Hate towards BS Christians

a reply to: Puppylove

I see, however there is corruption and wrongness in every religion, and more so then that, every diverse sect or group in society. However you used your broad brush to paint the Christians early on in your thread. You have made a full circle in the aspect of you have done the exact same thing you initially were ranting about...

a reply to: LoverBoy

No I didn't, at no point did I ever once paint all Christians with the same brush. Not in the original rant, nor in any post afterwards.

Technically not even the title does, as it only targets BS Christians and not all Christians.

a reply to: Puppylove
No you painted Christianity when every group in religion and outside of religion has people like this. In a way it really shows who you hate and your intention.

Lost cause. Kind of like the saying.... "Haters gonna hate". Whatever keeps you up at night.

The issue here is that, many people believe they have the right to claim they are something, and that's the end of it, and no one has the right to question/call them on it.

It's completely crazy to me that people can claim to be Christian, without knowing the first thing about their religion. I've known "Christians" who've never read the bible or even gone to Church. Who have no idea Jesus was even a carpenter, or who spent time with sinners and prostitutes. Who really only knows things like God Hates Fags, and crap like that because their other, Christian in name only friends claim it, and put forth cherry picked crap from the old testament as proof for them.

And EVERYONE is supposed to be ok with that, and just say, yep sure. Then if say the same person was to say, I won't sell that homo, flowers for their wedding cause it's against my religion, we're supposed to roll over and say, ok dude.

a reply to: LoverBoy

I explained later for someone who asked why I'm focusing on christianity why that was. Did you only read the 1st post? Or is clarification to be ignored at all times.

Christianity is the only religion I deal with on a regular basis and the only with Christ as a main focus. Christianity is also the only one trying to pass laws to allow them to discriminate in the US as FAR AS I KNOW.

I'm sure there are other hypocrites, but I don't deal with them regularly, and I what I said about religious freedom laws should apply to every religion equally. I'm not going to speak with authority about religions I don't know that well.

Also once again, was not calling out all Christians at any point.

a reply to: Puppylove

So Christians are either Westboro Baptist

or

"enlightened" (shudder) hypocrites.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

And now for a musical interlude. . .

a reply to: beezzer

Um, how do you get that? Cause I used extreme example cause it's easier to make a point that way?

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: beezzer

Um, how do you get that? Cause I used extreme example cause it's easier to make a point that way?

I'm just a simple l'il bunny who don't know nuthin' 'bout nuthin'.

So yes, even I get to use extremes to make a point.

Of note, I honestly don't truly care what a Christian does in their private life, whether they're truly committed or just like being part of the club. Not my business.

It's not my business until they start trying to claim religious freedom (especially to discriminate against others.) At which point authenticity becomes important.

The government should start a Department of Religious Authenticity.

If you pass, you get to be religious.

a reply to: beezzer

So if anyone who wants to can claim religion to not be involved in something they personally deem to be against their religion without proving authenticity they should be allowed to do so?

What about anyone who doesn't claim to be religious? What if they have their own personal reasons to be ethically opposed to something?

If one doesn't need to prove their religious convictions are true, then how is it any different than anyone, religious or not, simply saying "I just don't want to do that?"

What's this have to do with religion at all?

Why do people, simply because they claim, with no need to ever even provide a single iota of proof, that they are people of faith, suddenly receive the ability to not do things, that are expected and required of every single other citizen, merely on the merit of that claim, and that claim alone?

a reply to: Puppylove

huh?

I don't understand your post.

It's been a few hundred (?) maybe a couple thousand years that religious folks thought homosexuality was a no-no.

Especially the Christian and Jewish faiths, though I can't be sure about Islam. Though Islam is mighty rough on the gays.

So this isn't a recent thing, this belief.

It's been rooted in a cultural and religious foundation for centuries.

But you obviosly think you can snap your fingers and turn it around all at once.

Call the religious people names just because their faith has stated something for centuries.





Why can't you respect religious people and work with them to see that LGBT issues aren't evil. Why you gotta hate and be combative?

I thought "enlightened" people like yourself were tolerant.

a reply to: beezzer

They're trying to legislate the ability to treat us as second class citizens, sorry my ability to be understanding stops when I'm supposed to accept others treating me as subhuman. Tolerance only goes so far.

Also, there's a difference between believing homosexuality is wrong, and trying to force others to follow your beliefs.

I've stated before and I'll state again, no one is claiming anyone of any religion should be forced into engaging in personal homosexual acts, only that homosexuals be given the same status and treatment as every other citizen in the secular world. Not your home, not your church, just everywhere that's public, same as everyone else.

A business is public, they are secular, and as such are subject to government regulation against discrimination, as they should be. Jim Crow was defeated long ago, most agree, Jim Crow was a bad thing, let's not start the same crap with the LGBT community, let's skip all that crap this time, can we please? Is that really so much to ask? Let's not backpedal, just this once.

