the man for the simple fact he hasn't acted disrespectful to those that disrespected him. You don't need to respect his belief....respect his right to believe.

[Disclaimer] I don't give a **** if this pisses anyone off or if it makes me a target for the childish comments,...but damn someone had to say it.
[/Disclaimer]

[diamondgeezer]

Warlock, it's not that Lib expresses his opinions on a public forum - far from it, debate is what our society shoud in theory be about.

What I don't like is the fact that by using his powers as, say, a voter for example, he may be able to adversely affect the lives of perfectly innocent, law-abiding people simply because they're a little different from his ideal person. Despite Kazan's blatant hipocrasy in preaching his own views like a foaming-at-the-mouth zealot, his point about educating the young is valid. What if Liberator were to become a teacher and instill his views in the impresionably minds of two dozen kiddies... well, you make your own mind up about the consequences of that one.

Luckily history is on the side of reason, and no doubt Lib's grandchildren will wonder how their grandaddy could ever had held such views - just like the concept of black oppression in the time of Martin Luther King is almost unimaginable to me today

[Kazan]

Warlock: i was talking about him admitting he was wrong about condoms which don't enter into his religion at all


Shrike: How So

mikhael: If he takes a pop shot in parting he's not bowing out gracefully - he if merely says "i cannot defeat you guys in argument" or some other thing that doesn't have a pop shot embedded he may leave (but not expect this to be over)

[Bri_Dog]

So, when does the theological dictatorship take over?

[Flipside]

Fair enough Warlock, but it must also be bourne in mind that he made an awful lot of comments about homosexuals that were 'disrespectful' as in they were both un-researched and flame-invoking. Liberator has made it clear he does not believe that gays should have equal rights purely because they are gay.
In a multi-cultural board, that is verbal acetylene.
While I respect Lib's religion, even if I don't agree with it, I CANNOT stand by and watch people make blithe comments about a group of people who include good friends of mine, especially considering it is apparent that the person was making generalised, stereotyped statements. That is nothing to do with religion, simply to do with lack of understanding.

If theres one thing that needs to go into the HLP FAQ, it's 'if you haven't got evidence, don't say it'

[Kazan]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer
Despite Kazan's blatant hipocrasy in preaching his own views like a foaming-at-the-mouth zealot,

Excuse me? Foaming at the mouth zealots cannot justify their position




I have lost all patience with fundie bigots

[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by Liberator
I give up, I'm butting my head against a wall here.  I don't know what it's composed of except that I get a sense that you are all on some level very unhappy people.  You may not even realize it, but someday I hope you will.  May God bless you.

Originally posted by Kazan
And I'll take the blessing as it was intended - as sarcastic and an immature attempt to offend us by flaunting your piety as if it was something to be valued

I'm with Kazan on this one. You know, it strikes me as the highest form of condescension when a religionist tries to convince me of the righteousness of his religious beliefs, fails to do so and then says "God bless you." It's always struck me as meaning "Well, you're a dumbass for not believing for what I believe but since I can't win this argument, I'm just gonna cut my losses and forgive you for not believing what I know is true (even though I have no proof to back up my convictions) and I'll pray for God to forgive you too."

What do I need God's forgiveness for? I've done nothing that I need to atone for. And the concept that is central to so many religions (especially including Christianity) that I need to atone for my existence simply because I exist (because lots of people seem convinced that we're all irredeemable sinners unless we comply with their beliefs) is a belief that is anathema to everything I hold dear.

I know this world exists. I don't know of any afterlife. So it's plain and simple: I'm going to live my life that best that I can while I'm still here. Why waste this life when there is no proof of any other life?

Originally posted by Warlock
I have to say....while I may not agree with Lib...I respect the man for the simple fact he hasn't acted disrespectful to those that disrespected him. You don't need to respect his belief....respect his right to believe.

[Disclaimer] I don't give a **** if this pisses anyone off or if it makes me a target for the childish comments,...but damn someone had to say it. [/Disclaimer]

Libby can believe anything he wants. I have absolutely no beef with that. No one is disputing that. But this whole debate began with a constitutional amendment that, let's be honest, will take away a fundamental right to marriage to a group of Americans who want nothing more than to be treated equally. Libby's view is that they should not get that right. Libby is very much in favor of treating an entire group of people as second class citizens just because they don't meet his approval of "morality."

