Lavender
- Thread starter Todd
- Start date
shadowsource
A Flash In The Pain
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2001
- Posts
- 1,664
Lookin' very...
Conservative!
Conservative!
shadowsource
A Flash In The Pain
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2001
- Posts
- 1,664
Damn!
Todd, you should come to NYC, put on some BLACK duds, drink a lot of coffee, and step out late into the night....
Todd, you should come to NYC, put on some BLACK duds, drink a lot of coffee, and step out late into the night....
Re: Damn!
I been to New York, well the buroughs anyways, doing xtian stuff, down in Harlem, Brooklyn, Bronx , and the Island.
I drank lots of surge and Mountian Dew.
Each of the two seperate two week occasins that I was down there they had us do one night on the streets alone to understand in miniscule the homeless exerience. What an eye opener being alone in the streets of Brooklyn when your a back woods country boy. I drank so much Surge and Moutian dew, I was tripping. I was petrified of everything and everybody. cause everyonewas huge I was 5'7, 160 pounds carring a bible under my arm, and a pocket full of change for the soda machines and the phone incase I got to scared and chickened out.
It gave me greater perspective and a better world view around me.
shadowsource said:
I been to New York, well the buroughs anyways, doing xtian stuff, down in Harlem, Brooklyn, Bronx , and the Island.
I drank lots of surge and Mountian Dew.
Each of the two seperate two week occasins that I was down there they had us do one night on the streets alone to understand in miniscule the homeless exerience. What an eye opener being alone in the streets of Brooklyn when your a back woods country boy. I drank so much Surge and Moutian dew, I was tripping. I was petrified of everything and everybody. cause everyonewas huge I was 5'7, 160 pounds carring a bible under my arm, and a pocket full of change for the soda machines and the phone incase I got to scared and chickened out.
It gave me greater perspective and a better world view around me.
shadowsource
A Flash In The Pain
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2001
- Posts
- 1,664
Well, yeah -
That is a scary picture. Did you doubt that the Bible would protect you? I'm not asking to mock you, but all-nighters on the streets of Brooklyn can make you think strange thoughts....
You're not a Mormon, right? (and don't everyone laugh at me)
That is a scary picture. Did you doubt that the Bible would protect you? I'm not asking to mock you, but all-nighters on the streets of Brooklyn can make you think strange thoughts....
You're not a Mormon, right? (and don't everyone laugh at me)
Re: Well, yeah -
No, I am not a mormon. I am one of those baptist{one of the racist religions just ask the left.}
I didn't think that I could use Bible in Hand to hand combat if it came to that, but during the long hours from time to time when I got real tesne I would sit down and read, and pray{yeah its all psychophooey} calmnes and peace and serenity over came me {just ask the athiest though and they will tell youit was the Moutian dew that gave me those}to make it through a few more hours.
shadowsource said:
No, I am not a mormon. I am one of those baptist{one of the racist religions just ask the left.}
I didn't think that I could use Bible in Hand to hand combat if it came to that, but during the long hours from time to time when I got real tesne I would sit down and read, and pray{yeah its all psychophooey} calmnes and peace and serenity over came me {just ask the athiest though and they will tell youit was the Moutian dew that gave me those}to make it through a few more hours.
shadowsource
A Flash In The Pain
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2001
- Posts
- 1,664
ha!
I'm an atheist and I perfectly well understand how the Bible can help you in such a moment (I last read it in '95). Don't be so defensive. I voted for Clinton, and he was a Baptist. You guys have it easy compared to us: The polls say that they'd elect anyone (even a Mormon or a Black person) ahead of an atheist. And this genuinely wounds me, as I regard myself and am regarded as a very ethical person. The intolerance of atheists is profound!
I'm an atheist and I perfectly well understand how the Bible can help you in such a moment (I last read it in '95). Don't be so defensive. I voted for Clinton, and he was a Baptist. You guys have it easy compared to us: The polls say that they'd elect anyone (even a Mormon or a Black person) ahead of an atheist. And this genuinely wounds me, as I regard myself and am regarded as a very ethical person. The intolerance of atheists is profound!
Re: ha!
Clinton was what I call a Title Baptist, He used the title baptist when it it forward a cause, the religious right and religious left really swallows up mindless pandering to them, its really amazing.
