Anti-Bullying Speaker Curses Christian Teens

reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname


Of course, of course. Maybe you are so blind, that you don't see? Did you even see the insult you made in that statement? I doubt you did, which makes it even more sad.

Insinuating that the only "real christians" are the ones that agree with you. Thinly veiled insults. Oh, right, but you are just pointing out a truth, and it comes from your side. So it's fine!

But anyone calls it how they see it, and says speechboy was up there acting like a troll, or a douche, it's an insult, it didn't come from your side. BAD!

Hypocritical doublethink. Classic, I get it from both sides. That's the trouble people who don't put themself in a box, and submit to one of the group thinks have to deal with. We get attacked from both sides.

reply to post by Climax


Why thank you so much! That is certainly high praise.

reply to post by Stormdancer777

Did anyone ask them why they walked out?

Just curious.

Did you read the OP, or any articles on the issue? Clearly not.....

Rick Tuttle, the journalism advisor for Sutter Union High School in California, was among several thousand people in the audience. He said they thought the speech was one thing – but it turned into something else.

“I thought this would be about anti-bullying,” Tuttle told Fox news. “It turned into a pointed attack on Christian beliefs.”

Tuttle said a number of his students were offended by Savage’s remarks – and some decided to leave the auditorium.

“It became hostile,” he said. “It felt hostile as we were sitting in the audience – especially towards Christians who espouse beliefs that he was literally taking on.”

Tuttle said the speech was laced with vulgarities and “sexual innuendo not appropriate for this age group.” At one point, he said Savage told the teenagers about how good his partner looked in a speedo.

reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname


So you think you are the true judge of who is Christian and who is not? A foolhardy notion, I think.

reply to post by TKDRL


According to you everything is an insult then I call it the truth, and yes it hurts. Insults are real insults, like calling names.

And real Christian, does not mean agreeing with me, it meant that that person was honest enough to see the truth and speak up about it, being honest and open and tolerant. He was the only one sofar that I saw.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname

 

So you think you are the true judge of who is Christian and who is not? A foolhardy notion, I think.

I know it is definately not someone who first refuses to listen to someone, then attacks that person for what he said, even though she didn't listen, spreads a blatant lie, gets called out on it 3 times, and then still refuses to retract it and take responsibility for it, and continues on as if nothing happened.

That much I know.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Ehm jeah, why not respond to this,

Bam , busted. This shows your blatant ignorance. This was the whole point. He said that if that part of the bible is not accepted, then why are the parts about homosexuality stillaccepted, that's what he said.

Cause you said this, which was completely false

Therefore they do not condone stoning women as Savage suggests.

Are you going to take responsibilty for that blatant lie, or piece of proof that you don't even know what he said?

Or are you just conveniently going to skip over that.

If you don't know what he said, why are you in this discussion again? Showing your ignorance? Good cause.

Btw, love what you said about another poster,

Did you ignore my post about the anathematizing of Origen? Or perhaps you overlooked it because it seemed to be of some other issue.

edit on 29-4-2012 by RandomEsotericScreenname because: (no reason given)

lmao, what I said of another poster? That's funny because you wouldn't have called the early Church philosopher Origen "another poster" if you had half the knowledge you claim. Ok now that we got that out of the way, I edited my original post, but not by much. Savage was suggesting that Christians do not approve of stoning of women for giving up their virginity before marriage, but that this does not stop them from condemning gay marriage. The truth of the matter is that chastity is encouraged in the Christian faith, but that forgiveness of all sins through repentence and atonement is tantamount. This is the classic Christian outlook..any references to the Westboro church notwithstanding...

Now all of that being said, it is not my job to dress down other Christians in this forum.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

lmao, what I said of another poster? That's funny because you wouldn't have called the early Church philosopher Origen "another poster"

Are you kidding me. You did not ask another poster why he ignored your post? You are funny.

I edited my original post, but not by much. Savage was suggesting that Christians do not approve of stoning of women for giving up their virginity before marriage, but that this does not stop them from condemning gay marriage. The truth of the matter is that chastity is encouraged in the Christian faith, but that forgiveness of all sins through repentence and atonement is tantamount. This is the classic Christian outlook..any references to the Westboro church notwithstanding...

