And what of my cites to the Catholic Church and other of the largest demoninations (including the largest) in the U.S.?
I never said you were–from the gitgo, I acknowledged the existence of reasonable Christians (for a certain value of “reasonable”)
But they ARE “most Christians”–at least here in the US. Did you not read Homebrew’s cites? Damn, woman, do you need it spelled out any clearer exactly how hostile the major denominations are to me and mine?
Never said it, so why you attribute that to me is mystifying. You’re a good woman, but you and your church are not in the majority.
What of them? I’m not a Catholic and I go to a non-denominational church. I just said I have nothing in common with those people, so I wish not to be lumped in with those who “lack independent thought”.
gobear, you acknowledged the presence of reasonable christians, but then went on to say that we don’t believe there are non-reasonable ones.
That is my beef. If I believed everyone was like me, I wouldn’t think twice about your post.
Oooh! Is this where you trot out your bogus piece of evidence where the majority of fundamental Christians polled are anti-gay, and you claim that means that the majority of all Christians are anti-gay? I love that one.
:: blows whistle ::
Time out!
Please, please, Christian and non-Christian supporters of reason, science, and compassion – can we stop the internecine warfare and turn the passion and fury upon the targets that deserve it? The dogmatists who elevate an abstract doctrine over the reality of human suffering before them in the flesh – those are the people to flay. I’m an atheist; I believe a large chunk of the Christian population in this country is narrow-minded and judgmental to the point of outright bigotry (check out what’s happening in Massachusetts over gay marriage, for example); but there are also goodly numbers of Christians who carry Christ’s message of love into their daily lives in a way that embraces rather than repulses those who differ from them.
We need to stop fighting over who’s more open-minded and unite against the folks whose minds are nailed shut, people!
[sigh] Can’t we all just get along?
:: runs for cover ::
Not to sound condescending, but you didn’t make any links to the Catholic Church (not that I doubt what they’ll say).
What if we phrase the sentiment a little differently?
For example, I will fully admit that I have not spoken with every single Christian on the planet, not have I administered an opinion poll that will allow me to tabulate where the majority of Christians stand. Therefore, I will conclude that it is not factually accurate for me to say “most Christians do/feel X”.
However, I will say that every single time that I have become aware of a vocal group attempting to stop social progress in areas that are very important to me, they have been Christians.
From this I can conclude that if person X has extremist and regressive views, there is a high probability that he will be Christian.
To the degree that you unquestioningly swallow mythology and legends as reality, then yes. I see no reason to give religion any more respect than we give astrology or the reading of tea leaves. We know that the Biblical accounts of creation are not true, that, the figures and events described in much of the Bible didn’t exist, and that the mind is the product of the brain, not some immanent nous that lives separately from and survives the death of the body. Clearly, Polycarp, who thinks some kid on the Web is the Second Coming, has shown that even the most sensible people can fall prey to delusions, because they have been primed to gullibility by religion.
If, on the other hand, you view Christianity as more of an ethical system that teaches love and compassion and gives meaning and depth to your life, then no.
If you agree that my comments did not include you, and you agree that you are outnumbered by the intolerant Christians, then we have no reason to argue.
Originally posted by Munch
Oooh! Is this where you trot out your bogus piece of evidence where the majority of fundamental Christians polled are anti-gay, and you claim that means that the majority of all Christians are anti-gay? I love that one.
[/quote]
*Homebrew already provided you some pretty damning cites. Try to argue that they don’t mean what they say–I love that one.
I asked…“Do we have you on the record as saying that all of the above dopers are incapable of independent thought?”
gobear said…
Nice tap dancing…of course I never said anything about “unquestioning faith”…most if not all folks who have theistic beliefs, question or examine them over time.
But again, you said earlier
…and the fact of the matter is that all of those posters…and billions more from Einstein to most U.S. presidents and world leaders…most corporate leaders…most of the population has theistic beliefs.
And ALL of them, from Einstein to Gandhi to the vast majority of the worlds leaders are ALL…
…wait for it…
…incapable of independent thinking.
Wow.
Good thing we have gobear and the fellow atheists around to rescue our theistic asses from ourselves.
Gobear, you know I have a rather high opinion of you, and it was a pleasure meeting you last fall. On the other hand, I do not believe that the likes of RaptureReady.com, etc. are in the majority when it comes to Christian belief. Indeed, even though I am a lifelong Christian, I didn’t even hear of Rapture theology until I became an adult. I get the impression they’re about as typical of Christianity in the United States as the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence are of homosexuals. Even if they have snuck into the majority while my back was turned, I’ll point out to you that Rapture theology’s pretty much unheard of outside the U.S. Certainly every Episcopal priest I’ve asked about it considers it, bluntly, nuts.
You’ve seen my song and dance on why becoming an Atheist is not a viable option for me – better a delusion which sustains my life (Christianity) than one which might end it (my own worthlessness, caused by depression and other factors). I also figure I can do a lot more to change my religion’s attitudes by working within it, including smiting back, Bible verse for Bible verse.
Lad, you know I don’t blame you for being angry, for being bloody furious at times. Hell, one reason I left a Christian message board is because I got so angry I broke a chair one morning! That doesn’t give either of us the right to tar all Christians with the brush of bigotry.
Please, reconsider?