In private, you can do whatever you wish, in your church, talk all the smack about gays anyone wants, I care, but it's not my business. You bring it into the secular world, you use it treat others as subhuman when trying to go about their lives in public like every other citizen, it's a problem, and is my business.

Also I target Christianity, because it has Jesus, a dude who actually said things like "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" I'm not arguing homosexuality is a ok in Christianity, but neither is a lot of things, what I'm arguing against is that, Jesus stated people should treat people as subhuman because they sin, and that one can reasonably use Christianity as an excuse to do so.

a reply to: Puppylove

No-one is trying to make gays second class citizens.

Just don't force religious folks to dance to your tune.

This entire "gay marriage" thing is fairly recent. Give it time. Once the Supremes give their vote, it'll be settled.

Sorry you can no longer be tolerant of religious people.

Seems like you're asking more of religious people than you are asking of yourself.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: grandmakdw

First off it's a rant, like hyperbole, strong language is expected, it's getting stuff off one's chest that frustrates them.

Two, once again the strong language was aimed at the people I stated quite plainly I think represent Christianity in name only, and not those I feel are truly christian.

To those I felt were truly christian, and lived it to the best of their ability I put on a pedestal far above myself. How high must I put a Christian before I am speaking fondly of them?

Damnit why am I still here...

Who made you judge and jury as to who is an acceptable Christian
and who is a smelly, crappy, ass of a Christian?
You are judging pretty harshly for someone who claims Christians are judgmental.

You are pretty unforgiving of Christians who are just people,
like you,
who make mistakes in their lives,
being a Christian doesn't mean you never screw up.
Being a Christian doesn't mean you are better than anyone else,
it doesn't mean you don't screw up.
It means when you do mess up, when you do screw up,
you can go to Jesus and ask for forgiveness and
try your best not to screw up again.

To be a Christian means that no matter how bad an ass you are,
how crappy and smelly you are, how judgmental you are,
if you go to Jesus when you mess up you can be forgiven
and still be a part of God's family.
It also means you have the obligation to try and do better,
it absolutely does NOT mean you won't mess up again.
Christians are just people, everyday people, who mess up from time to time.
They just have a model they try to live by,
and often fail to live up to, but they try.

Are you - OP - better than Jesus?
Jesus did hang around the people in the world
who made some really bad choices in their lives and really messed up.
So you are angry and tell the people who make bad choices
but say they are Christians you are a delusional bald faced liar;
because they messed up and are not Christian enough for you?

So you have the simple truth, so you claim,
and no one else can see it?
You are good enough to call people out on their bull#
and yet tell people who say they are Christian
that they must always be loving and kind,;
while you feel free to call people #ty, crappy, smelly, bull#ters
and bald faced liars;
isn't that being a hypocrite?

Why are you so angry at people you think are delusional?
Shouldn't you be understanding toward the delusional?
OR does not being a Christian mean you can be mean
to the delusional and judgmental toward everyone else?
Why should you care at all about someone else's delusion?
Who are you to decide what is a delusion and what isn't?
How are you more qualified than anyone else in the world
to decide rather or not a specific Christian is delusional?

You claim to be fond of "real" Christians,
so how are you holy enough and good enough
to make sit in judgement over all Christians,
and decide who is not a
bull#ting, delusional, #ty Christian;
and who is a Christian you can be fond of?
Isn't that rather judgmental on your part?
Why do you think you have the right to judge Christians,
but they have no right to have thoughts on lifestyles
they think are right or wrong, about anyone else?

Do you think Christians must only bend to what you think
is correct Christian behavior
and never mess up
and always do the right thing and be perfectly saccharine sweet
100% of the time or they are bull#ting crappy asses?

Why are you picking and choosing and judging
what Christians do or don't do and
saying they must conform to your idea of a perfect Christian
and never make mistakes or they are crappy asses?

To whomever else reads this:
I am parodying the OP's profane words about Christians,
since the OP choose to use vulgar words when describing Christians,
I am simply using the OP's own profanity to make a point.
In real life, I absolutely never use these profane and vulgar words,
nor do I ever utter such garbage ridden verbiage.
I felt it was necessary for the OP to comprehend what I had to say
since it appears to be the only vocabulary that the OP understands.

And yes, that is a quite judgmental thought on my part,
based on the verbiage and vocabulary used in the OP.

And yes, by making this post I am being a smelly crappy ass
of a Christian according to most who will read it.

I do it to make a strong point about who is really being the most judgmental.

Right the religious have made no attempts in any states or anywhere what so ever to make it a ok for them to discriminate. What planet you living on, can I move there?

Ok, I'll give you one thing, chances are, they're going to lose. I'll give you that. Chances are, we already won. Is something I've said before. For example the thread about the taxi driver. Where I argued that the laws we have against discrimination are a bit harsh, and that our fines that ignore income and social status are atrocious.

Where I even argued that many of my brothers and sisters are likely greedily hoping to hit the discrimination lawsuit jackpot and is hard to assume otherwise in many cases as long as such extreme payouts exist.

