Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Right Wing Watch)   Are you Christian and pro-gay rights? Then you're just like slave owners and those who opposed women's right to vote   (rightwingwatch.org ) divider line
    More: Dumbass, vote, intellectual honesty  
•       •       •

10655 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jul 2013 at 5:55 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



239 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-07-15 04:13:48 PM  
Dumbfark gay-basher that works for a dumbfark gay-bashing organization acts like a dumbfark gay-basher?

Shocking!
 
2013-07-15 04:18:09 PM  
Many Christians were slave owners and opposed suffrage. So the trolly headline fails unless both conditions are  both anecessary and asufficient condition for opposing those things.
 
2013-07-15 04:19:44 PM  
But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

Also the dumbfark gay-bashing organization took in over $13 million in 2011 from dumbfark donors, so I would say they are profiting from it.
 
2013-07-15 04:24:37 PM  
FTA: But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

txvalues.org
 
2013-07-15 04:27:09 PM  
I can only assume that this is going green on the Main Page because some people need to go back to school with their trolling.

This guy... this guy can troll.
 
2013-07-15 05:00:20 PM  
I know this sounds crazy, but why don't we just stop believing that Bronze Age myths are real?
 
2013-07-15 05:05:11 PM  

gimmegimme: I know this sounds crazy, but why don't we just stop believing that Bronze Age myths are real?


This.
 
2013-07-15 05:21:24 PM  
I was fully prepared to be angered by this and primed to offer a refutation.  But I'm really more confused than anything.

factoryconnection: This guy... this guy can troll.


No doubt!
 
2013-07-15 05:23:44 PM  

Sgt Otter: FTA: But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

[txvalues.org image 500x386]


Of course, if we uphold the sexual standards of the Bible, that means multiple wives, concubines, and marrying your brother's wife after he dies, and keeping of chattel is OK?

I don't think that they've thought this cunning plan all the way through...

i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-07-15 05:26:13 PM  
The Christian bible condones slavery.

1 Timothy 6:1-5

Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be blasphemed. Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful to them on the ground that they are members of the church; rather they must serve them all the more, since those who benefit by their service are believers and beloved. Teach and urge these duties. Whoever teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that is in accordance with godliness, is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words. From these come envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions, and wrangling among those who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.

1 Peter 2:18-29

Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh. For it is a credit to you if, being aware of God, you endure pain while suffering unjustly. If you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God's approval.
 
2013-07-15 05:30:37 PM  
FTA: But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

www.minnpost.com

Marcus Bachmann's "gay therapy clinic" has collected over $100,000 in Medicaid payments since it opened a few years ago.
 
2013-07-15 05:36:39 PM  
So slavery and keeping women subservient are bad things now?  Not according to their usual rhetoric.
 
2013-07-15 05:41:28 PM  
Jesus supported traditional marriage so much that he himself never got married, and encouraged his followers to not get married.
 
2013-07-15 05:50:48 PM  

Sgt Otter: FTA: But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

[www.minnpost.com image 640x468]

Marcus Bachmann's "gay therapy clinic" has defrauded the government out of over $100,000 in Medicaid payments since it opened a few years ago.

FTFY

 
2013-07-15 05:55:42 PM  

Lorelle: The Christian bible condones slavery.

1 Timothy 6:1-5

Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be blasphemed. Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful to them on the ground that they are members of the church; rather they must serve them all the more, since those who benefit by their service are believers and beloved. Teach and urge these duties. Whoever teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that is in accordance with godliness, is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words. From these come envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions, and wrangling among those who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.

1 Peter 2:18-29

Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh. For it is a credit to you if, being aware of God, you endure pain while suffering unjustly. If you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God's approval.


Why the hell are you quoting the Bible when discussing modern evangelical worldviews?!

You don't honestly believe any of them have actually READ it do you?
 
2013-07-15 05:58:51 PM  
Looking how the female vote slanted toward BOB, I'm still opposed to women coating.
 
2013-07-15 06:01:02 PM  
The Retarded is strong in this article.
 
2013-07-15 06:01:33 PM  
That would be me.  I reject the BS argument in the article.
 
2013-07-15 06:02:57 PM  
The non-gospel works in the new testament, especially those by Paul were inappropriately added to the bible in a congress like compromise.
 
2013-07-15 06:03:48 PM  

Diogenes: I was fully prepared to be angered by this and primed to offer a refutation.  But I'm really more confused than anything.


Basic strawman anti-logic: All those bad guys used scripture for financial reasons. We aren't anti-gay for financial reasons. Therefore the pro-gay people must be doing it for financial reasons.

Standard Christian backstop defence: when your arguments shown to be incorrect (no it's not going to be the End of the World) and unchristian (WWJD?), you go for distraction to try to cover the holes in your story.
 
2013-07-15 06:04:05 PM  
*reads article*

img689.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-15 06:04:32 PM  
I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure Jesus never told his followers to hate anyone.  Therefore, I don't see the conundrum in someone being both a Christian and pro-gay rights.  Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays.  There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.
 
2013-07-15 06:04:40 PM  
So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"
 
2013-07-15 06:04:43 PM  

Brick-House: Looking how the female vote slanted toward BOB, I'm still opposed to women coating.


I love wimmin in coats. Yeah...only coats...short little coats with their hair done up all nice...pencil sticking out of their messy hair...

What was this about?
 
2013-07-15 06:04:51 PM  
Who cares, as long as the Christian bigots are attacking and alienating other Christians for a change.
 
2013-07-15 06:05:28 PM  

Diogenes: I was fully prepared to be angered by this and primed to offer a refutation. But I'm really more confused than anything.


I was more amused than anything, myself.

/Keep passing the plate around, there, buddy.
//Maybe get up enough for a dictionary for yourself.
///Maybe look up "oppressive" if you get that far.
//(Maybe not you, the twit/twat in TFA.)
 
2013-07-15 06:08:55 PM  
What the hell did I just read?

Whatever you say, crazy guy. Whatever you say.
 
2013-07-15 06:09:10 PM  

Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"


It means that you're able to live on the same planet as gay people without having a giant spasm.
 
2013-07-15 06:09:50 PM  
I've been compared to a slave owner before, but it's usually  because of the people i own.
 
2013-07-15 06:10:23 PM  

hubiestubert: Sgt Otter: FTA: But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

[txvalues.org image 500x386]

Of course, if we uphold the sexual standards of the Bible, that means multiple wives, concubines, and marrying your brother's wife after he dies, and keeping of chattel is OK?

I don't think that they've thought this cunning plan all the way through...

