We need to combat Christianphobia
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
But you're not forced to disbelieve, atlkvb. You can use that money the same way.
How's that? Just turned it around on you.
I don't really care if "In God We Trust" is removed from the money but I was just illustrating that the fact believers care a lot is a manifestation of the dominant group pushing their stuff on others.
Op2 if you don't enjoy the benefits of a Christian society want to try the alternative? You do have choices in the World today where Christians do not dominate the culture like you object to here in America. Want to live there?
Try Socialism. N.Korea? Cuba? India? Saudi Arabia? Iran? Lots of choices. Try one.
Last edited:
Witch hunts was just an example Ever hear of the Inquisition? Those were rabid Christians. It was only with the gradual waning of the religious nuts that civilization started being built. Yes, it was Christians doing the building but that's because all their was was Christians in the West at that time and the Christians doing the building were the less nutty Christians. Generally speaking, the less nutty the religious people get the better society gets.
And I'm going to simply point blank disagree with you on #2. Civilization in the West isn't waning, it's flourishing.
We remove prayer from schools and the moral decay in this country is staggering. Now Op2 wants to remove the motto from the money. Why does he hate America(ns) so much?
I get it. But you said Christianity is forced on you and I was pointing out it is not. You are free to disbelieve and no one confiscates your money. Yet you don't want Christians expressing their beliefs. Why are we taking down Nativity scenes? If you don't think that happened OK, ignore it. Why does it have to be taken down so millions of others who do believe that happened can't see it? Why do you get to decide what we can't believe in by keeping it out of your sight?
Ignore it, it's just a giant fairy tale anyway right?
I didn't say Christianity is forced on me. You have a tendency to put words in my mouth (which is why I called that other post of yours a non sequitor) and I'm not playing that game with you anymore.
The inquisition was grotesque, and the Catholic Church has acknowledged as much. It's "rein of terror" is also vastly overstated by atheists. Pop quiz, who's killed more people in history Christians or atheists? Oh so you believe the ones burning people at the stake were the "less" nutty Christians huh. Seems you need to think this through a little better. The last two sentences are patently and provably false.
No, blame the people who caved to the LGBT agenda, they're just as culpable. Same as you, pumpkin.
Speaking of which my whacko tech took a turn recently. He used to just rant Glenn Beck/Rush Jibberish all day. He still does that, but I think Biff is putting a lot of stress on him and his beliefs. Now, everyone who doesn't follow his cause is simply going to hell. Gays, Democrats, RINOs, you name it....all going in the big fire.
Not how it works, but there will be plenty of those left out of eternity I'm sure.
Tell us what you think of LGBT stuff. Are you against gay marriage? Do you think homosexuality is a sin? I'm genuinely curious. I get tired of the LGBT politicizing but in general terms my approach is that I don't really care if people are like that. As long as they're paying their taxes and not driving drunk, etc., I'm fine with them. If they want to get married then I don't care. What do you think?
Yes, it is specifically called out as a sin. Period, end of story. But let's not be too choosy, so is child murder but the entirety of the left and a portion of the right condones that so...
Yep, what ya got. You've got a 150,000,000+ body count in the 20th century alone.
Last edited:
Adultery and lying are sins too but they're not illegal. Do you think homosexuality should be illegal?
No its not Op2. You live freely as you wish in a Christian dominated society you claim is forced on you yet you still enjoy the benefits of that society.
Try practicing your atheism in Iran. Or try reading about Freedom in N.Korea. You are allowed to do pretty much whatever you want here, including ignoring Christians and what they believe. Yet you still feel forced to be exposed to Christian ideals. It is true we live under a Judeo Christian ethos but no one is forced to believe. Muslims worship here, atheists do their thing too. Christians aren't advocating for their removal from the public square. So why can't you cut Christians the same slack?
I know it's legal but I'm asking you if you think it should be legal. Adultery is immoral (or so most would think, myself included) but it's not illegal. Do you think homosexuality should be legal? Do you think gay marriage should be legal?
I think partly a problem with the Left is that in their campaigning for this stuff they insist that everyone love this stuff they want to legalize. They don't want to just make gay marriage legal, they want everyone to smile and say how wonderful it is, which only annoys the people on the other side and makes them resist more. I think the Left would do better to take an approach of, "X should be legal but nobody has to like it" since after all, lots of things are legal that a segment of our society don't like.
You're avoiding the question and getting into semantics. Do you think gay people should be able to pair up in a legal union. Don't get caught up in whether the word to describe it is "marriage" or something else.
Perhaps my view is skewed by where I live but where I live if you say anything negative about gay people in anyway you're an outcast. I don't want to say anything negative about gay people but it feels oppressive to live in a place where you know you can't. Where I live you don't just have to give them equal rights but you also have to act like you like it. Nobody should have to act like they like anything IMO.
Marriage shouldn't be legal? I assume by that you mean marriage should be a church thing only and the state should stay out of it. That's a reasonable view but the problem is that for a long time the religious folks were in control of the levers of government and they could have instituted sucha thing but didn't.
In 1900, say, the powers that be could have said "We're going to have the states do civil unions and we're going to leave marriage to the church," but if they had done so the population in general, which was overwhelmingly religious, would have screamed bloody murder.
Wrong again.
We already knew you deny scientific facts, so it's no surprise that you deny history as well.
To me homosexuals can do what they want, even be monogamous. But they can't call that Marriage because by definition it is not and they can't be considered normal because by natural use of sexuality it is not.
Kinky? Yea. Different? Yes? Morally correct? Debatable in a free society but certainly open to free interpretation and subject to ultimate judgement by the Law giver who says it is Sin no matter if you believe that or not.
The Govt grabbed ahold of marriage with the institution of the progressive income tax system. Another play, straight out of the Communist Manifesto.
The reason it doesn't work to just change it now is that it comes off (accurately) as an attempt to merely not let gay people have that word. Religious people had no problem with the state using the word marriage until they state started applying it to gay people.
That said, I thought the gay movement would have been a lot smarter to early on say "Fine, we don't care about the word marriage, just let the state have civil union and the churches have marriage." And then they could have gotten their rights sooner but they'd just be under a different word. And the churches that marry gay people now would have ended up marrying gay people anyway. It just strikes me as bad politics.
The government used marriage for a long time when religious people completely controlled society. If religious people really didn't want the government using the word "marriage" they'd have discontinued it long before gay people started becoming prominent. If that happened then there would never have been a debate about gay marriage but rather about gay civil unions.
And what other things are churches forced to do now that they don't want to do? Nothing. Churches can do whatever they want, no matter how nutty.