CJ
[quote]
…and the fact of the matter is that all of those posters…and billions more from Einstein to most U.S. presidents and world leaders…most corporate leaders…most of the population has theistic beliefs.
And ALL of them, from Einstein to Gandhi to the vast majority of the worlds leaders are ALL…
…wait for it…
…incapable of independent thinking.
Wow.
Good thing we have gobear and the fellow atheists around to rescue our theistic asses from ourselves.
[quote]
First, Einstein was an atheist; all that talk about “God doesn’t play dice” is just rhetoric tailored for public consumption.
Second, the argument from popularity is a fallacy; the number of people who subscribe to a belief has no relevance to its merits. Moreover, all those people you cite have wildly conflicting conceptions of deity–is there one god or many gods? Does He have a wife and a son? Is he the chief god of a pantheon or doing a solo act? It doesn’t support your case that every relgion disagrees with every other religion.
Can I conclusively demonstrate there is no God? No, but neither can I conclusively demonstrate there are no elves, unicorns, vampires, apsaras, kobollds, brownies, angels, devils, werewolves, ghosts, or any number of other supernatural entities. Doesn’t mean they exist.
Tell you what–read The Bible Unearthed, by Israel Finkelstein and Neal Asher Silberman–we’ll talk.
Just jumping in to see if any of those against MAP have stated their beliefs that the birth control pill assists in abortion?
Simplistic description of Einsteins relationship with religion.
…“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
Well I wasn’t MAKING the argument that popularity=truth. I WAS wondering if you really think that all of the people who believe in a God “lack the ability to independently think”.
An “inability to independently think” seems pretty equivalent to “not too bright”…
You don’t think Bricker is very bright? Or Jodi? Or tomndebb? Or RTFirefly? None of them can think for themselves?
Been buying up shares of a straw company, have you?
No one, least of all me, claimed that there are “no yahoo Christians” or that there are no Christian groups that support the sorts of things you describe. Indeed, I’d be pretty foolish to suggest such a thing – these people do exist, as evidenced by the websites you noted.
What I did suggest is that your assertion that these types are somehow representative of mainstream Christianity as a whole is stupid and asinine. Yes, there are fundamentalist whacko Christians. They are as representative of the Christian faith as fundamentalist whacko Muslims who think crashing planes into buildings is a positive step for Islam worldwide.
Devil’s advocate, DCU: Are you asserting that the prominent church leaders (including the Pope) who condemn homosexuality as a sin, the entire half of the major American church that split off from the other half over the gay bishop ‘scandal,’ and the half of the entire country (which is predominantly Christian) that believes that homosexuality is a sin are NOT representative of mainstream Christianity?
Here’s an important quote. Read it. Pretty much takes care of this whole argument.
Gay Dodson, executive director of the Texas State Board of Pharmacy in Austin, says pharmacists can refuse to fill prescriptions for medical reasons–for instance, if a patient is given orders for two incompatible drugs. But “there’s no conscience clause in Texas law that would allow a pharmacist to refuse under moral grounds,” she says.
There. The pharmacist has no legal right to refuse to fill the script, unless there is a possible interaction.
Were that what gobear was talking about, you might have an argument. However, gobear did not say “mainstream Christianity is less than fully accepting of homosexuality.” Instead, he suggested that extremist, fundamentalist whacko websites were representative of mainstream Christian thought. Kindly pick up your straw man and take it elsewhere.
And frankly, the fact that the debate over homosexuality is taking place in the church ought to be seen as a good sign – a showing that Christians are willing to wrestle with reconciling scripture with modern notions of fairness. Just as most mainstream denominations wrestled with ordaining female clergy several decades ago, so today they wrestle with handling homosexuality. That serious debate takes place on the issue is to Christianity’s credit.
The church necessarily adopts such social changes slowly, bound as it is to longstanding tradition and biblical text. That, I think, is actually a good thing in the long run: the church slows the embracing of new notions of morality, and in doing so forces us to thoroughly question whether those changes are ultimately beneficial.
But the mere fact that the church changes at a speed less than what you would prefer is not a reason to slur the good name of millions of decent Christians worldwide by tarring them with the peculiar views of their religion’s most extreme adherents. Gobear should be ashamed of himself for doing so. You should be ashamed for endorsing that behavior.
No, and again, if the claim is “mainstream Christianity is less than fully accepting of homosexuality,” then I’d have to agree.
But to suggest, as gobear does, that RaptureReady.org and the other websites gobear listed are representative of mainstream Christianity is a whole 'nother kettle of fish.
I understand that, but one could argue (and I’m not sure I fully believe this myself; I’m trying to talk this out) that the symptoms of this “less than full acceptance,” which includes answering in polls that homosexuality is a sin and voting in favor of “defense of marriage” laws, is tacit acceptance of the belief of the folks on RaptureReady.org, and encourages them and their ilk (including otherwise “mainstream” radical social conservatives) by making them believe that the nation agrees with them (especially the enthusiastic passing of DOMA-type laws). Heck, I bet if you read some of their threads right now, they’d bring up the polls as “proof” that the nation is fully behind them. Granted, they’re deluding themselves, but still, isn’t that some pretty powerful encouragement, especially given that many of the louder speakers against homosexuals run the country? And if vast numbers of mainstream Christians do and believe this, could that be where gobear is coming from?
I’m sort of developing this on the fly; I hope you understand what I’m getting at.
I love the smell of irony in the morning.