[i.chzbgr.com image 500x1335]


okay, i'm usually willing to "reasonably discuss" bible stuff, but for some reason i keep reading the citations from the first book of the bible as "coming" from the book of "genitals"...  which i guess you could argue no harm/no foul on the big bang (creation incident).  still needs jizzmoppers (sorry, i mean jesuits)
 
2013-07-15 06:11:08 PM  
No money in being anti-gay? lmao1. Convince low-income, ill-educated working stiffs that Teh Ghey is after their chilluns.2. Present your pro-corporate wealth party as the party of "God", upholding His laws3. Working people flock to the polls like an angry, disturbed hive to vote for your candidates--against their own best financial and social interests.4. Pass pro-corporate legislation to shove billions into the pockets of the wealthy elite, at the expense of social programs, infrastructure, and other public "goods"5. Profit *enormously*6. Rinse, repeat, endlessly
 
2013-07-15 06:11:20 PM  
Yeah, try telling that to my nearly 7ft Gay Christian friend. He will merely laugh at you, say "Bless your heart" (He's Texan).
 
2013-07-15 06:14:44 PM  

Diogenes: So slavery and keeping women subservient are bad things now?  Not according to their usual rhetoric.


Giving gays full rights is just as hypocritical as withholding rights from women and blacks. It makes perfect sense, I'm sure.
 
2013-07-15 06:15:13 PM  

Lutrasimilis: Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"

It means that you're able to live on the same planet as gay people without having a giant spasm.


Oh, I get it now.  So when they say "pro-gay" they really mean "decent human being".  But they can't say "decent human being" because then that would make them "complete assholes".
 
2013-07-15 06:17:09 PM  
In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"
 
2013-07-15 06:17:28 PM  

Lutrasimilis: It means that you're able to live on the same planet as gay people without having a giant spasm.


Depending on the type of spasm involved this could mean any number of things really
 
2013-07-15 06:17:53 PM  

gimmegimme: I know this sounds crazy, but why don't we just stop believing that Bronze Age myths are real?


i39.tinypic.com
 
2013-07-15 06:20:50 PM  
Just imagine, in one or two decades gays will be added to that list of his as something the religious spearheaded and used as an example for whatever they'll be against at that point in time. The transgendered possibly.
 
2013-07-15 06:21:43 PM  

Pincy: Oh, I get it now. So when they say "pro-gay" they really mean "decent human being". But they can't say "decent human being" because then that would make them "complete assholes".


Actually, what they really mean is THE ENEMY. They don't recognize any of your positive qualities if you're THE ENEMY.
 
2013-07-15 06:21:53 PM  
fark religion, fark politics and fark you, too, Buddy.
 
2013-07-15 06:23:15 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: Just imagine, in one or two decades gays will be added to that list of his as something the religious spearheaded and used as an example for whatever they'll be against at that point in time. The transgendered possibly.


I'm thinking lefties will make a comeback.  At least I hope so.
 
2013-07-15 06:23:18 PM  

ALL GIRLS AGREE TO PULL PANTIES DOWN: Brick-House: Looking how the female vote slanted toward BOB, I'm still opposed to women coating.

Women have always been a fan of Battery-Operated Boyfriends.


Keep mine in the top shelf of the nightstand right next to the bed. Ready for action.
 
2013-07-15 06:24:55 PM  
Much like a skilled yogi, it takes years and years of practice to be able to perform the mental contortions necessary to argue that opposing civil rights for a marginalized group actually places you in solidarity with those on the right side of history.
 
2013-07-15 06:25:05 PM  

Lutrasimilis: Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"

It means that you're able to live on the same planet as gay people without having a giant spasm.


I think perhaps it is the potential for "giant spasms" being what scares him most about being associated with gay folks.
 
2013-07-15 06:25:37 PM  
Now that the z man shiat is over we can get back to regular crazy around here.
 
2013-07-15 06:26:17 PM  
Science has already proven that the Quran is superior to the BIble.

/The Quran burns longer.
 
2013-07-15 06:26:22 PM  

gimmegimme: I know this sounds crazy, but why don't we just stop believing that Bronze Age myths are real?


Because if you live by Bronze Age rules, you can hate anybody you like, and it's not really hate 'cause it's ok with God.
 
2013-07-15 06:26:57 PM  
The thing is, those that use quotes from the Bible to support anti-homosexual bigotry are completely ignoring the historical and social context in which the Bible was written.

They are obviously cherry-picking which of all of the hundreds of Old  Covenant "laws" they want to follow--those same laws which Jesus's sacrifice and the New Covenant are supposed do away with, so they shouldn't be using those for justification for anything anyway.

And Paul didn't want anyone to fark anyone, period because he thought the world was going to end, like, tomorrow, so we all should spend all of our time praying. Obviously, the world didn't end when he thought it would and if everyone had done as he advocated, Christianity would have died out just like the Shakers.

These bigots are actually the ones misinterpreting/misunderstanding the Bible, not the pro-gay rights Christians.

The bigots are most certainly not following Jesus's message.

But, then, the vast majority of people who proclaim themselves Christian don't know anything really about the religion they profess. If they did, a lot of these problems would go away.

/Episcopalian, aka a Christian that doesn't throw logic and thinking out the window
 
2013-07-15 06:27:57 PM  

Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"? I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is? Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something? "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"


I'm still trying to figure out the whole "special privileges"/"gay rights" thing.  Which ones, where?  The same ones I and every other straight person have right now?

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


I'm sorry to hear that.  I've known a lot of good Catholics, for my part.  (Have my disagreements, but it's cool.)
 
2013-07-15 06:28:56 PM  
He sure knows a lot about misinterpreting scripture. But then again, everyone does.
 
2013-07-15 06:29:11 PM  

Coco LaFemme: I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure Jesus never told his followers to hate anyone.


Luke 14:26  If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple.

That is the J Man speaking directly
 
2013-07-15 06:30:03 PM  
Well come on, who doesn't keep at LEAST a House-homo to tend to the decor and clothing selections? I'd be lost without Sven!
 
Ant
2013-07-15 06:30:41 PM  
Ow! I just sprained my brain trying to do the mental contortions necessary to understand this.
 
2013-07-15 06:31:57 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


Anyone who says that is just a jerk or a troll or both.
 
2013-07-15 06:32:15 PM  

Deathfrogg: I think perhaps it is the potential for "giant spasms" being what scares him most about being associated with gay folks.


Why? There's a great deal of money in giant spasms. Religion, for instance.
 
2013-07-15 06:32:23 PM  
I'm going to skip straight past outrage and explanation on why this is retarded and just move on to "patting the special person on the head". He clearly can't help being that stupid.
 
2013-07-15 06:32:26 PM  

Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"


memez.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2013-07-15 06:32:54 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


I imagine you'd get more grief in a Catholic forum than you would in this one. Catholics aren't supposed to be pro-choice or gay-friendly. Just ask the Holy Father.

Mind you, if you're one of those maverick Catholics who wants to reform the institution, more power to you. Otherwise, why be a Catholic? I don't mean to be snarky, I am genuinely curious about people who reject Catholic values but want to be Catholics.
 
2013-07-15 06:35:01 PM  

FizixJunkee: Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"

[memez.s3.amazonaws.com image 498x737]


Okay, that image is farking disgusting. Let's just encourage men to fake interest in one of the few bastions of women's athletics so that they can ToUcH BoObZzZ.

disgusting.
 
2013-07-15 06:35:14 PM  
Broseph 12: 27  Douche not unto others, lest thou be spoken of as a douche.  Be cool to all.