Good for you, my point was that you obviously didn't listen to what he had said, yet you were here condemning him.

And it took me four post for you to respond to it, and still can't admit that you didn't even know what was said.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


You always manage to bring up and blame the nasty Red commies for everything, don't you.....
It does get old, and laughable, you know that right?

Well Dang Nammit, make those commies stop having gay babies then!

Originally posted by graphuto

Either way, no one has to listen to anything they don't want to.

Sure they do! I would say I didn't want to hear a great deal of what I heard in high school. I had to sit through over 5 or 6 anti drug and violence assemblies in high school that had Christian messages that I didn't want to hear.

I didn't want to be in shop class or art class, but I had to. Heck, I didn't want to go to school in general, but I had too.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname

 

They walked away at the word "bible"

Thank goodness we still have a right to walk out of a bible-bashing lecture if we so choose. Under communist rule that might change. Don't take your liberties for granted.

I have, nor do many others here have any issue what so ever with those young adults walking out, what we have an issue with is the manufactured outrage, those young adults started waling out at the word "Bible" before anything that could possibly offend them had even been said yet, this shows it was a planed episode of manufactured outrage, a tactic, nothing more. It simply shows that regardless of what Mr. Savage would say or did say, they were going to be "outraged" at the "war" on "christians".

As someone who tries to follow Christ's teaching as best I can, I to have a problem with pseudo-"christians" who corrupt and pervert the teaching in the Bible to promote hate and abuse.

reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname

Are you kidding me. You did not ask another poster why he ignored your post? You are funny.

Sorry, I actually did misunderstand your point as it was not stated so clearly.
Glad you find humor in all this.
Yes, often people jump to the end of a discussion and therefore miss certain relevant points, as probably happened that the individual likely assumed I have no knowledge of the effects of the Nicene Council on early church doctrine, therefore he either did not read that post or he ignored it because it seemed to be reflecting other issues. That is exactly what I posted to him/her.

reply to post by RyanFromCan


So they can walk out as long as the point at which they walk out, or the reason they walk out is approved by you? So walking out is an example to you of hate ? I will try and remember that next time someone begins pummeling me with abusive language.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Climax

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname

 

They walked away at the word "bible"

Thank goodness we still have a right to walk out of a bible-bashing lecture if we so choose. Under communist rule that might change. Don't take your liberties for granted.

Yep its your right to be willfully ignorant, but dont expect people to think highly of you for it.

You've missed the point entirely. But I am not surprised. Please see my post about how atheists have deliberately tried to eliminate religion for the cause of communism.

By the way, as a matter of historical perspective, Harry Hay was a member of the communist party.

edit on 29-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

No, you missed the point, you pathological and paranoid fear of anything you dream up as part of a "communist agenda" has blinded you to the reality that it is not just atheists who have a problem with pseudo-"christians" soiling the name Christian, there are also many people like myself, who do their best to live in the teachings of Christ who have issues with pseudo-"christians" soiling the name Christian. It is the actions of these pseudo-"christians" we have a problem with, as they do not publicize that what they are doing is actually a perversion of the Biblical teachings.

Originally posted by Clearskies


Maybe some were running (actually walking...) from his bullying, because they weren't hardcore Christians and might've hurt the guy accidentally or on purpose?

Does anyone actually remember being in high school? I'm guessing the majority left because to them it was a stupid presentation and they were bored, and once they saw a couple people leave, they had an excuse to walk out.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Climax
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

You mean today people with agendas try and play the word game to trick others there are direct threats against them so that they react by begging for a solution, which has been prepared.

The False Christians are tricking you into looking at outside forces as hostile so that you are too preoccupied to notice the infiltration that is going on behind your backs.

That's hilarious, but carry on. I am not subject unto false Christianity. Only a fool would ignore the real historical actions of the outright and deliberate oppression of Christianity and the Church by communists and then suggest hostile forces are a mere trickery of the mind. Perhaps you could pick up a history book, or perhaps the true story as chronicled by Alexsander Solzhenitsyn in his book,"The Gulag Archipelago".

