As long as that “common thread” is agreed upon by the one being called out, this would apply here. Point stands.
Unfortunately, Poly, the “common thread” among Christian sects seems to be “belief that Jesus Christ was the son of God and that he died for our sins so everyone can get to heaven.” The details beyond that vary way too wildly to make comparisons.
Esprix
Gosh, this is the first time I have read this thread since I posted on it last.
I just wanted to say thank you Delphica.
Why is it that other ‘threads of hate’ have been shut down so fast, but the Mods let this continue?
Amazing!!! :rolleyes:
Perhaps the mods, in all their glorious wisdom, keep hoping this thread will actually progress somewhere, instead of staggering around like the undead at a brain buffet.
Wow, you got me with that one. “Zing!” as Esprix so eloquently put it.
But let’s call a spade a spade. You’re actually complaining about the anger that a man exhibits when somebody attacks and insults his wife for no reason (Eva Braun? roach? sheesh). If you’re going to criticize my behavior, at least get straight what behavior you’re talking about.
I prefer “touché”.
You are not on solid ground, Joe, when you say “with no reason.” You and your ilk have used a very dubious reason to attack others on this board for their faith or their sexuality. And wasn’t there someone around, say, 2000 years ago, who said something about “seventy times seven?”
He privately e mailed me calling me a hypocrite with no cite!!
(and threatened to have me banned)!
Can you believe it??!!!
some christians…
He being Joe_Cool of course.
hi Monty
Calling a spade a spade. How interesting. I thought that was what I did when I called a roach a roach.
Jersey is no Eva Braun. Eva had fashion sense and at least picked a mate who had some stature, as twisted as that stature was. Yet… I guess I can see somewhat of a parallel. Violent dealings with those not powerful enough to fight back using force and terror tactics. It is stretching, but the barest trace is there.
Still, the behaviour of you and your betrothed that is being discussed is your recalcitrant pose about being the last word in theology and the application of it.
You seem to be great at dishing it out and ever so poor at taking it. Perhaps you could learn from this that you need not dish out like you have been. Though to assume you will learn ANYTHING is highly suspect at best.
FOR WHAT?
I have some trouble with their religious views, but I have to defend here. Jersey is a beautiful and stylish woman and her & Joe make one of the best looking couples I know. In person they have shown me nothing but kindness and grace. They have gone out of their way to help me before and I must say, as strongly as I disagree with some of their world views, they seem to me to be kind and loving people IRL. I think this attack need not have been so vicious, personal, nor drawn out.
When speaking about religion it is really easy to get riled up. I have said some things in the past in religious threads that probably would have gone over alot better had I been less agressive and more understanding. A lesson I struggle with and one that I think alot of us would do well to consider.
Either way, after reading all of the recent threads (originals and subsequent pitters) these kids have been mixed up in, I think that the assessment that they are horrible people is unwarranted, and the character attacks have been way over the top. I don’t agree with everything they say by a long shot, but I get the impression that they are very kind and caring people for the most part. The disagreement with their philosophy I can empathize with but the judgement of them as horrible people seems way off the mark to me.
Not that anyone cares what I think.
DaLovin’ Dj
As I’ve quoted before, “We all talk a different language, talking in defense.”
From my public and private dealings with Joe, I’d have to agree with DJ’s views, with the added proviso that Joe, like many of us, can see red when something directly attacks him or his – and in his view, his stance in behalf of the Bible and what it says does not justify direct attacks on him or his wife and their attitudes and persons. Needless to say, for any gay person who feels himself to be dehumanized by the sort of attitudes generally taken by people who agree with their Bibliocentric stance, it is quite fully justified as “you get back what you give.”
Vanilla, I think whatever the exchange between you was needs to be brought out into public view. It sounds like Joe was insulted by your apparent implication that he was not being very Christlike in "Amen"ing Homebrew’s sardonic use of Joe’s “Christian” attitudes, and considers you hypocritical for agreeing with Homebrew.
I know Joe and Jersey to be sincere and decent people, through a small amount of personal contact and third-person reports. But from what I’ve seen online, it would often be hard to prove that – and at least some of the blame for that goes to the gay posters who went overboard in condemning them for their stance, and at least some to Joe in returning anger for anger and bile for bile when they did.
I’ve seen Joe and gobear come to a consensus of sorts. I’ve seen Jersey make a post expressing her very positive opinion of a discharged gay military Arabic-translator, and I think that was at least partly an attempt at offering an olive branch.
I’m suggesting here a ceasefire and opportunity to get the issues that separate people brought out and examined, with no jumping to conclusions or flamefests on either side. I dunno if it will work, but it’s no more than my duty to try.
Funny, I thought there was an understanding that our private e-mail conversations would be kept private and not splashed all over the board. Are you in the habit of violating privacy?
Private conversations are undertaken in e-mail because they do not belong in a public forum. If you have a problem with me and what I said to you privately, you can take it up with me privately. Matthew 18:15-17, since you say you’re a Christian. But since you prefer to disregard the Bible and go for the short-term popularity with the Christian-bashers, maybe this holds a little more water for you:
From the SDMB registration agreement.
But this is honestly no less than I expected from you.
Oh, nice, Joe - making a list of who is and who isn’t Christian now?
You just lost what little credibility you had.
Esprix
Private emails SHOULD be kept private, by all standards of etiquette. However, when sending mail, one should consider the receiver. Some will keep things private, and some won’t. Once mail is sent, the letter (whether email or snail mail) is technically the property of the receiver.
That being said, if a couple of people are having a private discussion, we vastly prefer that it be kept OUT of the Straight Dope Message Boards. This means don’t discuss your emails with each other. Don’t discuss problems you’re having on or with other message boards. If more than one family member posts at the Straight Dope, don’t post about family problems. DON’T DRAG THE SDMB INTO IT! We get into enough fights as it is.
In fact, vanilla, this isn’t the first time you’ve dragged your private affairs/arguments/discussions onto the message boards. Do it again, with ANYBODY AT ALL, and you’re banned. And you should take MY threat of banning seriously.
Lynn
For the Straight Dope
Joe, if you had called me a hypocrite without giving an extremely good reason for your accusation and made a threat against my membership here, I’d not only make it public but would take the making of such threat up with an administrator post haste.
You quoted that passage to me in our e-mail exchange, which I have not yet made public except for my on-board apology to Jersey. I responded in what I thought was a peacable manner addressing your problems and objections, expressing interest in continuing the discussion privately. You declined to answer that e-mail.
Now, I cannot here “take this to one or two brethren” so I am skipping that step and stating publicly that I seek peace. But you cannot use selected Scriptures to justify what you want to do and do not want done, and not observe the rest of it – that’s what this thread was all about in the first place.
My advice, if you’re willing to listen: drop it now, with Vanilla. Or perhaps see why she said what she did, why she feels that way.
Poly, the only “threat” I made to vanilla was that I expected our e-mail to be kept private, and if that privacy was violated I would report her to the Administrator for that violation. That is all.
Beyond that, while I appreciate your concern, I’m not going to discuss the conversation I had with her on this board. I hope you understand.
No, Esprix, nothing of the kind. It’s not my place to make that judgment, nor am I qualified to do so. She says she’s a Christian. That’s all I know.
Isn’t that the whole point of this thread’s OP, but in regard to you?