Or a favorite of mine from Bill S. Preston, Esquire and Ted Theodore Logan:  Be excellent to each other.  And party on dudes.

/article's logic makes as much sense as quoting Bill and Ted
 
2013-07-15 06:37:02 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


How do you reconcile those beliefs if you also give money to the catholic church? Do you just like to donate to pedophile-protecting, woman-hating anti-choice, anti-gay bigots while also donating to LGBTQ community and pro-choice organizations?   Not sure how you can justify that, does it work like carbon offsets?
 
2013-07-15 06:37:27 PM  

phalamir: Coco LaFemme: I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure Jesus never told his followers to hate anyone.

Luke 14:26  If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple.

That is the J Man speaking directly


Again, to understand ANYTHING in the Bible properly, you have to understand its historic and social context:

"But this fails to recognize the background to Jesus' words in Jewish literature. Jesus is not encouraging hate. Rather, he is saying that social networks will be torn apart because of his words and actions--as the end results of the people's sin, not because his goal is dissension. "

For full explanation, see this article (from whence the above quote came): http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/jesus/family
 
2013-07-15 06:37:46 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I imagine you'd get more grief in a Catholic forum than you would in this one. Catholics aren't supposed to be pro-choice or gay-friendly. Just ask the Holy Father.

Mind you, if you're one of those maverick Catholics who wants to reform the institution, more power to you. Otherwise, why be a Catholic? I don't mean to be snarky, I am genuinely curious about people who reject Catholic values but want to be Catholics.


if anything, I'm going back to the core values Catholicism has taught me throughout the years. For me, it gives me peace going to mass. I want to be good to others, especially those going through hard times.
 
2013-07-15 06:38:52 PM  
"Why the hell are you quoting the Bible when discussing modern evangelical worldviews?!"

Especially when that passage was directed at the time to the general policies of the time.
Many assumed Christ was coming to start an armed insurrection, instead He preached peace.
The above passage makes more sense when you include this.
"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."
Remember Christ was so meek, He never opposed his executioners, even healing one.
As for pro-gay rights, Christ never said a word against the gays, keep that in mind before someone comes in quoting Leviticus or Paul.
/The Bible, book of many chapters by different authors.
//try to read it in context of who said what, when.
 
2013-07-15 06:40:24 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I imagine you'd get more grief in a Catholic forum than you would in this one. Catholics aren't supposed to be pro-choice or gay-friendly. Just ask the Holy Father.

Mind you, if you're one of those maverick Catholics who wants to reform the institution, more power to you. Otherwise, why be a Catholic? I don't mean to be snarky, I am genuinely curious about people who reject Catholic values but want to be Catholics.


I'm betting it's the younger nuns that do it for them.
 
2013-07-15 06:40:52 PM  

FizixJunkee: Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"

[memez.s3.amazonaws.com image 498x737]


not supporting 4th woman on boner - clearly gay
 
2013-07-15 06:41:54 PM  

codergirl42: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

How do you reconcile those beliefs if you also give money to the catholic church? Do you just like to donate to pedophile-protecting, woman-hating anti-choice, anti-gay bigots while also donating to LGBTQ community and pro-choice organizations?   Not sure how you can justify that, does it work like carbon offsets?


Maybe he only gives money that supports local programs within his diocese or parish that don't conflict with his values.

Not everyone in the Catholic church is like what you stated. Unfortunately, a lot of those in the old boys' club in the higher positions of power are. But things are changing, albeit slowly.
 
2013-07-15 06:42:23 PM  
www.mockpaperscissors.com
 
2013-07-15 06:42:35 PM  

Lee451: The Retarded is strong in this article.


Smells a lot more like Freudian projection than stupidity to me.  I was all prepared to get my outrage on, but really, this guy is so pathetic I actually giggled.

I mean, sure homophobia is bad, but this is "eat da poo-poo"-level homophobia.  It's almost cute.
 
2013-07-15 06:42:41 PM  
i.imgur.com

/Baby steps y'all
 
2013-07-15 06:43:36 PM  
the good thing about all the old testament strawman arguments is that they can be used to mop up the spooge from the full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk

/ b-b-but lobster, answer that!
 
2013-07-15 06:46:25 PM  

42_42_42: codergirl42: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

How do you reconcile those beliefs if you also give money to the catholic church? Do you just like to donate to pedophile-protecting, woman-hating anti-choice, anti-gay bigots while also donating to LGBTQ community and pro-choice organizations?   Not sure how you can justify that, does it work like carbon offsets?

Maybe he only gives money that supports local programs within his diocese or parish that don't conflict with his values.

Not everyone in the Catholic church is like what you stated. Unfortunately, a lot of those in the old boys' club in the higher positions of power are. But things are changing, albeit slowly.


at the end of the day, it shouldn't matter what label you give yourself, FFS. Just make your life and others a better place and actually "do something" not sit behind a monitor and proclaim to be morally superior, without doing anything.
 
2013-07-15 06:46:50 PM  

Kurmudgeon: Especially when that passage was directed at the time to the general policies of the time.
Many assumed Christ was coming to start an armed insurrection, instead He preached peace.
The above passage makes more sense when you include this.
"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."
Remember Christ was so meek, He never opposed his executioners, even healing one.
As for pro-gay rights, Christ never said a word against the gays, keep that in mind before someone comes in quoting Leviticus or Paul.
/The Bible, book of many chapters by different authors.
//try to read it in context of who said what, when.


Therein lies the beauty of ancient scripture. Since most Christians don't read the bible, it becomes relatively simple for even a stupid man to cherry-pick passages to fit the current political climate, pontificate with divine authority, and acquire sub-believers who will take their sexual hysteria seriously.
 
2013-07-15 06:47:12 PM  

Sgt Otter: FTA: But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

[www.minnpost.com image 640x468]

Marcus Bachmann's "gay therapy clinic" has collected over $100,000 in Medicaid payments since it opened a few years ago.


www.fairfaxunderground.com
 
2013-07-15 06:49:37 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: Many Christians were slave owners and opposed suffrage. So the trolly headline fails unless both conditions are  both anecessary and asufficient condition for opposing those things.


Ayup. There's a helluva lot more stuff in the bible about slavery than there is about homosexuality.
 
2013-07-15 06:49:43 PM  

Pincy: So if you support equal rights for everyone then you are "pro-gay"?  I'm not even sure what "pro-gay" is?  Am I supposed to be rooting for them or something?  "Gooooooooo Gay Team!"




I hate aleprechaunists.
 
2013-07-15 06:51:09 PM  

fusillade762: Because People in power are Stupid: Many Christians were slave owners and opposed suffrage. So the trolly headline fails unless both conditions are  both anecessary and asufficient condition for opposing those things.

Ayup. There's a helluva lot more stuff in the bible about slavery than there is about homosexuality.


Then thou shalt take an awl, and thrust it through his ear unto the door, and he shall be thy servant for ever. And also unto thy maidservant thou shalt do likewise.
Deuteronomy
 
2013-07-15 06:51:27 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I imagine you'd get more grief in a Catholic forum than you would in this one. Catholics aren't supposed to be pro-choice or gay-friendly. Just ask the Holy Father.

