Umm, let me get this straight.
You’re insulted by the remarks of the husband** of a woman who was shot, explaining what attracted him to her when they met?
THAT remark (not a description by a reporter, but by the fucking HUSBAND of the victim) is insulting to you?
The mind boggles :rolleyes:
I admit it was a hijack, but yes, I am insulted by people constantly equating “religious = moral.” If someone said, “they couldn’t possibly have abused their children—they were white!” or, “She was Hispanic; she had good morals,” I don’t think anyone would carp about my being mildly annoyed.
Repeat: “mildly annoyed.” It’s not like I am suggesting a full-on riot with looting.
Did you read my post? The quote you included was about a HUSBAND referring to his deceased wife? That doesn’t even come close to the examples you list here.
FTR, you didn’t describe yourself as “mildly annoyed” but as…let me find it,
Oh yeah…“incredibly insulting”.
So to sum up, Eve is “incredibly insulted” by the personal account of a widower on why he fell in love with his wife.
Cry me a river. :rolleyes:
Well, yeah, I am very sorry for his loss. But that does not give you carte blanch to tell me when I am and am not allowed to take offense at being called immoral. Perhaps he spoke hastily because of his grief, or perhaps he was mistranslated (he does not speak English). But the quote as it stands? “Me no likee,” to quote Sarah Jessica Parker.
Oh Yes. Because religion has absolutely nothing in any way to do with morality.
Eve, that was quite possibly the single biggest example I have ever seen of someone projecting.
beagledave, rather than further hijkacking this thread, why not
a) open a Great Debates thread on this topic if you’d like a serious, in-depth discussion of this matter, or,
b) open a Pit thread if you just want to scream and yell like a spoiled three-year-old.
beagledave, rather than further hijkacking this thread, why not
a) open a Great Debates thread on this topic if you’d like a serious, in-depth discussion of this matter, or,
b) open a Pit thread if you just want to scream and yell like a spoiled three-year-old.
It doesn’t. One can be moral without being superstitious. Maybe we can start with “Act only upon that maxim which you would, at the same time, wish to become universal law.” (Thank you, Immanuel).
As for the boys, why were they the only ones starved? Because they weren’t biologically related to the “parents”? And I don’t get the uncles logic. How can someone be born with an eating disorder? Isn’t that learned behaviour? I can’t imagine our homonid ancestors would have been able to procreate if they refused to eat.
**
beagledave checks to see if he told Eve she was “not allowed” to express an opinion…um nope, but nice red herring. You’re “allowed” to express any opinion and be subject to the reactions of others.
Are you REALLY saying that you have never criticized someone else for being offended about something? :dubious"
Well, I’m going by your version of the story since I don’t have the original source…but from what i can gather, the man is recalling his wife. He is listing the things that attracted him to her, that she was religious…that she has good morals.
Help me out here…where was this widower expressing condemnation about atheists?
By the way …which is it are you “incredibly insulted” like you claimed earlier or are you “mildly annoyed” like you backpeddaled later?
**
Huh. Sounds like you think you have “carte blanche” to tell me that I can’t find the whining of yours silly.
Funny, that.
The name calling is classy though.
Are there reasonably intelligent people left in the world who believe that religion and morality share any kind of connection? Still today?
The mind boggles. I don’t think it’s insulting as Eve sees it, but I do find it baffling. It can become insulting when it’s used to backhandedly imply that the non-religious cannot be moral.
I dunno, Eve, I think its attitudes like yours that give athiests a bad name. Youre almost being oversensitive to the point of suppressing someones religious views, which in this country is still legal.
Lighten up.
Why is it even allowed to “foster” that many children… ? Don’t they set a limit?
Maybe thay can teach the 19 year old to say…
“Wachoo talkin’ about Willis!”
(I’m sorry, but it just could not be helped)
Yes, it damn well could.
WHAT. THE FUCK. IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE? How can a human being do this to another human being? How could it be that no one fucking noticed? There’s thousands of people out there who would move heaven and hell to have a chance at being a parent and yet we’ve got fuckwads like this playing out their own twisted little version of 8 is Enough, locking kids in cars and trunks, shaking them, beating them, burning them; I read about it in the papers and what’s worse, I answer the phones when it’s some little kid calling 911 saying Daddy hurt Sissy and she won’t wake up, or someone calling because the neighbor’s 2 year old showed up on their doorstep wearing nothing but a filthy diaper in the middle of winter because Mommy locked him out of the house so the worthless whore could get it on with her crack dealer, which I guess is better than giving the 2 year old to the crack dealer in exchange for a hit, and yeah, we call DFS, but for every kid that gets rescued there’s 20 more out there somewhere who won’t get any help because nobody saw nuthin’.
