U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Western Washington
9,263 posts, read 8,584,747 times
Reputation: 15980

Advertisements

Oh, I am over it. You are quite clearly ok with seeing non-religious people harassed. I have no doubts on the matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 03:05 AM
 
Location: New York Area
16,329 posts, read 6,447,135 times
Reputation: 12584
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Maybe now would be an appropriate time to point out the fact that BF not only ignored the first two postings of these questions, but also the third.

Interestingly, BF has also posted about 10 different responses over 4 different threads in the past two days. I think it a reasonable conclusion that he is dodging the conversation.
One of the distinctions of religion from science is that religion's statements are not falsifiable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:18 AM
 
Location: WV and Eastport, ME
11,349 posts, read 11,115,908 times
Reputation: 7505
This is post #19. The relevant questions are:

What are your thoughts on institutional prayer in schools? Abortion? Military chaplains? Parsonage exemptions? 501c3 tax reporting requirements? “In God We Trust” mottos? 10 Commandments monuments? Same sex marriage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Really?

What are your thoughts on institutional prayer in schools? Abortion? Military chaplains? Parsonage exemptions? 501c3 tax reporting requirements? “In God We Trust” mottos? 10 Commandments monuments? Same sex marriage?

Sure, some of these things do not rise all the way to persecution, unless you define persecution the way Jeffbase does. In that case, each of these examples is persecution.
This is post #44. This part referred to and quoted post #19:

Since you seem to be in a mood to ask questions, and I have answered, maybe you could do me the same courtesy. Upthread I asked you this, but received no reply. How about it?

This was a request [again] asking for these questions to be answered:

What are your thoughts on institutional prayer in schools? Abortion? Military chaplains? Parsonage exemptions? 501c3 tax reporting requirements? “In God We Trust” mottos? 10 Commandments monuments? Same sex marriage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Do you mind me pointing out the irony in this statement? You are the one who keeps pulling in things like tattoos when Arleigh wants to discriminate in employment hiring on the basis of religion. Now you are bitter because I tried to anticipate your thoughts? If you want to be fair, then lets be fair in all things.



I did not say that a state cannot make a law regarding any sort of religious restriction. I don't believe that at all.

I said that a state cannot establish a religion. Very, very different. As an example, if a follower of a death cult has a sincere belief that they are allowed to kill a neighbor on a religious holiday, the state has an interest in restricting this action, as it infringes upon a different right.

This has also been upheld a number of times. I believe that Native American religions that view the ingestion of peyote as a religious sacrament do not override drug laws.

Since you seem to be in a mood to ask questions, and I have answered, maybe you could do me the same courtesy. Upthread I asked you this, but received no reply. How about it?
That was request #2. Somebody else had comment on the fact that the questions had not been answered. That lead to this comment:

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
He won't do that. I have asked him twice what the thought about a number of issues, and he has ignored the question both time.

The fact is, he does want the country run on Christian principles, and but he won't admit it. He wants to hide behind majority vote or some other irrelevant thing.
That lead to this comment:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
How about actually talking to me? Instead of arrogantly talking about me to another person? My goodness that's rude.

What questions have I missed of your's? You do realize I have a life, right? That I don't sit for hours and hours and hours 24/7 and wait for people like you to post questions to me?
That would make this request #3 to answer the questions asked in post #19:

Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
That would be posts #19 and #44 in this thread.
The questions were repeated for the 4th time in this post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Thank you Mensa.



I have talked to you quite a bit, and talking to another person about you is not rude. I was simply stating facts. We speak about people in the third person all the time. In fact, our language has an entire set of pronouns dedicated to this endeavor.

You are once again trying to change the subject from religious attempts at political domination via the political process to one of civility by making false accusations. You do this frequently rather than simply address the shortcomings of Christianity.




For your convenience, in case Mensa’s pointing out the post numbers was inadequate (I really hope Mensa does not consider it rude that we are talking about him). As we have experienced a bit of thread drift, will provide a bit if context. You had stated that no Christian wants to see non-Christians harassed, although you did use the word persecuted.
This post is the 5th request:

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Maybe now would be an appropriate time to point out the fact that BF not only ignored the first two postings of these questions, but also the third.

Interestingly, BF has also posted about 10 different responses over 4 different threads in the past two days. I think it a reasonable conclusion that he is dodging the conversation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
I did not follow that one, but I have seen enough dodging from BF to guess. I find that my interest in this forum vacillates wildly. I either enjoy the banter and debate, or the obfuscation and willful ignorance annoys me and I need to take some time off. The topic you refer to must have been in one of my off phases.
BaptistFundie, this post complete avoids the questions you were asked:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
I'm surprised to see you still on this. No one is dodging. I spoke plainly. transponder gave a faulty interpretation of the text and I corrected him. That's that. Show something new, or it's over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Really? Your answer to dodging is to simply deny you did it? Does the dishonesty in your life ever bother you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
And your answer to me simply correcting you is to say "nuh uh! is so!"