My pet theory on why an athiest wouldn't be openly voted for is because they would not be as likely to pander to any religious organization, No Slogan Master Jackson, no BrillCream Falwell, To Tear filled Baker would get special interest pandering froma a religiously neutral athiest.
I actually would prefer to have an athiest in there for just that very reason, no religious pandering, hopefully straight up issue to issue.
shadowsource said:
Clinton was what I call a Title Baptist, He used the title baptist when it it forward a cause, the religious right and religious left really swallows up mindless pandering to them, its really amazing.
My pet theory on why an athiest wouldn't be openly voted for is because they would not be as likely to pander to any religious organization, No Slogan Master Jackson, no BrillCream Falwell, To Tear filled Baker would get special interest pandering froma a religiously neutral athiest.
I actually would prefer to have an athiest in there for just that very reason, no religious pandering, hopefully straight up issue to issue.
Doulton
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Posts
- 458
Clinton was a Baptist? Damn, I knew I shouldn't have voted for him...Oh wait, that's right, they don't let Kiwi's vote in American elections for some strange reason 
I think it's rather simple why people don't want us athiests in charge. What we believe is not what they believe. Even though the various denominations of Christainity may squabble and disagree on the finer points, it's quite another thing to deny the existance of a supreme being altogether (although if you take Laurel's definition of an athiest then we don't necessarily deny his/her existance.) If I was a Baptist I would rather have a Catholic leader than an athiest. I think to people who believe in a devine maker, then the denial of that maker is a profound mistake, and vice versa. And I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that I'd certainly prefer an athiest leader. And it's much more likely to happen down in a little backwater dirge like New Zealand than in the states. Hmm, maybe she is in fact? Maybe I'll look it up, although I have no idea how I would go about doing that.
Who's dribbling?
I think it's rather simple why people don't want us athiests in charge. What we believe is not what they believe. Even though the various denominations of Christainity may squabble and disagree on the finer points, it's quite another thing to deny the existance of a supreme being altogether (although if you take Laurel's definition of an athiest then we don't necessarily deny his/her existance.) If I was a Baptist I would rather have a Catholic leader than an athiest. I think to people who believe in a devine maker, then the denial of that maker is a profound mistake, and vice versa. And I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that
I'd certainly prefer an athiest leader. And it's much more likely to happen down in a little backwater dirge like New Zealand than in the states. Hmm, maybe she is in fact? Maybe I'll look it up, although I have no idea how I would go about doing that.Who's dribbling?
Doulton
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Posts
- 458
Re: Re: ha!
One more thing. Although I would hopefull have the self control not to word this statement as patronisingly as UncleBill (and remember, I did say hopefully), I think the explanation for this is pretty simple too. Although now that I've said that I don't know how to say it without sounding extremely condascending to religious people Oh well, I'll do my best.
If your belief was based on a rejection of logic and evidence, wouldn't you reject the thinking of those who advocate such things? It's a threat to your way of life, and thus very scary and uncomfortable.
I just want to apologise to all those people I've just offended with that remark I realise that not all religions and not all religious people hold faith as the cornerstone of their belief, this is just a reference to those who do. And just so that this doesn't turn into a repeat of the "Name your religion" thread (Not that it wasn't a great thread), by faith, I mean those who don't want to examine the reasons for their belief. I believe that if you look at the dictionary definition of faith then that's what you will find it means, but as the other thread demostrated there are those who hold different interpretations
Unclebill said:
One more thing. Although I would hopefull have the self control not to word this statement as patronisingly as UncleBill (and remember, I did say hopefully), I think the explanation for this is pretty simple too. Although now that I've said that I don't know how to say it without sounding extremely condascending to religious people
Oh well, I'll do my best.If your belief was based on a rejection of logic and evidence, wouldn't you reject the thinking of those who advocate such things? It's a threat to your way of life, and thus very scary and uncomfortable.
I just want to apologise to all those people I've just offended with that remark
I realise that not all religions and not all religious people hold faith as the cornerstone of their belief, this is just a reference to those who do. And just so that this doesn't turn into a repeat of the "Name your religion" thread (Not that it wasn't a great thread), by faith, I mean those who don't want to examine the reasons for their belief. I believe that if you look at the dictionary definition of faith then that's what you will find it means, but as the other thread demostrated there are those who hold different interpretations 
Laurel
Kitty Mama
- Joined
- Aug 27, 1999
- Posts
- 20,692
Doulton said:
Not NECESSARILY, though I do know people who do, in fact, deny his/her/its existence. Though even something as nonchalant as not believing is contrary to faith, and offensive to many. I don't even discuss my world views with people...because once they find out I don't believe, many will become VERY upset with me. It doesn't matter that I give time and money to charities, that I help stranded old ladies when they're cars die, that I work hard to live by The Golden Rule, that I don't steal or rape or murder. My lack of belief puts me on a lower rung than the Death Row serial killer who "found God".
