Greer gets death threats and kicked out of his church.

[Siege]

Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to be? I mean, there’s Matthew 6:1-4 in which Jesus says:

“Be careful not to do your ‘acts of righteousness’ before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

“So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

That may be why people aren’t hearing as much from some Christians.

CJ

[Princhester]

I know it’s a tradition to turn biblical tidbits to mean what suits, but I really don’t think that passage means: “fail to speak up about things going on in front of you that you don’t think are right”. It just means don’t make a fuss about your own acts of goodness.

[Siege]

Precisely. Check the last page where my own rector called the congregation to act and speak out against what’s wrong, something I agree with whole-heartedly. What I was referring to when I quoted Matthew was churches which I sincerely hope have told Judge Greer that he is welcome to worshipping with them.

CJ

[Testy]

@Siege

Precisely. Check the last page where my own rector called the congregation to act and speak out against what’s wrong, something I agree with whole-heartedly. What I was referring to when I quoted Matthew was churches which I sincerely hope have told Judge Greer that he is welcome to worshipping with them.
CJ

As Princhester pointed out, there is a difference between doing good works of some type and speaking out against injustice and evil.
While some other church may have invited judge Greer and kept it quiet from the injunctions you mention, I see inviting the judge as more making a point that injustice and outright stupidity should be challenged, especially by those associated with it. This should be done publicly.

Regards

Testy

[gobear]

@Miller

Love the believer, hate the belief, eh?

Still smells like bullshit to me.

So you agree with every school of thought that cxomes down the pike? If I were to say the same things about astrology, would you still trot out that tired apologist nonsense?

[Siege]

For about the 3rd time, I agree! So does my rector and he specifically told our congregation to do so. What do you suggest we do? Invade Florida? I must admit, the weather’d be better down there.

CJ

[gobear]

And just for Miller and his bf, another example of Christians making decisions about other people’s lives:

“This is a very big issue that’s just beginning to surface,” said Steven H. Aden of the Christian Legal Society’s Center for Law and Religious Freedom in Annandale, which defends pharmacists. “More and more pharmacists are becoming aware of their right to conscientiously refuse to pass objectionable medications across the counter. We are on the very front edge of a wave that’s going to break not too far down the line.”

First birth control pills, then. . . what? Refusing to dispense condoms to gay people? Refusal to dispense HIV meds because that would be “thwarting God’s judgment?”

And you can’t just dismiss this as ancillary jackassery that has no connection with faith–this is assholish behavior stemming directly from the poison of religion.

[Polycarp]

@gobear

And just for Miller and his bf, another example of Christians making decisions about other people’s lives:

First birth control pills, then. . . what? Refusing to dispense condoms to gay people? Refusal to dispense HIV meds because that would be “thwarting God’s judgment?”

And you can’t just dismiss this as ancillary jackassery that has no connection with faith–this is assholish behavior stemming directly from the poison of religion.

You know, after I calm down, I’ll agree with you. As Siege and I, and Metacom and about a dozen others have been saying since you started posting these screeds.

For the moment, I’ve deleted a good dozen versions of this post that disparaged you in a variety of ways. TVeblen, Princhester, and SteveG1 made the same point earlier, from a variety of metaphysical perspectives, that often religion is the costume worn by cultural or personal custom to cloak it in an air of respectability.

I am no longer asking but telling you to stop dumping us who have faced obloquy and insult to stand on your side, into the same mix with assholes who would hide their hatred behind a Bible. It ill becomes you, and it offends me that you would resort to the same sort of techniques as Falwell and Dobson and Paul Cameron. May I next expect a post in which you cook statistics to “show scientifically how evil those debbil Christians are”? Because, Mr. gobear, that is the direction your posts have been heading. And as someone who was proud to call you friend, that saddens me.

[duffer]

@gobear

And just for Miller and his bf, another example of Christians making decisions about other people’s lives:

Huh. I thought it was lawmakers that made laws. Who the hell didn’t give me the memo that us evil Christians now control all the laws made just to piss off gobear?

C’Mon people, there are birth control pills to stop! Surely whatever gobear can cite will be backed up by stats of Pharmacists in that city to show that it wasn’t just one Doctor (Yes, they are doctors), but every one of them denying the script.

The fact that it’s a rallying point and the woman had it filled isn’t important here!

This is so far beyond rediculous that all I can do is laugh. And, honestly, the laughter isn’t very enjoyable.

[Polycarp]

@duffer

Huh. I thought it was lawmakers that made laws. Who the hell didn’t give me the memo that us evil Christians now control all the laws made just to piss off gobear?

