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.
Thank you for defending the original poster. Based on a quick reading of the first few words of the title of the thread, I was inclined to question his view that people [of any worth IMO] looked down upon Christians. However, I look down upon you. I have very little interest in what you theorize, based on NO evidence, he might have changed to. Rather, I would criticize the government and any individual who would give us the opportunity to find out. You people are a CAUSE of crimes like his.
You say a whole lot of nothing here. Just blaming Christians for everything.
The word 'rape' does not appear once in your link. The word 'children' 7 times. Please cite where you are getting this information from, or is it one again Jeff seeing things that are not there? Show us directly. Kinsey was controversial, but never has your accusation been leveled.
You dismiss this guy's actions because the article doesn't say "rape"? He engaged sex with minors for research. Doesn't that always equal rape to you? At least be consistent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
We all know the perversions some Nazis did. Most who claimed to be Christian by the way. Hitler was Catholic, and guess what the belt buckles of the German Armed Forces said?
Do I need to translate "Gott mit uns"? Hint: It's remarkably similar to the "In God We Trust" thingy on American money. And police cars.
Hitler used religion only as a way to gain power. Claiming he was a Christian is one of the most ridiculous distortions of history. I'm really starting to think you believe atheists can never do or say anything wrong. Never. It's a fantasy world.
That's easy, and you seen it before. Here, to refresh your memory:
You still have yet to explain why your opinion is any more worthy than anyone else's opinion of morality. What of the atheist that thinks that thinks that the girl deserved it? Who is right? His sense of morality conflicts with your's.
Last edited by Vizio; 04-20-2016 at 02:51 PM..
Reason: typo
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
You dismiss this guy's actions because the article doesn't say "rape"? He engaged sex with minors for research. Doesn't that always equal rape to you? At least be consistent.
SHOW us where. Cite it. Document it. So far, it is only your say so. SHOW us.
Quote:
Hitler used religion only as a way to gain power. Claiming he was a Christian is one of the most ridiculous distortions of history. I'm really starting to think you believe atheists can never do or say anything wrong. Never. It's a fantasy world.
Hitler and his band of criminals made cozy with the Catholic church and supported the Church tax in Germany. You need to learn to accept facts, not rumor.
We don't have the full audio of the interview. Only sound bites. Your threads and the report is nothing more than a witch hunt to make Christians look bad when in reality all we have here is a former criminal who shows every sign of being reformed and a pastor who may or may not have said some really dumb things and handled a difficult situation poorly. You act like people are currently being raped in this church.
Maybe it's time we turn the tables and start looking at the actions of atheists. People like Alfred Kinsey who raped children all in the name of science. Or horrific medical experiments that the Nazis did on children. I shudder to think what a secular humanist society would do all in the name of science.
Since the reporters were negative about one instance at one church they must of been dishonest atheists. You are like a broken record, Christians = victims and athesits or secular people = mean spiritied baby killing nasty people.
And before you attack me for hating the man convicted of raping a 13 year old go back and read my posts. You may find that I am not 100% opposite of yourself. But I judged this instance from the evidence not from am I a Christian or am I not in choosing which side to take. I would be hesitant to put my granddaughter in the lone presence of either the former convict or the pastor, the latter cause I do not get the feeling that he puts females in high regard.
You are one for complaining about anyone going off topic and yet here is a link to Alfred Kinsey. By the way you most likely do not know this but to do any study or experiment on humans, even a survey by a student, it must pass an ethnics committee, at least the universities I have gone to. You really do not like or trust anyone who is not religious do you?
You dismiss this guy's actions because the article doesn't say "rape"? He engaged sex with minors for research. Doesn't that always equal rape to you? At least be consistent.
From your link...
"Kinsey wrote about pre-adolescent orgasms using data in tables 30 to 34 of the male volume, which report observations of orgasms in over three-hundred children between the ages of five months and fourteen years.[SIZE=2][31][/SIZE] This information was said to have come from adults' childhood memories, or from parent or teacher observation.[SIZE=2][32][/SIZE] Kinsey said he also interviewed nine men who had sexual experiences with children, and who told him about the children's responses and reactions."
This isn't what you were talking about was it? Because if it were, it clearly states that he did not rape anyone, and in fact, relied on OTHERS observations. If there is something else in there that I am missing, please point it out. Now, you could say that he was encouraging and turning a blind eye to child abuse, and on that we would agree.
If he did indeed, at some point, rape a minor, then I would feel no different about him than I do about the rapist at the church.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Hitler used religion only as a way to gain power. Claiming he was a Christian is one of the most ridiculous distortions of history. I'm really starting to think you believe atheists can never do or say anything wrong. Never. It's a fantasy world.
Says the guy defending a rapist and priest who blames 13 year old girls for being raped, simply because they claim to be Christian....
"Kinsey wrote about pre-adolescent orgasms using data in tables 30 to 34 of the male volume, which report observations of orgasms in over three-hundred children between the ages of five months and fourteen years.[SIZE=2][31][/SIZE] This information was said to have come from adults' childhood memories, or from parent or teacher observation.[SIZE=2][32][/SIZE] Kinsey said he also interviewed nine men who had sexual experiences with children, and who told him about the children's responses and reactions."
