Dude, the guy’s a football player who’s kneeling down on the sidelines. That’s it. And all of a sudden he’s the next Hitler. Please. He’s only a threat to the opposing team. (Ditto Polamalu – in fact, that’s guy’s really dangerous. You don’t want to get in his way, or he’ll mow you down.)
What about those who follow the Sermon on the Mount, or the parable of the Sheeps and the Goats, or the Good Samaritan?
Religion can influence people to do good, or it can influence people to do evil. You have on one hand Fred Phelps and Pat Robertson; on the other, Oscar Romero and Martin Luther King. You have Osama Bin Laden, and then you have Gandhi.
Why is everything always so black and white with you? Life isn’t just good people and bad people.
Dogma doesn’t matter, because most Christians aren’t experts on their religion. The lay parishioner can have all sorts of weird beliefs.
That said, is it actually a distorted view? Don’t Catholics require submission to Jesus for salvation?
In any case: http://pewforum.org/Age/Religion-Among-the-Millennials.aspx
In answer to:* Do you think there is a hell, where people who have lead bad lives and die without being sorry are eternally punished?* Under age 30 is 59%, over age 30 is 62%.
Lobohan, actually not really. Catholicism, to put it extremely simply, basically states that while Christianity is the best bet for salvation, only God can answer who is saved and who is not. So no, it is not taught that those who don’t believe in Jesus go to Hell. That may have been a pre-Vatican II teaching, but it’s really not the Church view. (No, “You must accept Jesus Christ as your savior or you’ll burn in hell forever and non-Christians are condemned!!!”)
Oh, that’s obnoxious, no doubt. I’m not saying I’m a fan of Tebow, mind you. Just that I don’t think he’s evil. Annoying and overexposed, probably. But that’s about it. (Although the over-exposure isn’t really his fault.)
Personally, I wish the media would shut up about the guy and quit acting like he’s the second coming of John Elway. (Is he really that good? Talent wise, that is? I’ve heard from both sides.)
You’re proving my point. Remember, I asked how Maher’s tweet can possibly be to substantiate the statement that religion is harmful. By your own admission, it doesn’t. Therefore, this whole issue of the harmfulness of religion is simply irrelevant.
I don’t think he is evil; I don’t hate him. However, he is worthy of mockery, and he is good for a few laughs. Maher agrees; his tweet represent nothing more than ridicule.
Mockery, yes. But some of the out and out hate that people show is pretty over the top.
Maybe I’m just a wee bitter – I’m a Steelers fan and our quarterback, while probably one of the best in the league, is a complete and total asshole. Trust me, I’d rather have someone with Tebow’s personality than Roethlisberger.
See, you say this - everyone always does. People always say that the other guys need to learn how to take a joke. But when its their ox being gored, or their ideological allies’ oxes, they get up in arms about how offended they are.
Tim Tebow became a folk hero to the “silent majority” of Christians in America. When he was ridiculed, they stopped being silent.
Fox “News” and the people that listen to them are not a “silent majority” by any stretch of the imagination. The reaction to the tweet was deliberately blown out of proportion by Fox, and the yahoos are upset about the tweet because Fox commentators are upset about it.
I don’t know about Fox, I just know about what I see on my Facebook feed. I don’t think the majority of those people heard about it from Fox originally. I think they heard about it from other peoples’ Facebook posts. Facebook is the future of news anyway; the standard TV news format is already a dinosaur. People see their friends posting about the Tebow incident and join in with their own opinions. And in this case, their opinions are strong.
I would think the general concensus about whether he deserves the mockery is more significant than the opinions of a small group of self-selected supporters.
I agree. Christians often don’t follow what their religion demands, which is to love each other. You, OTOH, are completely pulling out of your ass that the religion “demands” that adherents kill nonbelievers. Actually, to say you pull that our of you ass is an insult to arguments that are pulled out of someone’s ass.
I’m not ignoring anything. Christians committed atrocities in the past in the name of Christianity. It was the norm, but not because of Christianity. That was the social norm of that era, regardless of religion. Said atrocities are not in the nature of Christianity, which is what you are claiming, and they needn’t be part of Christianity going forward. History proves that.