Those few seem to have a lot of political power.
I agree. Pat Robertson could motivate 1000s to give money or go to the polls. Frig- Freg Phelps has more influence than me.
But that brings me back to the premise that everyday Christians are quietly doing good works, and not consolidating power.
I have a feeling that if these guys could attain more power by creating a coalition of gerbil herders, they would replace the cross with a hamster wheel today.
And weren’t first century jews waiting for a political/military messiah? I think they were suprised when Jesus came and said basicly just to love everyone.
It was a jab at the media. You said it yourself: the loonies get more airtime. Therefore, anyone reasonable would be part of a minority in television, but the thing is, you never get to see them on the air. So, instead of saying “one of the few (in the realm of television) you ever see”, I opted for “one of the few you never see”.
I like playing with words. It’s just that when I do it it comes off as clever as playing with food. 
Tosh. Dudes make stuff, chicks birth stuff. It astonishes me that anyone would ever worship a goddess who was basically a giant uterus and vagina. Where’s the artistry? The reproductive tract just insensibly fulfils its purpose; there’s no creativity in it.
(Underlined phrase emphasised to draw attention to Stoid’s astonishing hubris in thinking that anyone who disagrees with him is holding a truly bizarre view.)
Odd thought: all goddess worship is founded on manipulation of men (don’t titter!), either with the hope of gettin’ some pussy or a the fear of a slapping from Mom.
Meanwhile: Polycarp, weird as rishathra may be, it’s mainstream next to that three-in-a-bed action the Pierson’s Puppeteers get off on. :eek:
Any incoherence in this post is apologised for in advance. Although the Immodium has kicked in, I’m not firing on all six today by any means.
I agree that a 14 or 15 year old isn’t ready for sex and that if she’s looking for love by giving her body to a bunch of boys, that this would cause additional emotional stress. But the problem I have is with the concept of “dirty.” I’m not saying you personally called it dirty, but that is the underlying – or explicit message – of many if not most Christian churches. This, I believe, adds complexity to the already difficult mixture of adolescence and sex drive. By calling it a sin against God, most Christian churches also throw in shame, causing further emotional stress. Not only do these kids have to deal with their hormones, they must also feel guilt and shame that they are violating their God’s will.
Have you attended “most” Christian churches"? We don’t talk about sex nearly as much as you think we do.
Does the Southern Baptist church *not * consider premerital sex a sin? Do “most” Christian churches not?
Then don’t complain when outsiders assume that your church shares the attitudes of the spiteful, attention-hogging, self-appointed representatives of Christianity clamoring for the spotlight.
Actually, please do complain. Loudly, in public, in print, on TV, and anywhere else you can think of. Get the message out there that Falwell and his ilk don’t speak for mainstream Christianity, and maybe the pols will stop pandering to them.
I’m not sure I understand that. And I’m not sure I want to. Manipulation of men?
Hiya Snakes. First of all see the apology above; I was running a bit of a temperature at the time. I was trying to say that goddess-worship didn’t bring much to the theological table other than:
“Worship the mighty Womb, that it may deign to bring forth life!”
or
“Worship the mighty Vagina, that you may get some if you’re good”
or
“Worship the mighty Mother, or she’ll slap you the way your earthly Mother did when you were still running around bare-arsed”
all of which is generally aimed at getting men to knuckle under to the goddess, the priestesses, and women in general, by making men aware of their second-class citizen status either for not being able to give birth, or being helpless to resist the lure of the old pussy, or for once having been smaller and weaker than their custodial parent.
It was just an odd thought and not a hugely developed argument. Make of if what you please.
Yes. And so does the Presdbyterian Church, the Roma Catholic Church, Islam, Reform Jews…I don’t see the point you are trying to make.
Adolescence IS a difficult time, rife with hormones and a societal pressure to indulge in every pleasure. There is no way we are going to make those years easy or uncomplicated. We do however feel that when dealing with sexual issues as a teen, HAVING sex will only add to the confusion and potential for terrible consequences. We feel that making a decision to not have sex actually simplifies things. I hope they have fulfilling sex lives full of love and intimacy when they are ready. Itwould be nice if they waited until marriage, but I am a realist.
Should they feel guilt? Sometimes guilt may be the one thing that keeps you in line. If they profess to be Christians, and they are not living their lives according to the tenets therein, I suppose there will be guilt.