I've also said, it's mostly just time that's needed at this point. I agree with you here as well.

That being said, it doesn't change that, no Christianity is not an excuse to discriminate against others. It also does not mean I need to be tolerant of people trying to pass ridiculous laws to make themselves immune to anti-discrimination laws.

What's needed is the anti-discrimination punishments to be brought down to a reasonable level. Where the punishment fits the crime, where a persons status and income are taken into account, where, it's only reasonable to pursue it if your cause is legit and not as a money making scheme allowing you to ruin someone for years simply because someone pissed in your cheerios.

There's a lot wrong, but that anti-discrimination laws exist aren't it, nor is laws that give the religious impunity against anti-discrimination laws the solution. What's needed is to reduce the punishments of anti-discrimination laws to a reasonable level so that only legitimate cases exist, and to let time take it's course.

Don't care if gay marriage is recent conflict, ect, discrimination is still wrong, Jim Crow like behavior is still wrong.

That said, I will agree no one deserves to lose their business, livelihood, or be in debt for years, because they slipped one day and let their hang ups get the best of them. At least not if they take measures to correct their behavior, and accept that they are in the wrong. If they just keep doing it, obviously the minor fine stops being enough, and the bigger fines can be revisited in their case and revoking of their business license taken into consideration.

a reply to: grandmakdw

No, I claim to have a problem with Christians who attempt to use their religion as an excuse to act in a non-christian manner using the claim of religious freedom. Not my business what they do in private as long as they don't try and use the state to legislate and protect their hypocrisy in the secular world.

I swear, so much picking and choosing... is this a pandemic?

As for the only vocabulary I use. You should try reading the rest of the thread. The only time so much vulgar language has been used was in the RANT portion of the thread.

You read the RANT portion of the thread, saw some language you didn't like, in doing so saw red, and went on instant blind attack mode. There is absolutely no way you could possible have read 90% of my posts in this thread if you think what was in the RANT portion of the thread is how I normally communicate on the forums or anywhere.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: grandmakdw

No, I claim to have a problem with Christians who attempt to use their religion as an excuse to act in a non-christian manner using the claim of religious freedom. Not my business what they do in private as long as they don't try and use the state to legislate and protect their hypocrisy in the secular world.

I swear, so much picking and choosing... is this a pandemic?

As for the only vocabulary I use. You should try reading the rest of the thread. The only time so much vulgar language has been used was in the RANT portion of the thread.

You read the RANT portion of the thread, saw some language you didn't like, in doing so saw red, and went on instant blind attack mode. There is absolutely no way you could possible have read 90% of my posts in this thread if you think what was in the RANT portion of the thread is how I normally communicate on the forums or anywhere.

The OP is supposed to represent the model for the entire thread. It sets the tone for the thread and is supposed to be the basis of all further discussion.

You never answered any of my questions about why you
think it is ok for you to stand in judgement of Christians
and decide who is good enough in your opinion to
be called a Christian and
who is a crappy, bull#ty, bald faced liar?



Why can you be judgmental, just because you aren't a Christian
that frees you to be as judgmental as you wish towards others?

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Indigent

Again, hyperbole, seriously people, take the statement in it's intent, do not simply be contrary to be contrary, I don't think any of you are really so unaware of what hyperbole is, nor incapable of determining intent that was clearly meant.

Hey I liked what you said, I agree in principle but as has been suggested there is a darker side to the persecutions.

Valid point in the Western world and valid point that many Christians dont act as called to be

I feel the same as you at times.

People are all sinners, all broken.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: grandmakdw

No, I claim to have a problem with Christians who attempt to use their religion as an excuse to act in a non-christian manner using the claim of religious freedom. Not my business what they do in private as long as they don't try and use the state to legislate and protect their hypocrisy in the secular world.

I swear, so much picking and choosing... is this a pandemic?

As for the only vocabulary I use. You should try reading the rest of the thread. The only time so much vulgar language has been used was in the RANT portion of the thread.

You read the RANT portion of the thread, saw some language you didn't like, in doing so saw red, and went on instant blind attack mode. There is absolutely no way you could possible have read 90% of my posts in this thread if you think what was in the RANT portion of the thread is how I normally communicate on the forums or anywhere.

So you, as a non-Christian
can sit in judgement of
Christians
and decide who is
using their religion as an excuse;
and who is being a true Christian?

Under what authority do you deem
yourself above everyone else that
you can stand in judgement?

If a Christian feels they are being
denied religious freedom by being
forced to participate in something
that they personally feel violates
their own personal faith: who are
you to judge them and say they
are #ty people?

Is a Muslim a #ty, crappy, ass
if they are caterers and someone asks
them to make bacon wraps for their
wedding and they refuse? Should they
be taken to court and run out of business?
Because they are discriminating and using
their religion as an excuse to discriminate
against non-Muslims?