C’Mon people, there are birth control pills to stop! Surely whatever gobear can cite will be backed up by stats of Pharmacists in that city to show that it wasn’t just one Doctor (Yes, they are doctors), but every one of them denying the script.

The fact that it’s a rallying point and the woman had it filled isn’t important here!

This is so far beyond rediculous that all I can do is laugh. And, honestly, the laughter isn’t very enjoyable.

Be fair, Duffer. If a group of people are founding their opposition to a practice on what they consider moral grounds, whether it be the death penalty, the use of fur and meat, abortion, gay marriages or attempting to block them, then there are grounds for challenging the moral grounds on which they found their views, and in consequence anyone propounding those moral grounds as a social standard to which all are to be expected to conform.

My standard on the pharmacy case is that if a person is licensed by the state to perform a public function, which it is illegal to perform without that license, then he or she has made an implicit commitment to perform that function in behalf of anyone who can legally request it to be done, regardless of his or her personal feelings as regards it. He or she is entitled to have reservations on moral grounds, but if that be the case, he or she should not accept the state license and the obligations that go with it.

If my wife is faced with renewing her driver’s license, to set up a hypothetical example, it should not be her obligation to shop around for a DMV office staffed by a person who believes women should be permitted to drive; they all should be prepared to renew her license, regardless of their personal feelings on the subject. (I realize this one is vastly anachronistic in ascribing an attitude, but that de-fuses it and hence makes it a good example of my point.)

[gobear]

@Polycarp

I am no longer asking but telling you to stop dumping us who have faced obloquy and insult to stand on your side, into the same mix with assholes who would hide their hatred behind a Bible. It ill becomes you, and it offends me that you would resort to the same sort of techniques as Falwell and Dobson and Paul Cameron. May I next expect a post in which you cook statistics to “show scientifically how evil those debbil Christians are”? Because, Mr. gobear, that is the direction your posts have been heading. And as someone who was proud to call you friend, that saddens me.

" May I next expect a post in which you cook statistics to “show scientifically how evil those debbil Christians are”?

No, because unlike Falwell and Dobson and their sort, I have no need to sacricifice my ethics to “lie for the Lord.” The unadorned facts speak for themselves. The most vicious, backward, troglodytic wing of conservative religion is feeling its oats and rising to claim a right to dictate to non-believers how to live and what to think in an unholy Christo-fascism.

And, yes, your denomination is riven by pro-gay sentiment that has cost people dearly. Yes, there are good Christians who abhor Falwell as much as I do. Yes, there are denominations that accept gay people, but that’s all beside the point. If every Christian was as peaceable and decent as you, I’d adopt a gentler tone, but I’d still challenge religion as being metaphysical nonsense akin to palm-reading or astrology or supply-side economics. To quote Robert Ingersoll,

We do not want creeds; we want knowledge – we want happiness.

And yet we are told by the church that we have accomplished nothing; that we are simply destroyers; that we tear down without building again.

Is it nothing to free the mind? Is it nothing to civilize mankind? Is it nothing to fill the world with light, with discovery, with science? Is it nothing to dignify man and exalt the intellect?

Is it a small thing to make men truly free – to destroy the dogmas of ignorance, prejudice and power – the poisoned fables of superstition, and drive from the beautiful face of the earth the fiend of fear?"

Poly, you’re a good person, so why not simply be a good person without having to kneel in obeisance to the church that engenders tyranny?

[Testy]

@Siege

For about the 3rd time, I agree! So does my rector and he specifically told our congregation to do so. What do you suggest we do? Invade Florida? I must admit, the weather’d be better down there.
CJ

Well, invading Florida might be a good start. There seem to be major problems in that part of the world. In any event, my comments certainly aren’t aimed at you specifically but more toward religion in general. If you wish me to acknowledge that there are good and decent religious individuals. I willingly do so. Yourself and Poly come to mind immediately as being good advertisements for your respective faiths.

The problem is that there are no good religions.
Every religion that I am aware of claims to provide a guide for living, implying an involvement in worldly affairs. Given that it is humans that have to carry out the divine commands, those guides for life are inevitably going to be twisted into a justification for something ugly. Islam is a very nice religion but its followers are commanded to live a certain way and when Islam becomes part of the government it becomes a demon that is never satisfied. Christianity is no better. Everone rightly decries the excesses of the Taliban regime but never stops to think that, given the opportunity, their own religion would be jut as foul and abusive.

Religious people are trying (and succeeding) at gaining secular power in the US. Politicians will inevitably bow to the wishes of their constituents and eagerly try to surpass them in expectation of another few million votes come election time. That is just the nature of things but in the US we are supposed to have SOCAS, something that religious people are trying as hard as they can to erode.