I respect everyone's right to their own belief (so long as they don't interfere with other's rights). If we were all happy, and acted responsibly, and allowed others to live as they choose, then the world would be an amazing place.
Doulton
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Posts
- 458
He rants once again...
I was quite confused for a while there. I saw that Never had written the last post, so I read Laurel's thinking it was by Never. I was very surprised to learn Never {doesn't believe}
I considered keeping this next point to myself as I'm sure alot of people will think it just sounds arrogant and naive. But I think it's a point that should be made.
I don't like the idea that everyone should just mind their own business when it comes to religious or political views. You (Laurel) say "So long as they don't interfere with other's rights", but what belief doesn't have the potential to do that? Even the most seemingly tame system of beliefs can turn dangerous with time and the expansion of it's following. Religious people are often (even if somewhat stereotypically) seen as being calm and gentle. But look at all the religious wars that have occured and are still going on today. Yes, many of them are the very result of those religions trying to impose their beliefs on others. But I'm not saying you should ever try to force someone to see things your way. Just that it is naive and irresponsible not to take an interest and to try and promote discussion and analysis.
Never (Never the person) may well get sick and tired of hearing this athiest anti-faith bullshit, but if she believes that we are headed for hell, it would be pretty selfish of her not to try and enlighten us. Every athiest knows the equivilent frustration of trying to "get christians to see reason" Many people get annoyed at those who try to convert people to their religion, thinking that they are self-righteous, or that those who try to get people to see things their way must only be doing it because they are uncertain themselves. That's bullshit as far as I'm concerned. In their minds they're saving me from damnation. That belief may be wrong, but that doesn't detract from their good intentions.
"If we were all happy, and acted responsibly, and allowed others to live as they choose, then the world would be an amazing place"
Of course that's true, but allowing others to live as they choose shouldn't mean being afraid to discuss matters of religion or politics because you don't want to be unpopular or get frustrated.
I must love the sound of my own voice or something huh? I'll shut up for a while. Promise. No you can't see my fingers.
I was quite confused for a while there. I saw that Never had written the last post, so I read Laurel's thinking it was by Never. I was very surprised to learn Never {doesn't believe}
I considered keeping this next point to myself as I'm sure alot of people will think it just sounds arrogant and naive. But I think it's a point that should be made.
Laurel said:
I don't like the idea that everyone should just mind their own business when it comes to religious or political views. You (Laurel) say "So long as they don't interfere with other's rights", but what belief doesn't have the potential to do that? Even the most seemingly tame system of beliefs can turn dangerous with time and the expansion of it's following. Religious people are often (even if somewhat stereotypically) seen as being calm and gentle. But look at all the religious wars that have occured and are still going on today. Yes, many of them are the very result of those religions trying to impose their beliefs on others. But I'm not saying you should ever try to force someone to see things your way. Just that it is naive and irresponsible not to take an interest and to try and promote discussion and analysis.
Never (Never the person
) may well get sick and tired of hearing this athiest anti-faith bullshit, but if she believes that we are headed for hell, it would be pretty selfish of her not to try and enlighten us. Every athiest knows the equivilent frustration of trying to "get christians to see reason" Many people get annoyed at those who try to convert people to their religion, thinking that they are self-righteous, or that those who try to get people to see things their way must only be doing it because they are uncertain themselves. That's bullshit as far as I'm concerned. In their minds they're saving me from damnation. That belief may be wrong, but that doesn't detract from their good intentions."If we were all happy, and acted responsibly, and allowed others to live as they choose, then the world would be an amazing place"
Of course that's true, but allowing others to live as they choose shouldn't mean being afraid to discuss matters of religion or politics because you don't want to be unpopular or get frustrated.
I must love the sound of my own voice or something huh? I'll shut up for a while. Promise. No you can't see my fingers.
Similar threads