It plain for everyone to see that Libby wants to impose his beliefs (or allow those like himself to impose similar beliefs) on other people who do not share those beliefs. It is that imposition of values on people who don't share them (either by Liberator, DeepSpace9er or George W. Bush or anyone else) that I have a problem with.

EDIT: Kazan may have flown off the handle and said some stuff that MIGHT have been uncalled for, but in this sort of debate it's easy to get pissed off when fellow Americans want to deny their own countrymen equal rights to something we all take for granted. Hell, even I get pissed off sometimes, but my legal training makes it easier for me to keep my head. Kazan doesn't have that advantage of training to rein in his temper, but his arguments here have been thoughtful, concise and well-reasoned out.

That's more than Libby or DeepSpace9er were able to do.

[Warlock]

DG: I've got no prob with Lib expressing his views anywhere. I was actually trying to defend his right to express that without being attacked, verbally or otherwise. As far as his beliefs affecting his vote which in turn affects someone's life, happens everyday and has thus for 200 years or so.  Every man and woman that votes does so based off their beliefs. Be them religiously influenced, or otherwise. Sadly the "people's right to vote" has it's downsides. If they are more "Religious Nutcases" voting against the Marriage issue than there are voting for it....so be it, it's a MAJORITY vote. Besides, like any other law... it'll get hit with things to prevent it from actually being put into affect.

Kaz: Not from that post I read. You merely gave the man hell for giving up the debate with you. You've giving him and anyone that didn't agree with you hell through the whole thread. Not agreeing is fine, being forceful about it is fine, but insulting and just plain acting an ass is'nt. You want ppl to respect you and your views, respect them and theres. At least respect them and their right to have those views.

[diamondgeezer]

Originally posted by Warlock
Sadly the "people's right to vote" has it's downsides. If they are more "Religious Nutcases" voting against the Marriage issue than there are voting for it....so be it, it's a MAJORITY vote.

Yes, and I'd have to live with it cos that's exactly the kind of society I advocate. Annoys the hell out of me that I might  fight to defend that right only to have **** like that happen

Originally posted by Warlock
Kaz: You've giving him and anyone that didn't agree with you hell through the whole thread.

And the rest of the BB. All I'm after, Kaz, is some respectful tolerance from the man who preaches it's importance the loudest

[Ghostavo]

I think this covers it.

Read Articles 1, 7, 18, 20 but especially 16.

[mikhael]

And don't forget Article 30. Article 30 is VERY important because it affects the interpretation of Article 16.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer
And the rest of the BB. All I'm after, Kaz, is some respectful tolerance from the man who preaches it's importance the loudest

there is one thing that shouldn't be tolerated and that's bigotry

and i think yuo can understand that this week i have no patience for the likes of Lib and DS9er -- they're comiong out of the woodwork

[Stryke 9]

This week?

[Kazan]

stryke: normally i have more patience than i've had in this thread

[Bobboau]

you do?

[Kazan]

bob: with fundies


i think  my impatience with n00bs is incurable

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Warlock
DG: I've got no prob with Lib expressing his views anywhere. I was actually trying to defend his right to express that without being attacked, verbally or otherwise.

Of course Lib has that right but he's also making attacks of his own.

Originally posted by Liberator
I get a sense that you are all on some level very unhappy people.  You may not even realize it, but someday I hope you will.  May God bless you.

That's an attack. He's basically said that my life is unhappy because I do not agree with him. He then says that if I don't feel unhappy it's because I don't realise it. That's an insult to my intelligence right there.

What's worse is that he asked for facts to back up our arguement and when proved wrong he runs away rather than admitting he's wrong. That's pretty annoying and I don't consider it an attack to call him a coward for doing that. He should at least have the grace to admit he made mistake.

Kazan : While I can understand why you get annoyed with fundies (I do too) there is no need go to the extremes you're going to. I can understand why you'd need to if yours was the only voice giving the opposing arguement but the agnostics actually seem to outweigh the religious on this board. There are enough of us to trash the arguements of Lib and DS9er with out the need for shouting.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer

And the rest of the BB. All I'm after, Kaz, is some respectful tolerance from the man who preaches it's importance the loudest

[Corhellion]

*removed*