Get over it. It's done. Move on. Show a real question.
The questions have been asked of you 5 times. You have ignored them every time. The posts quoted here show that as clearly as the noon day sun.

Here are the questions you have ignored:

What are your thoughts on institutional prayer in schools? Abortion? Military chaplains? Parsonage exemptions? 501c3 tax reporting requirements? “In God We Trust” mottos? 10 Commandments monuments? Same sex marriage?


__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 06:45 AM
 
6,298 posts, read 1,779,133 times
Reputation: 939
Believe it or not, folks, I don't read every post in a thread. I'm guessing I'm like most people. Accuse me of dodging if you wish, but that's just the way it is. I have a life and I'm not always going to wait here to have someone attack me.

I'm not sure what it is exactly that you're asking of me. You just want my opinion? ok.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Really?

What are your thoughts on institutional prayer in schools?
It's not the public school system's place to teach my kid prayer. But legally, if a community were like minded enough, I see no issue with it. I know of places where 99% or more of the people are Mennonites. They pray in school. No one objects, because they're all in agreement.
Quote:

Abortion?
I will refrain from answering this, as this is a banned topic on this forum, to my knowledge. If the mods choose to allow it, I'll go to town on it.
Quote:
Military chaplains?
What about them? Why not? My understanding is that there are chaplains representing all sorts of religions, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam included.
Quote:
Parsonage exemptions?
It's reasonable. Most pastors pay more in taxes than you and I. They have to pay self-employment taxes on their income. The parsonage exemption is merely an exemption on their self-employment tax.
Quote:
501c3 tax reporting requirements?
I'm not a tax expert. What exactly are you asking about this? That a church should be non-profit? Why would we have issue with it?
Quote:
“In God We Trust” mottos?
What God? Why is this an issue?
Quote:
10 Commandments monuments?
Our nation has a Judeo-Christian heritage. Why is this an issue? In a courtroom or a park, I see no issue. It's not an endorsement of any religion, as there are many religions that reference them, and it's a cultural issue. Again, though, if a local area was predominantly a religion other than one that uses them, get rid of it. Put up some quotes from Gandhi. I don't care.
Quote:

Same sex marriage?
If the people vote to change it, then change it. But it's been defined as male/female as long as history records. But when the courts simply overrule the will of the people, that's an issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Western Washington
9,263 posts, read 8,584,747 times
Reputation: 15980
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
Believe it or not, folks, I don't read every post in a thread. I'm guessing I'm like most people. Accuse me of dodging if you wish, but that's just the way it is. I have a life and I'm not always going to wait here to have someone attack me.

I'm not sure what it is exactly that you're asking of me. You just want my opinion? ok.
Yes. I am interested in your opinion specifically because you said that you did not want to see non-Christians persecuted. As I noted earlier, the thread is about harassment, so I thought it interesting that you would change the word. Not sure if you think the two words are interchangeable, or if you think harrasssmwnt is ok while persecution is too far.

Quote:
It's not the public school system's place to teach my kid prayer. But legally, if a community were like minded enough, I see no issue with it. I know of places where 99% or more of the people are Mennonites. They pray in school. No one objects, because they're all in agreement.
So you see no problem with forcing the 1% to pray in a manner that they do not believe in? What if the vote is 52:48? Is it ok to force 48% of people to pray, presumably against the wishes of their parents?

It isn’t that nobody objects because they are all in agreement. Frequently nobody objects because they will be harassed if they do.

I will note that you are supporting something that is in violation of the constitution.

Quote:
What about them? Why not? My understanding is that there are chaplains representing all sorts of religions, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam included.
The vast majority, out of proportion to the population, are evangelical. Humanist chaplains have been rejected.

Quote:
It's reasonable. Most pastors pay more in taxes than you and I. They have to pay self-employment taxes on their income. The parsonage exemption is merely an exemption on their self-employment tax.
I will agree that ministers paying a self employment tax is a bit odd, but the concept of giving tax free housing is also inappropriate. Would it not be more fair to tax them in the way that everyone else is? Don’t you see that this is a huge loophole which can be structured in such a way as the skew compensation heavily towards the tax free portion of income, and is inherently unfair? How about self-employed atheist activists? They pay self-employment, but cannottake a$vantage of the parsonage 3xemption. Are you ok with that?

I'm not a tax expert. What exactly are you asking about this? That a church should be non-profit? Why would we have issue with it?

