If it was he is still making stuff up since that thread has nothing to do with his assertion that I "get indignant about seeing a decorated Christmas tree in public".
(it is a good thread though and I stand by everything I said....in 2007 :-) )
|
If it was he is still making stuff up since that thread has nothing to do with his assertion that I "get indignant about seeing a decorated Christmas tree in public".
(it is a good thread though and I stand by everything I said....in 2007 :-) )
Right... the Catholic Church nominated you as saint already, first one thats still alive.... right? Everyone that frequents this forum knows you are an atheist... you've bragged about it adnausium in at least hundreds of posts... but if it makes you happy to pretend otherwise... have at it...far be it for me to deny you that bit of happyiness, everyone else here knows the truth.
If it was he is still making stuff up since that thread has nothing to do with his assertion that I "get indignant about seeing a decorated Christmas tree in public".
(it is a good thread though and I stand by everything I said....in 2007 :-) )
I googled "needkarma objects to Christmas tree" and that's what came up.
Similar to what Jesse on B. Bad was coached to say when Jane was found dead- "I woke up, I found her. That's all I know."
smearcase... I can find dozens on a matter of minutes... on threads I've participated in alone the comments were made in, but its not worth my time... they are there and only a mod or higher can edit content so there won't be any last minute deletions... and its not important enough for me to get worked up over anyway. I've got more important things to do.
When did I deny that? How do I pretend I'm not? You obviously do not have anything better to do.Quote:
Everyone that frequents this forum knows you are an atheist....but if it makes you happy to pretend otherwise...
BTW next Christmas we'll put up a decorated tree... just like last Christmas. I really don't know what you're rambling about.
Jesus didn't have a tree. Some guy in Europe through that into the tradition in the 16th Century.
The Christmas Archives
They make it up as they go along would appear. Religious beliefs are subject to influence other than the truth. Or is it a perceived truth?
If it makes you feel good to believe that... have at it.. you among a few others have a long history of posting info to that effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Is it up you you or me to decide these sorts of things? Nope... everyone's free to celibrate it as they wish, or not... just not to demand how others will or won't be doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Just an observation.
If you destroy all their "religious" beliefs, rituals and traditions, they are going to be left with the aweful or is that awesome, truth, Jesus. Where do you go then? no saints to hide behind, no statues to hide behind, no one left to pray to but Jesus
Jesus didn't need all the rubbish, he didn't need buildings and he didn't need deputy dog Santa
Why the need to pray to anything at all?Quote:
no one left to pray to but Jesus
Humans need those things though.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Regarding people's need for prayer and a church and all its trappings, here's a terrific book for you -- Rollo May's Cry for Myth. From the goodreads web site: "Rollo May, respected therapist and bestselling author of Love and Will, discusses the relationships between myths [and rituals] and the subconscious, showing how myths can provide meaning and structure for those who seek direction in a confused world. Here are case studies in which myths have helped Dr. May's patients make sense out of an often senseless world."
Firstly; we need to get the attitude out of the way, Jesus is not a thing, an object. Secondly; there are times in the life of every person where they need the intervention of someone greater than themselves, if you haven't experienced that yet, you have been fortunate. My book; Revival ~ a different perspective will answer your questionQuote:
Why the need to pray to anything at all?
I have been fortunate I suspect.
Remember this from the person who just a few posts back was claiming they WERE NOT an atheist...
When was that smoothy?
Go back a few posts. Those are not comments made by a person that has any religious faith.
If you are you are..if you aren't you aren't....whichever it may be...embrace it. Nobody here is trying to "save you" or convert you.
Once again I don't understand your lack of capacity to directly answer a question.
I learned that from you. You should be proud.
I'll tell you what, Dems are damn sure desperate. From resurrecting the war on women, to synchronized attacks on Fox News, calling Americans liars, playing the race card to this...
Obama: Some in GOP want 'segregation' for gays | Mobile Washington Examiner
The Great uniter is just another liberal a$$h... liar. And that has nothing to do him being black, half white, gay or whatever, he has no interest in making this a better place. Divide and conquer at home while taking more selfies as the world crumbles.
Speaking of some religions being different than others, some Syrian Christians have opted for dhimmitude, which I suppose is the least painful of the 3 options, the other 2 being conversion or death.
This is a despicable act by a bunch of fundamentalist extremist military groups. Totally unacceptable! They isn't even Syrians.