Mind you, if you're one of those maverick Catholics who wants to reform the institution, more power to you. Otherwise, why be a Catholic? I don't mean to be snarky, I am genuinely curious about people who reject Catholic values but want to be Catholics.


you can be a member of the KKK and still like some black folks or have a jewish friend. life isn't 100% or nothing.
 
2013-07-15 06:51:30 PM  
www.logcabin.org


Gay rights supporters/republican
 
2013-07-15 06:51:48 PM  
How long until this ExGay gets caught farking a dude? The lady doth protest too much.....
 
2013-07-15 06:52:22 PM  

cookiefleck: 42_42_42: codergirl42: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

How do you reconcile those beliefs if you also give money to the catholic church? Do you just like to donate to pedophile-protecting, woman-hating anti-choice, anti-gay bigots while also donating to LGBTQ community and pro-choice organizations?   Not sure how you can justify that, does it work like carbon offsets?

Maybe he only gives money that supports local programs within his diocese or parish that don't conflict with his values.

Not everyone in the Catholic church is like what you stated. Unfortunately, a lot of those in the old boys' club in the higher positions of power are. But things are changing, albeit slowly.

at the end of the day, it shouldn't matter what label you give yourself, FFS. Just make your life and others a better place and actually "do something" not sit behind a monitor and proclaim to be morally superior, without doing anything.


At the same time, if the label you choose for yourself is one that is already associated with certain ways of thinking, you can't honestly be that shocked when people lump the entire shebang together. Nobody cares about the nuance.
 
2013-07-15 06:53:44 PM  

KrispyKritter: Mambo Bananapatch: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I imagine you'd get more grief in a Catholic forum than you would in this one. Catholics aren't supposed to be pro-choice or gay-friendly. Just ask the Holy Father.

Mind you, if you're one of those maverick Catholics who wants to reform the institution, more power to you. Otherwise, why be a Catholic? I don't mean to be snarky, I am genuinely curious about people who reject Catholic values but want to be Catholics.

you can be a member of the KKK and still like some black folks or have a jewish friend. life isn't 100% or nothing.


Yes, but you can't be surprised when you get lumped in with the parts of the KKK who hate all black folks and don't have that Jewish friend. You chose a label associated with those things.
 
2013-07-15 06:55:33 PM  

Coco LaFemme: Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays. There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.


This is just plain not true. I don't really want to argue the finer points of it, and I don't have a problem with people being for or against gay marriage. By saying that those against gay marriage logically must hate guys, you have a bad starting point for discussion, because there is plenty of room for A to be true and B to be false.
 
2013-07-15 06:56:54 PM  

jonny_q: Coco LaFemme: Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays. There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.

This is just plain not true. I don't really want to argue the finer points of it, and I don't have a problem with people being for or against gay marriage. By saying that those against gay marriage logically must hate guys, you have a bad starting point for discussion, because there is plenty of room for A to be true and B to be false.


Go on...
 
2013-07-15 06:57:02 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: cookiefleck: 42_42_42: codergirl42: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

How do you reconcile those beliefs if you also give money to the catholic church? Do you just like to donate to pedophile-protecting, woman-hating anti-choice, anti-gay bigots while also donating to LGBTQ community and pro-choice organizations?   Not sure how you can justify that, does it work like carbon offsets?

Maybe he only gives money that supports local programs within his diocese or parish that don't conflict with his values.

Not everyone in the Catholic church is like what you stated. Unfortunately, a lot of those in the old boys' club in the higher positions of power are. But things are changing, albeit slowly.

at the end of the day, it shouldn't matter what label you give yourself, FFS. Just make your life and others a better place and actually "do something" not sit behind a monitor and proclaim to be morally superior, without doing anything.

At the same time, if the label you choose for yourself is one that is already associated with certain ways of thinking, you can't honestly be that shocked when people lump the entire shebang together. Nobody cares about the nuance.


If you choose to prop up a belief system that supports the things I listed above, even if you do not agree you are part of the problem.
 
2013-07-15 06:59:06 PM  
letrole: Tthe good thing about all of the Oold Ttestament strawmanmen arguments is that they can be used to mop up the spooge from the full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk .

/ b-b-but lobster, answer that!


Also, they work pretty well at making hypocrites out of the most sanctimonious people on the planet.
 
2013-07-15 07:00:29 PM  

letrole: the good thing about all the old testament strawman arguments is that they can be used to mop up the spooge from the full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk

/ b-b-but lobster, answer that!


Lobster is my surname, you ass.
 
2013-07-15 07:03:03 PM  
Wow, that's like watching two contortionists play Twister and do the limbo at the same time.
 
2013-07-15 07:03:48 PM  
stickerish.com
 
2013-07-15 07:08:27 PM  
You know who else had gays in their national organization?
 
2013-07-15 07:13:52 PM  
So they're pushing "progay" as a word?
 
2013-07-15 07:17:25 PM  
Lutrasimilis: strawmanmen arguments
Also, they work pretty well at making hypocrites out of the most sanctimonious people on the planet.


The plural of 'strawman argument' is 'strawman arguments'. It is an established rule of the internet that spelling flames usually result in the flamer looking like a twat.

Sanctimonius, indeed.
 
2013-07-15 07:18:05 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: KrispyKritter: Mambo Bananapatch: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I imagine you'd get more grief in a Catholic forum than you would in this one. Catholics aren't supposed to be pro-choice or gay-friendly. Just ask the Holy Father.

Mind you, if you're one of those maverick Catholics who wants to reform the institution, more power to you. Otherwise, why be a Catholic? I don't mean to be snarky, I am genuinely curious about people who reject Catholic values but want to be Catholics.

you can be a member of the KKK and still like some black folks or have a jewish friend. life isn't 100% or nothing.

Yes, but you can't be surprised when you get lumped in with the parts of the KKK who hate all black folks and don't have that Jewish friend. You chose a label associated with those things.


I can't imagine many Catholics getting lumped in with the Klan.
 
2013-07-15 07:18:58 PM  

codergirl42: The My Little Pony Killer: cookiefleck: 42_42_42: codergirl42: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

How do you reconcile those beliefs if you also give money to the catholic church? Do you just like to donate to pedophile-protecting, woman-hating anti-choice, anti-gay bigots while also donating to LGBTQ community and pro-choice organizations?   Not sure how you can justify that, does it work like carbon offsets?

Maybe he only gives money that supports local programs within his diocese or parish that don't conflict with his values.

Not everyone in the Catholic church is like what you stated. Unfortunately, a lot of those in the old boys' club in the higher positions of power are. But things are changing, albeit slowly.

at the end of the day, it shouldn't matter what label you give yourself, FFS. Just make your life and others a better place and actually "do something" not sit behind a monitor and proclaim to be morally superior, without doing anything.

At the same time, if the label you choose for yourself is one that is already associated with certain ways of thinking, you can't honestly be that shocked when people lump the entire shebang together. Nobody cares about the nuance.