The hospice where TS is finishing dying is surrounded by religious protestors making stupid and outrageous claims. Where are the religious counter-demonstrators? There are no religious people down there saying “Leave the woman alone to finish her dying. This is none of your business.”
Instead, we have the religious people urging Jeb Bush to ignore his sworn duty and mount an illegal “rescue.” We have a resident and various other elected leaders pasing bills without checking the facts. Not because they give the slightest damn about Terry Schiavo, but because they have to cater to the religious people among us.

Regards

Testy

[dropzone]

@Reeder

Yep…good “christian” behavior.

Defend this christians

Reeder, are you a RNC plant; their impression of a “typical” liberal? I’ve about had it with your kneejerk (emphasis on “jerk”) reactions, conclusion jumping, and broad brushing. Your assholishness has gotten on my last nerve.

Same for you, gobear. You are acting like the other biggest asshole around here lately and the way you wrap your hatred in selfpity for your persecution makes it especially nauseating.

I am sick and tired of you both. Just shut the fuck up and let the grownups talk, okay?

[duffer]

@Polycarp

Be fair, Duffer. If a group of people are founding their opposition to a practice on what they consider moral grounds, whether it be the death penalty, the use of fur and meat, abortion, gay marriages or attempting to block them, then there are grounds for challenging the moral grounds on which they found their views, and in consequence anyone propounding those moral grounds as a social standard to which all are to be expected to conform.

Agreed. Protest all you want about a pharmacist that refuses to fill a script. I think it’s dumb not to fill it, but if the pharmacist feels that way, fine. Was there another pharmacy available to fill this order? If so, it’s one person excercising the right to follow his or her religious teachings vs. a person looking to file suit because she was too lazy or thin-skinned to go to another pharmacy.

I thought freedom of religion applied to those that are, uh, religious. Where am I going wrong here? It seems pretty cut and dried so long as we’re not talking lawsuits to change what is already accepted. If we’re talking a script for birth control pills that couldn’t be filled at any other place in the city, I’ll stand beside her. If it’s a “Hey, let’s challenge the law because I’m bored and want attention”, the argument is a little weakened.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

Thankyou Reeder for providing this report. I haven’t heard much in particular about this brave and honourable man Judge Greer, but to find out that he has been at odds with his support group so consistently and painfully, allows me to be at peace with the final outcome of his decision. He truly must have been convinced that regarding Terri’s wishes, and now I’m convinced.

[gobear]

Same for you, gobear. You are acting like the other biggest asshole around here lately and the way you wrap your hatred in selfpity for your persecution makes it especially nauseating.

Fuck off, Dropzone. I find it tiring that you have to write off criticism of religion as “hatred” so you can dismiss any discussion that does not flatter your metaphysical biases. Pitiful.

[Testy]

@duffer

<SNIP>
I thought freedom of religion applied to those that are, uh, religious. Where am I going wrong here? It seems pretty cut and dried so long as we’re not talking lawsuits to change what is already accepted. If we’re talking a script for birth control pills that couldn’t be filled at any other place in the city, I’ll stand beside her. If it’s a “Hey, let’s challenge the law because I’m bored and want attention”, the argument is a little weakened.

It should also be freedom from religion. If I go into a pharmacy with a legitimate prescription I expect it to be filled, regardless of the pharmacist’s religious scruples. If he has such a problem dispensing certain legitimate medicines, he should be doing something else or put a sign over the door that only religiously-allowed prescriptions will be filled.

Regards

Testy

[Hamlet]

@gobear

I find it tiring that you have to write off criticism of religion as “hatred” so you can dismiss any discussion that does not flatter your metaphysical biases.

Actually, I think dropzone was not concerned about your criticism of religion, but rather how and how often, you express it.

[gobear]

@Hamlet

Actually, I think dropzone was not concerned about your criticism of religion, but rather how and how often, you express it.

You make a good point and I guess I should dial it down a couple of notches. I don’t like being strident, but the Schaivo case and other indicia of the growing tide of social control are giving me the roaring heebie-jeebies.

I’ll lay off the God tip for a while.

[dropzone]

@gobear

Fuck off, Dropzone. I find it tiring that you have to write off criticism of religion as “hatred” so you can dismiss any discussion that does not flatter your metaphysical biases. Pitiful.

WHAT metaphysical biases? If I have any they are more towards you than the theists, but just because I often agree with you doesn’t mean that I can’t be sick and tired of your shrill extremism. Being one I know what pains in the ass are like and you have grown into a one-trick pony whose hatred is palpable.