Even wikipedia tells it like it is

Before and after the October Revolution of November 7, 1917 (October 25 Old Calendar) there was a movement within the Soviet Union to unite all of the people of the world under Communist rule (see Communist International). This included the Eastern European bloc countries as well as the Balkan States. Communism as interpreted by Lenin and his successors in the Soviet government required the abolition of religion and to this effect the Soviet government launched a long-running campaign to eliminate religion from society.[1] Since some of these Slavic states tied their ethnic heritage to their ethnic churches, both the peoples and their church where targeted by the Soviet.[2][3]

Very soon after the October Revolution, the campaign to end religion, and more specifically, Christianity and Judaism began. In 1920 the White Sea camp was opened on the grounds of a once Russian Orthodox Monastery. At this camp which took mainly Orthodox and Catholic priests, the prototype for other Soviet camps was revealed. The camp began to exterminate those who would not bend to state.[4]

en.wikipedia.org...

Do you know what the term "exterminate" means? Yes, it happened to Christians and Jews alike.

edit on 29-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

You do realize that in the last 100 or so years, that the "Church" has lost much of it's political power right, the reality is, that in most instances the "Church" was the defacto government in most places, you did what the church said to do, and the church collected "taxes" they called tithes.

Originally posted by RyanFromCan
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

You always manage to bring up and blame the nasty Red commies for everything, don't you.....
It does get old, and laughable, you know that right?

Well Dang Nammit, make those commies stop having gay babies then!

So sorry if the truth hurts. Isn't that what all the pro-Savage people are saying? I know that you and others feel a compulsion to believe the lie that communism has been dead since the fall of the Berlin Wall, but it simply isn't and the likes of Van Jones have been popping up everywhere. Marxism did indeed infiltrate the churches over a period of time with the express purpose of destroying the truth and the foundation. All the main communists and Marxists have admitted these things. I have posted explicit statements by Gorbachev and Lenin himself, and by observors within the church.
What is so hard about that? Why do you deny it so? What are you defending here? I see you have now taken to using ridiculous and outrageous statements in your attempt at argument.

reply to post by RyanFromCan


I am not defending the power structure of the Vatican if that is what you are implying. When did I ever do that? Did I not expose right here the church anathemas against Origen as a way to condition the people? I am also aware of the power of the Jesuits. Also it seems some people are rejecting the expose on the false doctrine of Marxism.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname

 

Sure they heard what was being said. It took them all but a couple minutes to know where he was coming from.
But in case you didn't know it, Christinity does not believe in stoning women either, as Jesus confronted people attacking a woman and said let whoever has not sinned cast the first stone. This is a basic teaching and those kids know it. Therefore they do not condone stoning women. I'm certain they do not support stoning of Gays either, but they may still view it as immoral. Someone mentioned the OT in relation to the practice of stoning, and the teachings of Christ shed knowledge on the fact that everyone has sinned at one time or another and he did not condemn the woman, BUT he said "Go and sin no more".
As to the idea of sleeping around before marriage, modern Christians still appreciate the value of saving oneself for marriage, but modern laws do not recognize stoning as an appropriate discipline. InVictorian times, women were chaperoned by family and friends so that they were not tempted to give up their chastity.

edit on 29-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

WOW, you clearly did not watch the video, it took a grand total of 20 seconds from the time Dan uttered the word "Bible" to the time the first "escapee from persecution" walked past the camera at the back of the room, not to mention, the moment Dan uttered the word "Bible, you see heads turn in the bottom left of the screen where the young adults start whispering in each others ears. In the 20 seconds it took for the first girl to walk out, not one thing had been said to offend those"christians", unless the words, "Bible" "Leviticus" and other books of the bible cause them great emotional suffering. as for your take on modern faith and the acceptable/unacceptable parts, I wonder how many of the young adult ladies in the crowd were out in public on their period, how many had ham and cheese for lunch. I think you get my point, then again, I am probably expecting too much from you.

reply to post by RyanFromCan


Yes the first person did walk out right away. It took longer for the rest you know. But so what? I would like to know just how many rocks you expect me to allow you to throw at my head before I leave?

And oh please please leave off the personal discussions of ladies. It is exactly this which I am making the decision to ignore further posts by you as it is only more ridiculous attempts to justify Savage's approach.

Your post was totally tacky and so was Savage.