If you choose to prop up a belief system that supports the things I listed above, even if you do not agree you are part of the problem.


I can understand that, I mean there are LGBT friendly churches that don't give money to groups that support hate and bigotry. They could join one of those if they wanna hold on to their faith or whatever.

This was an interesting documentary BTW on Netflix
www.scncucc.org
 
2013-07-15 07:21:52 PM  
"Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.
 
2013-07-15 07:26:16 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


I hope this is a joke. Damn Poe's law.
 
2013-07-15 07:26:44 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


That's not a difficult decision at all. It's attached to me, and Jesus forgives.
 
2013-07-15 07:28:39 PM  

ALL GIRLS AGREE TO PULL PANTIES DOWN: Brick-House: Looking how the female vote slanted toward BOB, I'm still opposed to women coating.

Women have always been a fan of Battery-Operated Boyfriends.


Gay Boyfriends can be pretty awesome, too.
 
2013-07-15 07:28:53 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


Cock cock cock! I wish all my problems were that easy.
 
2013-07-15 07:30:15 PM  
Guys, guys, calm down it's obviously a satirical site. Just look at this one! http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content /nothing-safe-austin-ruse-upset-h e-had-see-lesbian-food-network
 
2013-07-15 07:32:10 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


So he gave us this wonderful cock and denounces us for enjoying it. God sounds kind of like a knob.

Anyway, I don't serve my cock, my cock serves me. And my lady.
 
2013-07-15 07:32:20 PM  

Martian_Astronomer: Much like a skilled yogi, it takes years and years of practice to be able to perform the mental contortions necessary to argue that opposing civil rights for a marginalized group actually places you in solidarity with those on the right side of history.


On the contrary, it's pretty easy.  He pretty much just took what a reasonable person might say about homophobes and substituted "pro-gay" for "homophobe."  One global search-and-replace, coupled with a quick edit to fix pronouns and subject-verb agreement would do it.
 
2013-07-15 07:33:41 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?



upload.wikimedia.org

Progays are tasty.
 
2013-07-15 07:36:28 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


Well, if you put money in the collection plate, then you are actively acting against reproductive rights, gay rights, and science in general, plus supporting a worldwide pedophile ring.  Doesn't matter what you personallyclaim to believe, your actions (supporting the Catholic Church) are actively harming people.
 
2013-07-15 07:36:45 PM  
Interestingly, I've been seeing this crop up more and more.  Whenever someone e-mails me about "How can you be a pastor and support same-sex marriage?" I always talk about slavery (which is very well-attested in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament).  Apparently enough of us do that, that the whackos are now trying to claim that they are the spiritual descendants of the people who opposed slavery.

I don't get it.

Stupid is as stupid does, I suppose.

I recently wrote an essay on how socially progressive clergy are, indeed, Christians too, if anyone's interested.
 
2013-07-15 07:37:47 PM  

ciberido: Martian_Astronomer: Much like a skilled yogi, it takes years and years of practice to be able to perform the mental contortions necessary to argue that opposing civil rights for a marginalized group actually places you in solidarity with those on the right side of history.

On the contrary, it's pretty easy.  He pretty much just took what a reasonable person might say about homophobes and substituted "pro-gay" for "homophobe."  One global search-and-replace, coupled with a quick edit to fix pronouns and subject-verb agreement would do it.


Were you the author? ; )
/Sorry
 
2013-07-15 07:38:08 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

So he gave us this wonderful cock and denounces us for enjoying it. God sounds kind of like a knob.

Anyway, I don't serve my cock, my cock serves me. And my lady.


Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


Who the fark tries to anthropomorphize an anatomical feature? I guess the same people that think a imaginary sky wizard controls their fate...
 
2013-07-15 07:38:25 PM  

ghambone: How long until this ExGay gets caught farking a dude? The lady doth protest too much.....


latimesblogs.latimes.com
 
2013-07-15 07:41:10 PM  

cjoshuav: Interestingly, I've been seeing this crop up more and more.  Whenever someone e-mails me about "How can you be a pastor and support same-sex marriage?" I always talk about slavery (which is very well-attested in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament).  Apparently enough of us do that, that the whackos are now trying to claim that they are the spiritual descendants of the people who opposed slavery.

I don't get it.

Stupid is as stupid does, I suppose.

I recently wrote an essay on how socially progressive clergy are, indeed, Christians too, if anyone's interested.


I've got you farkied as "cool preacher dude" so I may be reading that soon.
 
2013-07-15 07:41:24 PM  

illannoyin: [i.imgur.com image 598x350]

/Baby steps y'all


Actually I can see that being said in the south. Not very PC down there even amongst the gay rights supporters.
 
2013-07-15 07:42:25 PM  

jonny_q: Coco LaFemme: Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays. There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.

This is just plain not true. I don't really want to argue the finer points of it, and I don't have a problem with people being for or against gay marriage. By saying that those against gay marriage logically must hate guys, you have a bad starting point for discussion, because there is plenty of room for A to be true and B to be false.


Hatred is behaviour. Denying others a right you claim for yourself is demonstrably hateful. One can rationalize one's behaviour, based on religion, ideology, or whatever, but one is still behaving in a hateful manner.

"Those who would deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."
-- A. Lincoln
 
2013-07-15 07:44:32 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: That's not a difficult decision at all. It's attached to me, and Jesus forgives.


That's the best part of being a Christian! You can go out and do whatever you want, as long as you have time to repent at the last minute.
 
2013-07-15 07:45:09 PM  

codergirl42: Mambo Bananapatch: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

So he gave us this wonderful cock and denounces us for enjoying it. God sounds kind of like a knob.

Anyway, I don't serve my cock, my cock serves me. And my lady.

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

Who the fark tries to anthropomorphize an anatomical feature? I guess the same people that think a imaginary sky wizard controls their fate...


I would never try to anthropomorphize my cock. He would hate that.
 
2013-07-15 07:45:35 PM  

42_42_42: phalamir: Coco LaFemme: I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure Jesus never told his followers to hate anyone.

Luke 14:26  If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple.

That is the J Man speaking directly

Again, to understand ANYTHING in the Bible properly, you have to understand its historic and social context:


It's also worth pointing out that the Bible wasn't written in English, nor did Jesus ever speak English.  Any time someone "quotes" Jesus in English, it is at best a paraphrase (even if the original written record really were a perfect transcription, which they almost certainly weren't).  One must acknowledge that the real meaning could be lost in translation.

My favorite example of this, silly as it might be, is "thigh," which was used at the time as a euphemism for "penis."  So all of those stories in the Bible in which a man was "struck in his thigh" or "suffered an injury to his thigh" refer to nasty things happening to their penises.
 
2013-07-15 07:47:25 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: fusillade762: Because People in power are Stupid: Many Christians were slave owners and opposed suffrage. So the trolly headline fails unless both conditions are  both anecessary and asufficient condition for opposing those things.

Ayup. There's a helluva lot more stuff in the bible about slavery than there is about homosexuality.