Uh that would be Islamic fundamentalist extremists and it is unacceptable, but seems our regime has been fairly silent about the plight of Syrian Christians. Meanwhile in other news, an Iranian Ayatollah said "Death to America is the first option on our table," and the "State Department allowed an Islamic preacher who called for the death penalty for homosexuals" into the country for a fundraising tour, while the emperor bashed Christians for wanting to segregate gays.
And then there's this, http://freebeacon.com/iran-executes-two-for-perversion/
And today we learn a Syrian Christian is forced to convert to Islam...and then beheaded anyway. Yes but, gay marriage, war on women...
Don't watch it.
So where is the uproar over the gay hairdresser refusing to cut the governor's hair?
Gay hair stylist drops New Mexico governor as client because she opposes same-sex marriage - NY Daily News
Hello again, steve:
If governors were a protected class of people, and this LAWBREAKER violated her rights, I'd be UPROARIOUS.
But, they're not, so I ain't.
excon
The governor is a minority, "Hispanic. A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race."
And gays are not a protected class, so try again.
Hello again, Steve:
In LOTS of places they are, and/or soon WILL be. The reason she was turned down was NOT because she's a minority. She was turned down because she's a governor...Quote:
And gays are not a protected class, so try again.
But, it DOES raise interesting legal issues... Maybe, like congressman Steve King said, she's only PRETENDING to be a governor, to TRAP the gay hairdresser into REFUSING service to her, just so she can make a case against the gay hairdresser, and score a big payday. That makes SO much sense to me..
I'm willing to rethink it, though. If it can be shown that governors, as a class, NEED protecting, I'm all for it.
excon
They should be protected against Christian aggression and degradation in America.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
No, that's incorrect, and the baker did not refuse to serve gays nor did the photographers refuse to serve gays.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
The hairdresser refused to serve the governor because she does not support same sex marriage, not because she's the governor. Can you show me how cutting the governor's hair might constitute some moral wrong for the hairdresser?Quote:
Refusing to Photograph a Gay Wedding Isn't Hateful - Conor Friedersdorf - The Atlantic
In America, there is plenty of homophobia, plenty of anti-gay bigotry, and plenty of people whose antagonism to gays and lesbians is rooted in hatred. Sometimes the language of religious liberty is used to justify behavior that is anything but Christ-like. But the Slate article is implicitly trafficking in its own sort of prejudice. The working assumption is that homophobia, anti-gay bigotry, and hatred are obviously what's motivating anyone who declines to provide a service for a gay wedding.
That assumption is wrongheaded. A closer look at the photographer's case is the best place to begin. Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin lost a case before the New Mexico Supreme Court, and have now appealed the ruling. As noted in their petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Huguenins' photography business does serve gay and lesbian clients, just not same-sex weddings. Insofar as a photographer can distinguish between discriminating against a class of client and a type of event—there is, perhaps, a limit—their business does so: "The Huguenins gladly serve gays and lesbians—by, for example, providing them with portrait photography—whenever doing so would not require them to create expression conveying messages that conflict with their religious beliefs."
The photography business has also turned down clients other than gay and lesbian couples while citing religious objections. "They have declined requests for nude maternity pictures," their petition states, "and photographs portraying violence."
Finally, it isn't just same-sex weddings they'd be uncomfortable photographing: their petition states that they'd also refuse business capturing a polygamous marriage.
Set aside for a moment the tension here between individual liberty and non-discrimination law. Whether you think the New Mexico Supreme Court decided the case rightly or wrongly, that is separate from the question of what motivated Elaine Huguenin. I've never met the woman. None of us can look inside her heart. But her petition presents a perfectly plausible account of why she would refuse to photograph same-sex weddings for perfectly common religious reasons that have nothing to do with fear of gays, intolerance toward gays, or hatred of gay people.
How is he damaged by cutting someones hair? He isn't whatsoever, it's just a haircut. Yet you defend him for rejecting the governor because of her beliefs while demanding someone who does serve all violate their religious values by participating in something they find morally wrong? Can you force me to photograph you masturbating, or is there a line we can draw, too?
Quote:
They should be protected against Christian aggression and degradation in America.
How about protecting Christians from the aggression of gays, Muslims, secularists, communists every place
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Interesting enough you probably demonstrate this. Provided you use the same grounds that are being applied for in the petition to the Supreme Court.
Some interesting points to come out of the petition:
. Photography is an art form.
.Forcing people to speak is unconstitutional
.Freedom of speech is of the same type type as freedom of mind.
.Anti-discrimination legislation can't override freedom to speak or, not to speak.
Exactly...Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:34 PM. |