This isn't what you were talking about was it? Because if it were, it clearly states that he did not rape anyone, and in fact, relied on OTHERS observations. If there is something else in there that I am missing, please point it out. Now, you could say that he was encouraging and turning a blind eye to child abuse, and on that we would agree.
If he did indeed, at some point, rape a minor, then I would feel no different about him than I do about the rapist at the church.
Says the guy defending a rapist and priest who blames 13 year old girls for being raped, simply because they claim to be Christian....
He has in the past linked to articles that did not say what he claimed they did. I have sometimes wondered if he goes to a web site for arguements and just uses their links without reading the article itself.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
He has in the past linked to articles that did not say what he claimed they did. I have sometimes wondered if he goes to a web site for arguements and just uses their links without reading the article itself.
That is his pattern, and he always ducks out when called on it.
For those that are (ahem) bright enough to work things out for themselves and are not manipulated sponges of the popular media, they would know that the report this thread is based on is typical of tabloid television or ‘teletabloid’. Anyway, whether the contents of stories contained in teletabloid reporting may be true, half true or even craftily embellished, this is NOT serious journalism. Tabloid television newscasts usually incorporate flashy graphics and sensationalized stories. Often, there is a heavy emphasis on crime, stories with good video, and celebrity news. It is a form of infotainment and seems often designed to shock or even instill anger and/or fear into the viewer rather than to actually enlighten them. To keep viewers on edge, wary, suspicious, paranoid and INTERESTED in tuning in to watch in the first place guarantees sponsor dollars which, at the end of the day, is THE object behind such television. Main TV news stories (even though they too are designed to encapsulate the news into two or three minute segments peppered with commercials) don’t carry these type stories for rather obvious reasons.
Here in Australia there are at least two such teletabloid programs that I know of that reflect this same down-market, sensationalist style of journalism and entertainment. They are Today Tonight and A Current Affair. Very often these shows feature some silly reporter chasing some guy down the street, waving a microphone followed by a camera crew yelling, “What do you have to say about ripping off the system, Mr. Brown?” or some such idiotic thing. Or, sometimes they get more personal and call the guy by his first name to imply to their viewers that they (the reporter) represents ‘the everyman’. Just as often they might sneak up on the unsuspecting person they’re pursuing, stick a microphone in front of his or her face for an interview and ask slanted (and often juvenile) questions which, just as often, elicit stupid and juvenile on-the-spot responses which, by content, seem to affirm to the viewer the guilt of the person of the charges leveled against him/her.
Isolated incidents are often exaggerated by teletabloid for sensationalist purposes to give the impression to the viewer that murderers, thieves, rapists, etc. are on every suburban street corner just lying in wait to pounce on them and their families. FEAR has become perpetually ingrained into the minds of media-manipulated communities. AND, all because of the media …NOT because of any actually experiential occurances! A commonly cited example of tabloid television run amok is a series of reports in 2001 collectively dubbed The Summer of the Shark, focusing on a supposed epidemic of shark attacks after one highly publicized attack on an 8-year-old boy. In reality, there were a below-average number of shark attacks that year. The Summer of the Shark has since been remembered as an example of tabloid television perpetuating a story with no real merit beyond its ability to draw ratings. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_of_the_Shark
So, what do we have here on this thread that has caused so many (probably) normally intelligent people to lose control of their reasoning abilities and rather take to emotional and inappropriate responses to those they might normally show some respect? Well, what we’re seeing here are responses from some (just a few actually) who tabloid TV was designed to rope in and to influence. Although I consider myself of fair intelligence as well as being an honest and decent man I’ve been the brunt of some pretty nasty posts that even resort to implying that “I” must also be a convicted rapist because I have the intelligence to look beyond the actual reporting of this story. While I don’t normally feel the need to affirm myself to anyone I will in this case reluctantly relent and say that I have NEVER raped anyone, NOR have I ever had any such desires!
The headline of this story reads: “Pro-rape pastor defends church’s hiring of child-rapist.” This headline is INTENTIONALLY misleading to grab the attention of those to whom it was designed to attract …knuckle-heads! I won’t give names …if the shoe fits, wear it. This pastor is NOT pro-rape!! Even his inappropriate comments NEVER implied that he was pro-rape! As for “defends church’s hiring of child rapist” …this is similarly worded to raise the ire of knuckle-heads! Again, the 'shoe fits' adage. This pastor has every right to hire Thomas Hopper! While Mr. Hopper is on the Kentucky Sex Offender Register the only restriction is that he has to get permission before he’s allowed on school property. NO ONE is forbidden from hiring the man! NOR has the community any legal right to harass this man! That some of you on this thread hate the man and hate what he may have done in the past is IMMATERIAL with regard to the law of the land!
That’s about it …case closed as long as Mr. Hopper makes good his word that he’s a changed man. So, to those of you on the thread that don’t like this arrangement or/and those who don’t like those of us who support the law that protects this man from YOUR inappropriate comments (remember the pastor?) …too bad. That’s the way it is.
Just one more thing. Our friend, cupper, didn’t think it fitting enough to start up two threads on the topic. He had to start a third one which was designed SOLELY to discredit Christians and Christianity …not just Fundamentalist Christianity but Christianity in general. And, many of you played along. Good one, cupper!
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.
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.