Then thou shalt take an awl, and thrust it through his ear unto the door, and he shall be thy servant for ever. And also unto thy maidservant thou shalt do likewise.
Deuteronomy


So, slaves are like vampires?
 
2013-07-15 07:48:01 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


Some of us have a problem with people who support kiddie-diddlers.
 
2013-07-15 07:48:17 PM  

gimmegimme: I know this sounds crazy, but why don't we just stop believing that Bronze Age myths are real?


Because conservative brains are

s21.postimg.org

Solid, hard, unchangeable, thick, inflexible, dense...
 
2013-07-15 07:50:12 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.



That is some splitting hairs stuff there.  If you are following the path of a minister, then you could also argue that serving your wife is a distraction from ministry.   Lots of different sects say a  lot about that.   Most of protestants would fail that one.  How can a man who has never had sex or been in a relationship and see the true power of a woman counsel a couple?

/ stopped dating mostly because when I'm dating I lose all my logic skills
 
2013-07-15 07:50:50 PM  

ghambone: How long until this ExGay gets caught farking a dude? The lady doth protest too much.....


Yeah, I don't want to go overboard with the "anti-gay people are self-hating gays" meme, but this guy really does come across as projecting his own self-disgust hardcore.  Plus the whole "EX-gay" thing is just... too easy.

It's like shooting fish in a barrel, really.
 
2013-07-15 07:52:26 PM  

ciberido: 42_42_42: phalamir: Coco LaFemme: I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure Jesus never told his followers to hate anyone.

Luke 14:26  If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple.

That is the J Man speaking directly

Again, to understand ANYTHING in the Bible properly, you have to understand its historic and social context:

It's also worth pointing out that the Bible wasn't written in English, nor did Jesus ever speak English.  Any time someone "quotes" Jesus in English, it is at best a paraphrase (even if the original written record really were a perfect transcription, which they almost certainly weren't).  One must acknowledge that the real meaning could be lost in translation.

My favorite example of this, silly as it might be, is "thigh," which was used at the time as a euphemism for "penis."  So all of those stories in the Bible in which a man was "struck in his thigh" or "suffered an injury to his thigh" refer to nasty things happening to their penises.


The Bible was also written 200 years after Jesus. So any quotes attributed to him are gossip at best and outright lies at worst.
 
2013-07-15 07:53:04 PM  

Snapper Carr: *reads article*


I feel dumber for having read that pile of shiat.
 
2013-07-15 07:55:20 PM  

ciberido: 42_42_42: phalamir: Coco LaFemme: I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure Jesus never told his followers to hate anyone.

Luke 14:26  If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple.

That is the J Man speaking directly

Again, to understand ANYTHING in the Bible properly, you have to understand its historic and social context:

It's also worth pointing out that the Bible wasn't written in English, nor did Jesus ever speak English.  Any time someone "quotes" Jesus in English, it is at best a paraphrase (even if the original written record really were a perfect transcription, which they almost certainly weren't).  One must acknowledge that the real meaning could be lost in translation.

My favorite example of this, silly as it might be, is "thigh," which was used at the time as a euphemism for "penis."  So all of those stories in the Bible in which a man was "struck in his thigh" or "suffered an injury to his thigh" refer to nasty things happening to their penises.


Oh my...
t3.gstatic.com

Oh and just wanna say you're one of the people that got me to look into being LGBT and christen. I mean I'm not christen but I don't want to be prejudice against someone for their beliefs when their not being prejudice towards me. As I've said my parents call themselves christens and are pretty good ones.
 
2013-07-15 07:55:35 PM  

Sgt.Zim: Snapper Carr: *reads article*

I feel dumber for having read that pile of shiat.


You probably are. I suggest locking yourself away and listening to Frank Zappa for a few hours to clear your head.
 
2013-07-15 07:56:15 PM  

epoch_destroi: Okay, that image is farking disgusting. Let's just encourage men to fake interest in one of the few bastions of women's athletics so that they can ToUcH BoObZzZ.

disgusting.


Might wanna wipe that sand out of your vagina there,Francis.
 
2013-07-15 07:58:10 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

So he gave us this wonderful cock and denounces us for enjoying it. God sounds kind of like a knob.

Anyway, I don't serve my cock, my cock serves me. And my lady.


Do you wash it? Then you serve your cock. You're gonna have to serve somebody (part).
 
2013-07-15 07:58:49 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


The sin of Soddom wasn't the gayness, but the whole idea of raping the visitors.

"Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them." But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, "Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof." But they said, "Stand aside." Furthermore, they said, "This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them." So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door. But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the doorway. Then the men said to Lot, "Whom else have you here? A son-in-law, and your sons, and your daughters, and whomever you have in the city, bring them out of the place; for we are about to destroy this place, because their outcry has become so great before the Lord that the Lord has sent us to destroy it."

The wickedness is less about the "relations" that they weren't upon having, but the capriciousness and the rudeness to guests. Fathers, owned their daughters, so offering up the girls was something he could do, offering up grown men, that's a whole different kettle of fish, at the time. You don't just toss out guests to a rape mob, ESPECIALLY if said guests are there to judge the city on its merits as a town deserving to be struck from the Earth. Then again, the Bible is fairly strong, including in Leviticus on the treatment of guests to your lands.

What astounds me, are of all the things that the Bible condemns, homosexuality is just one thing, of many, that folks seem to take way out of context. When, there are so very many things that the Bible considers, especially Leviticus, as being REALLY bad. Take Leviticus, just as the example, since THAT one seems to be the IMPORTANT book, and the hippy dippy crap about some kid from Nazareth is just so much Newage junk...

1.       Burning any yeast or honey in offerings to God (2:11)
Not a huge problem nowadays.

2.       Failing to include salt in offerings to God (2:13)
Again, not a huge deal to most Christian churches.

3.       Eating fat (3:17)
Southern cuisine is in trouble

4.       Eating blood (3:17)
German cuisine is in trouble.

5.       Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you've witnessed (5:1)
Congress is in trouble.

6.       Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you've been told about (5:1)
Congress is REALLY in trouble

7.       Touching an unclean animal (5:2)
Hope you don't like pork...

8.       Carelessly making an oath (5:4)
Again, Congress is REALLY in trouble

9.       Deceiving a neighbour about something trusted to them (6:2)
HOAs are against God...

10.   Finding lost property and lying about it (6:3)
Much of America is DOOMED...

11.   Bringing unauthorized fire before God (10:1)
The candle trade for saints is apparently DOOOOOOM!

12.   Letting your hair become unkempt (10:6)
Hipsters, teens, and much of Hollywood is DOOOOOMED!

13.   Tearing your clothes (10:6)
Wrasslin' is the work of the Debbil

14.   Drinking alcohol in holy places (10:9)
Catholics, we're looking right at you....

15.   Eating an animal which doesn't both chew cud and has a divided hoof (cf: camel, rabbit, pig) (11:4-7)
Rib joints are the work of the Debbil...

16.   Touching the carcass of any of the above (11:8)
Hope you aren't a fan of football...

17.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - any seafood without fins or scales (11:10-12)
Red Lobster is the work of the Debbil...