Whew. Guess that’s been building up for a while.
And people wonder why I never leave my house except to go to work.
Not in New York State, as far as I’m aware - my parents get paid depending on how old the child is (and therefore how much his or her keeping - for lack of a better word - is expected to cost).
People like this, who do it for the money, give all foster parents a bad name.
Oh, well then forget it.
**Weirddave shuffles away, disapointed. Behind him on the table we can just make out THE printing on a homemade poster:
"**SUNDAY!!SUNDAY!!SUNDAY!!
EVE VERSUS THE RELIGOUS RIGHT!!
“I do too have morals”, protests the famous author.
“Godless harlot!” accuses her opponent.
COME FOR THE RIOT, STAY FOR THE LOOTING!!"****
I know it’s unsporting of me to try to yank the tone of this thread away from a good old-fashioned whumpin’ contest, but I will, dammit.
I am appalled that this horrible offense has sparked such minor interest on this board, and that some lunatic even thought it appropriate to make a feeble Diffrent Strokes joke.
My mother was a step-child. Her mother and step-father showed a marked preference for their own children. Now, I can see that this is probably all it was - not wickedness, not violence, just rather poor behaviour. Like, when she was given a pretty doll for a birthday taking it off her, and giving it to a younger sister instead. Just poor unloving behaviour.
But it haunted her till the day she died.
It made her a person who constantly doubted her worth, never confident, never secure, and although happy at times, never very confident about happiness in the future.
Now, at the age of fifty, I look back over my own life and see how deeply my brother, sister and I were marked by her lack of confidence. All three of us have lives that have shown early promise, but have turned out far less fulfilling and satisfying than that promise indicated. In short, our lives have been failures. I believe were harmed in our lives by the consequences of the early life of our mother.
And that was the result of mere poor behaviour.
Given how grave and frightful these revelations are, what are these young men going to have to live with, if they manage to survive physically?
And their brothers and sisters, who must have known that the slightest show of compassion for their starving brothers at any time, would have probably endangered their own safety. What appalling burden of guilt will they have to live with? For the rest of their lives, and also for their own childrens lives, I assure you.
The rich and full church life these people led, shouldnt really surprise anyone who’s read Dickens I suppose, but is arresting nevertheless. These are the people to whom Christ said he would say “in that day” “I never knew you. Depart from me , ye that work iniquity”(Matthew 7, 21-2)
The christian church here in Australia continues to work to deprive homosexuals of their rights and safety. At the same time, it has finally been revealed that the Catholic Archbishop of Tasmania has for years covered up the series of sexual assaults by a priest friend of his. On Friday it was revealed that the Archbishop had lied in a nationally-televised interview. he had claimed that he never knew of the priests many offences; last night we saw the letter he wrote to one of the victims of this vampire, dated well before the interview.
In short, highly respectable christian people can be found out as predators on defenceless children.
So too, can atheists.
But atheists don’t usually claim the right of moral leadership and prohibition. They don’t preach public sermons against sins they commit themselves in private. I have never had an atheist tell me I am wicked for being gay, or heard one try to prevent young women from having abortions.
The point is, these depraved sadists felt so powerful and satisfied with their morals and goodness (Jackson “fed the homeless” you know) that they were able to indulge their worst, most primitive instincts.
Jesus with the children on his knee, talking of their closeness to heaven, is a lovely image for a stained glass window. And that is just where the church would prefer to leave it.
As usual, the suave and soignee Eve is right, and you other bastards are SO WRONG.
And please - pray for those Jackson children, all of them.
Cheers,
Redboss
PS Marlitharn - hope you are okay my dear. Please try to go for a walk in the sun when its there. Sounds like you need a bit of support in that work.
I’m a Christian, and I agree with RedBoss. Some of the cruelest people I have known, on-line and in real life have not only been Christians, but proud of their Christianity. I’ve no doubt that there are people who, because they follow the mainstream religion in their country, be it Christianity in the United States, Islam in Saudi Arabia, or Buddhism in Tibet (correct me if I’m wrong on that one), are very pleased and proud to consider themselves more moral than their neighbors who follow a different religion or who are Atheists.
I should know better by now, I really should, but still I’m appalled by how much hatred and cruelty some human beings are capable of.
CJ