Quote:
What God? Why is this an issue?
The god of the majority population of course. It is an issue because it excludes atheists, non-believers, animists and polytheists.

Quote:
Our nation has a Judeo-Christian heritage. Why is this an issue? In a courtroom or a park, I see no issue. It's not an endorsement of any religion, as there are many religions that reference them, and it's a cultural issue. Again, though, if a local area was predominantly a religion other than one that uses them, get rid of it. Put up some quotes from Gandhi. I don't care.
It isn’t cultural at all, and other religions do not specifically refer to the Christian 10-Cs. It is exclusionary to non-Christians, and creates the inference that government supports Christianity, potentiallly to the detriment of non-Christians.

Quote:
If the people vote to change it, then change it. But it's been defined as male/female as long as history records. But when the courts simply overrule the will of the people, that's an issue.
Polls indicate strong support among the population for same sex marriage. The courts have been empowered by the constitution to fill this role.


All in all, your answers to this group of questions show a strong pro-Christian bias. You are will8ng to overlook the constitution and ignore the rights of the individual every time. You are completely comfortable with flooding our public, governmental areas with Christian references. This means that your earlier statement saying that you did not support the persecution (maybe harassment) of non-Christians was not sincerely meant, as you clearly are willing to support a country that excludes non-Christians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:33 AM
 
6,298 posts, read 1,779,133 times
Reputation: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Yes. I am interested in your opinion specifically because you said that you did not want to see non-Christians persecuted. As I noted earlier, the thread is about harassment, so I thought it interesting that you would change the word. Not sure if you think the two words are interchangeable, or if you think harrasssmwnt is ok while persecution is too far.
Whatever. Don't read too much into it. I did not purposely choose my word to send you a message. You're taking this way too seriously.
Quote:


So you see no problem with forcing the 1% to pray in a manner that they do not believe in? What if the vote is 52:48? Is it ok to force 48% of people to pray, presumably against the wishes of their parents?

It isn’t that nobody objects because they are all in agreement. Frequently nobody objects because they will be harassed if they do.

I will note that you are supporting something that is in violation of the constitution.
Our government allows for it. I'm not suggesting I am in complete agreement, nor am I suggesting that if it was my kid I would not homeschool my kid or move out of state if it was something I disagreed with.

Do you understand that Christian parents routinely choose to simply homeschool rather than object and get harassed/persecuted?
Quote:

The vast majority, out of proportion to the population, are evangelical. Humanist chaplains have been rejected.
OK? And at this point, even the evangelical chaplains are rarely allowed to even mention Jesus. There are very strict guidelines on what they can and can't say. There are chaplains for all faiths.

I fail to see why you'd want a "humanist chaplain". What would he/she do?
Quote:


I will agree that ministers paying a self employment tax is a bit odd, but the concept of giving tax free housing is also inappropriate. Would it not be more fair to tax them in the way that everyone else is?
Ministers do pay taxes. But just as a small business owner is allowed to deduct business expenses, a minister is, as well.
Quote:
Don’t you see that this is a huge loophole which can be structured in such a way as the skew compensation heavily towards the tax free portion of income, and is inherently unfair? How about self-employed atheist activists? They pay self-employment, but cannottake a$vantage of the parsonage 3xemption. Are you ok with that?
If they're working for a non-profit and can claim it as a legit business expense, I wouldn't have issue with it.
Quote:



The god of the majority population of course. It is an issue because it excludes atheists, non-believers, animists and polytheists.

What would a humanist chaplain do? What function would he/she fill?
Quote:

It isn’t cultural at all, and other religions do not specifically refer to the Christian 10-Cs. It is exclusionary to non-Christians, and creates the inference that government supports Christianity, potentiallly to the detriment of non-Christians.
Jews, Christians, Muslims, and a wide variety of different pseudo-Christian religions do refer to them. The fact that you only associate them with a particular group of Christians is of no consequence.
Quote:

Polls indicate strong support among the population for same sex marriage. The courts have been empowered by the constitution to fill this role.
Has it ever been approved in an actual vote of the people? I'm not aware of any case where it has. Instead, we have seen activist courts make law.
Quote:

All in all, your answers to this group of questions show a strong pro-Christian bias.
Weird. Imagine that! A Christian would respond as a Christian!

Quote:

You are will8ng to overlook the constitution and ignore the rights of the individual every time.
I believe the Constitution limits the federal government. It is silent on the states.
Quote:
You are completely comfortable with flooding our public, governmental areas with Christian references. This means that your earlier statement saying that you did not support the persecution (maybe harassment) of non-Christians was not sincerely meant, as you clearly are willing to support a country that excludes non-Christians.
Of course it was. But you have a funny definition of persecution or harassment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top