18.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat. (11:13-19)
In fairness, this means that Newage folks are DOOOOOMED!

19.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - flying insects with four legs, unless those legs are jointed (11:20-22)
Cicadas may be out.

20.   Eating any animal which walks on all four and has paws (11:27)
Roof rabbit may have doomed the entire Greatest Generation...

21.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon (11:29)
Hope you haven't had gator bites...

22.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - any creature which crawls on many legs, or its belly (11:41-42)
Rattlesnake BBQ is RIGHT out...

23.   Going to church within 33 days after giving birth to a boy (12:4)
Hope you aren't having that Christening too early, you naughty folks...

24.   Going to church within 66 days after giving birth to a girl (12:5)
See the above, but double time for the girlchil'run...

25.   Having sex with your mother (18:7)
Which is not a bad rule to have, but let's face it, this rule pretty much takes out a good section of 90s day time TV

26.   Having sex with your father's wife (18:8)
Not a bad rule either, but see the above section on reality TV...

27.   Having sex with your sister (18:9)
This one is going to have Kentucky and good sections of the South, and Maine in trouble...

28.   Having sex with your granddaughter (18:10)
Not a bad rule at all, and...ewww

29.  Having sex with your half-sister (18:11)
See the earlier section on day time TV...

30.   Having sex with your biological aunt (18:12-13)
Again, see the section on day time TV...

31.   Having sex with your uncle's wife (18:14)
Man, Maury would be screwed if we damn everyone for this...

32.   Having sex with your daughter-in-law (18:15)
Maury may have sent a brazillion folks to Hell for this...

33.   Having sex with your sister-in-law (18:16)
Congress may be in trouble here too...

34.   Having sex with a woman and also having sex with her daughter or granddaughter (18:17)
Alan Clarke and Maury are soooo screwed on this.

35.   Marrying your wife's sister while your wife still lives (18:18)
Man, day time TV is just rife with sinfulness. Should we let children watch this smut?

36.   Having sex with a woman during her period (18:19)
Redwings. Apparently, always a bad idea...

37.   Having sex with your neighbour's wife (18:20)
Congress, and a fair amount of middle America is sooooo boned...

38.   Giving your children to be sacrificed to Molek (18:21)
In fairness, I'm all for religious freedom, but this seems like a good, commonsense rule.

39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

40.   Having sex with an animal (18:23)
The Scots apparently have generations of sending kindling to Hell...

41.   Making idols or "metal gods" (19:4)
Catholics, you may be in some trouble here...

42.   Reaping to the very edges of a field (19:9)
Yup. We're supposed to leave stuff for the poor and destitute to glean from the fields...

43.   Picking up grapes that have fallen in your vineyard (19:10)
Factory farming is the work of the Debbil...

44.   Stealing (19:11)
Congress and much of the legal system is so screwed...

45.   Lying (19:11)
Is there anything Congress CAN do then?

46.   Swearing falsely on God's name (19:12)
Pat Robertson and Congress apparently makes Jehovah wroth...

47.   Defrauding your neighbor (19:13)
Real estate and much of America is boned. You'll note how wroth folks are about this one, while being ghey is just the work of the Debbil...

48.   Holding back the wages of an employee overnight (19:13)
Paychecks are the work of the Debbil...

49.   Cursing the deaf or abusing the blind (19:14)
God is hard on douchebags...

50.   Perverting justice, showing partiality to either the poor or the rich (19:15)
Congress in both houses are boned...

51.   Spreading slander (19:16)
As are the tabloids...

52.   Doing anything to endanger a neighbour's life (19:16)
Most of America and the "here, hold my beer" crowd is screwed...

53.   Seeking revenge or bearing a grudge (19:18)
Congress...you are sooooooooo going ALL of you to Hell...

54.   Mixing fabrics in clothing (19:19)
Walmart, Sears, and Target. Agents of Satan...

55.   Cross-breeding animals (19:19)
God IS against GMO husbandry...

56.   Planting different seeds in the same field (19:19)
Put down the basil and the tomatoes. I don't care if they DO complement one another's growth, it's BAD!

57.   Sleeping with another man's slave (19:20)
Seriously. Bad form folks. Bad form.

58.   Eating fruit from a tree within four years of planting it (19:23)
The apple industry is the work of the Debbil...

59.   Practicing divination or seeking omens (tut, tut astrology) (19:26)
Miss Cleo is the work of the Debbil, and here we have this sin IN OUR PAPERS!

60.   Trimming your beard (19:27)
Look at all the dirty bastiches who do this. LOOK AT THEM!

61.   Cutting your hair at the sides (19:27)
The Marines are the work of the Debbil...

62.   Getting tattoos (19:28)
Tramp stamps and memorial tattoos are the work of the Debbil...

63.   Making your daughter prostitute herself (19:29)
Daytime TV is SUCH a sinful place...

64.   Turning to mediums or spiritualists (19:31)
Miss Cleo. Leading a nation into sin and depravity...

65.   Not standing in the presence of the elderly (19:32)
Welp, this one seems right out today...

66.   Mistreating foreigners - "the foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born"  (19:33-34)
Guess that means we can stop those Oathkeepers and Sheriff Joe from being mean to the immigrants then, right? Border fences are the Debbil's chopsticks I guess...

67.   Using dishonest weights and scales (19:35-36)
My industry is boned as a whole, as is pretty much most of the oil industry as well...

68.   Cursing your father or mother (punishable by death) (20:9)
Maury and the rest could have made a few bucks by televising the stonings though...

69.   Marrying a prostitute, divorcee or widow if you are a priest (21:7,13)
Odd, that you don't see more folks incensed by this...

70.   Entering a place where there's a dead body as a priest (21:11)
Which pretty much means that all our chaplains are boned.

71.   Slaughtering a cow/sheep and its young on the same day (22:28)
And in fairness, it's rude too. Eating mama and her babies is just greedy...

72.   Working on the Sabbath (23:3)
Sadly, this means no liquor stores open on Saturday or Sunday...

73.   Blasphemy (punishable by stoning to death) (24:14)
Man, we are going to need a LOT of stones. Just in the State legislatures, and let's not even get onto Congress...

74.   Inflicting an injury; killing someone else's animal; killing a person must be punished in kind (24:17-22)
This WOULD end cockfighting and dogfighting quick though...

75.   Selling land permanently (25:23)
Odd, you don't see more protests and signs around real estate agencies...

76.   Selling an Israelite as a slave (foreigners are fine) (25:42)
So, I guess we should be OK with slaves again?
 
2013-07-15 08:02:24 PM  

ReverendJynxed: HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?

Progays are tasty.


Delicious delicious progays...
 
2013-07-15 08:05:53 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


I would wonder why you still consider yourself catholic.
 
2013-07-15 08:07:51 PM  

megarian: ReverendJynxed: HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?

Progays are tasty.

Delicious delicious progays...


It's true progays can be very yum : )
 
2013-07-15 08:08:28 PM  
hubiestubert:
Very good point.  Though you missed a few hundred more laws but essentially they are similar to those.
 