We could avoid the guilt by saying, “Have sex if you want, God doesn’t care really.” But I think that would be a) untrue and b) dangerous and c) not in keeping with our beliefs.
All of that said, Christians are called upon to love others unconditionally and are not called to berate or belittle anyone even if they go against what we belive.
You know, as a historian, I had to be slightly amused by this comment. 150 years ago, a female of fourteen or fifteen would have been considered quite ready for sex.
It wasn’t common, but not unheard of for girls as young as thirteen to marry and have children. She would have been considered ready to run a household, manage servants (or do all of the myriad, backbreaking chores herself) and raise her children. Boys of that age worked like men, and had the same responsibilites as adults.
People of that time would see our customs as a bizarre, artifical extention of childhood.
(Please note that I am not passing any judgements on either present customs or past.)
Up to the minute proof that the Justice Department, according to ** law enforcemnet professionals themselves, ** (who are largely, it seems, as disgusted and fed up as I am) is in fact making prosecution of obscenity as high or higher a priority than addressing violent crimes, including terrorism :
Sickening. Infuriating. Fucking tragic.
OK I read your article and this Acosta character seems like a wacko. But nowhere in the article does it say he is a Christian. Maybe the letters written by the Christian anti-porn group mentioned have had some effect, but I do n’t make that connection.
But let me go back to another point in your OP. In the closing you say
Please elaborate on how the Christian belief system is “inarguably frail”.
I mean fragile… :smack:
All supernatural religious beliefs are inherently fragile, (Anything the mind can conceive can be argued, I suppose, even the existence of Leprechauns, so if you insist I will concede that modification of my statement.) because they demand the suspension of reason and science. Being the insatiably curious and intelligent creatures that we are by nature, that is a tall order, given the complete and utter lack of evidence that exists to support such beliefs.
Further, I have observed in my life, as I’m sure you have in yours, that the things which people are most defensive about are things that they are not really sure of. Where there is real confidence, there is no need to be defensive. The thing speaks for itself. So the fact that the religious (Christians and Muslims particularly) are so defensive about their respective beliefs screams insecurity, hence fragility.
And since I was referring specifically to the BELIEFS, let me say this as well: it is my belief, based not on faith, also not on any scientific studies or surveys, but based on empirical observation, that if you could peer into the hearts of the religious of the world, you would find plenty of doubt in the vast majority. It’s really hard to be intelligent and educated, live in the developed world of 2005, and swallow completely everything that most theistic belief systems ask you to.
The fact that so many people end up being religious anyway is a testament to the power of fear. Better to* try * and believe* something* than face the terror of death head on.
BOLDING MINE
So beliefs in something outside of the natural world (supernatural as you say) are fragile, yet we are supposed to find inherant truth in your beliefs built on your tiny bit of experience in this vast world…interesting. And seeing that none of us have ANY experience after death, whatever you believe about it has no more “scientific” certainty than mine. It is your BELIEF of what happens outside of this life, or, the supernatural. Yet you posit your theory and call it “inarguable”.
Tell me about the fragility of the 1000s who have died for their faith as martyrs. I myself believe that God is love and that I receive his love freely and offer it freely. I would never deny my faith, at gunpoint or under any threat. It in a strong faith, and I would gladly lay my life down for another, as there is no greater love, per Jesus.
How about the girl killed at Columbine, Cassie Bernall. She was asked by her killer, “Do you believe in God?” “Yes, I believe in God,” she said. “Why?” the gunman asked. But he did not wait for an answer. He shot Cassie Bernall dead. How weak was her faith?
And I don’t swallow everything Christianity asks me too. Jonah and the whale? Noah and the ark? All of that stuff may or may not be true. I think personally it is allegorical tales trying to make sense of God and the early Hebrew relationship with Him. I don’t think that is what matters. Its the love thing, man. That’s what matters.
Does that mean I am not intelligent and educated? Meh- I don’t care if it does.
I think what you have illustrated is your inability to experience anything beoyond the empirical. Perhaps it is your fear that will not allow you to believe in something bigger than yourself. I dunno really. But you have not illustrated how my faith or beliefs, or that of anyone else, is fragile.
Nobody knows… they told her ‘Peek-a-boo’.
(Apparently, this man’s son made up the story)
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/09/30/bernall/print.html
Or transferred it. Looks like the person who it was actually about was going ‘Oh, god’, and… the gunman let her live. Huh.
So… story’s completely turned around.
Have a nice day!