2013-07-15 08:08:36 PM  

jonny_q: Coco LaFemme: Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays. There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.

This is just plain not true. I don't really want to argue the finer points of it, and I don't have a problem with people being for or against gay marriage. By saying that those against gay marriage logically must hate guys, you have a bad starting point for discussion, because there is plenty of room for A to be true and B to be false.


Prove it.  Give the case for someone who is opposed to gay marriage yet does not feel any animosity towards gays whatsoever.

I'm sorry, but "this is just plain not true, but I don't really want to argue the finer points of it" isn't a convincing argument, and we've reached the point, like it or not, where you have to defend the position if you expect anyone (who isn't themself opposed to gay rights already) to take it seriously.

/with apologies to those who find the intensive pronoun "themself" grating
//And yes, I do mean intensive, not reflexive.
 
2013-07-15 08:09:17 PM  

manimal2878: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I would wonder why you still consider yourself catholic.


True most places have churches that are more open and accepting, I'm guessing family though.
 
2013-07-15 08:10:54 PM  
Lutrasamillis:"Therein lies the beauty of ancient scripture. Since most Christians don't read the bible, it becomes relatively simple for even a stupid man to cherry-pick passages to fit the current political climate, pontificate with divine authority, and acquire sub-believers who will take their sexual hysteria seriously."

Same as anti-Theists who want to hold the whole thing in contempt without giving what is actually written any study other than what can be used to support a preconceived bias.
It's your duty as a believer and recommended for non-believers to read so you won't be deceived.
 
2013-07-15 08:11:24 PM  

hubiestubert: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

The sin of Soddom wasn't the gayness, but the whole idea of raping the visitors.

"Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them." But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, "Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof." But they said, "Stand aside." Furthermore, they said, "This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them." So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door. But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the doorway. Then the men said to Lot, "Whom else have you here? A son-in-law, and your sons, and your daughters, and whomever you have in the city, bring them out of the place; for we are about to destroy this place, because their outcry has become so great before the Lord that the Lord has sent us to destroy it."

The wickedness is less about the "relations" that they weren't upon having, but the capriciousness and the rudeness to guests. Fathers, owned their daughters, so offering up the girls was something he could do, offering up grown men, that's a whole different kettle of fish, at the time. You don't just toss out guests to a rape mob, ESPECIALLY if said guests are there to judge the city on its merits as a town deserving to be struck from the Earth. Then again, the Bible is fairly strong, including in Leviticus on the treatment of guests to your lands.

What astounds me, are of all the things that the Bible condemns, homosexuality is just one thing, of many, that folks seem to take way out of context. When, there are so very many things that the Bible considers, especially Leviticus, as being REALLY bad. Take Leviticus, just as the example, since THAT one seems to be the IMPORTANT book, and the hippy dippy crap about some kid from Nazareth is just so much Newage junk...

1.       Burning any yeast or honey in offerings to God (2:11)
Not a huge problem nowadays.

2.       Failing to include salt in offerings to God (2:13)
Again, not a huge deal to most Christian churches.

3.       Eating fat (3:17)
Southern cuisine is in trouble

4.       Eating blood (3:17)
German cuisine is in trouble.

5.       Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you've witnessed (5:1)
Congress is in trouble.

6.       Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you've been told about (5:1)
Congress is REALLY in trouble

7.       Touching an unclean animal (5:2)
Hope you don't like pork...

8.       Carelessly making an oath (5:4)
Again, Congress is REALLY in trouble

9.       Deceiving a neighbour about something trusted to them (6:2)
HOAs are against God...

10.   Finding lost property and lying about it (6:3)
Much of America is DOOMED...

11.   Bringing unauthorized fire before God (10:1)
The candle trade for saints is apparently DOOOOOOM!

12.   Letting your hair become unkempt (10:6)
Hipsters, teens, and much of Hollywood is DOOOOOMED!

13.   Tearing your clothes (10:6)
Wrasslin' is the work of the Debbil

14.   Drinking alcohol in holy places (10:9)
Catholics, we're looking right at you....

15.   Eating an animal which doesn't both chew cud and has a divided hoof (cf: camel, rabbit, pig) (11:4-7)
Rib joints are the work of the Debbil...

16.   Touching the carcass of any of the above (11:8)
Hope you aren't a fan of football...

17.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - any seafood without fins or scales (11:10-12)
Red Lobster is the work of the Debbil...

18.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat. (11:13-19)
In fairness, this means that Newage folks are DOOOOOMED!

19.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - flying insects with four legs, unless those legs are jointed (11:20-22)
Cicadas may be out.

20.   Eating any animal which walks on all four and has paws (11:27)
Roof rabbit may have doomed the entire Greatest Generation...

21.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon (11:29)
Hope you haven't had gator bites...

22.   Eating - or touching the carcass of - any creature which crawls on many legs, or its belly (11:41-42)
Rattlesnake BBQ is RIGHT out...

23.   Going to church within 33 days after giving birth to a boy (12:4)
Hope you aren't having that Christening too early, you naughty folks...

24.   Going to church within 66 days after giving birth to a girl (12:5)
See the above, but double time for the girlchil'run...

25.   Having sex with your mother (18:7)
Which is not a bad rule to have, but let's face it, this rule pretty much takes out a good section of 90s day time TV

26.   Having sex with your father's wife (18:8)
Not a bad rule either, but see the above section on reality TV...

27.   Having sex with your sister (18:9)
This one is going to have Kentucky and good sections of the South, and Maine in trouble...

28.   Having sex with your granddaughter (18:10)
Not a bad rule at all, and...ewww

29.  Having sex with your half-sister (18:11)
See the earlier section on day time TV...

30.   Having sex with your biological aunt (18:12-13)
Again, see the section on day time TV...

31.   Having sex with your uncle's wife (18:14)
Man, Maury would be screwed if we damn everyone for this...

32.   Having sex with your daughter-in-law (18:15)
Maury may have sent a brazillion folks to Hell for this...

33.   Having sex with your sister-in-law (18:16)
Congress may be in trouble here too...

34.   Having sex with a woman and also having sex with her daughter or granddaughter (18:17)
Alan Clarke and Maury are soooo screwed on this.

35.   Marrying your wife's sister while your wife still lives (18:18)
Man, day time TV is just rife with sinfulness. Should we let children watch this smut?

36.   Having sex with a woman during her period (18:19)
Redwings. Apparently, always a bad idea...

37.   Having sex with your neighbour's wife (18:20)
Congress, and a fair amount of middle America is sooooo boned...

38.   Giving your children to be sacrificed to Molek (18:21)
In fairness, I'm all for religious freedom, but this seems like a good, commonsense rule.

39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

40.   Having sex with an animal (18:23)
The Scots apparently have generations of sending kindling to Hell...

41.   Making idols or "metal gods" (19:4)
Catholics, you may be in some trouble here...

42.   Reaping to the very edges of a field (19:9)
Yup. We're supposed to leave stuff for the poor and destitute to glean from the fields...

43.   Picking up grapes that have fallen in your vineyard (19:10)
Factory farming is the work of the Debbil...

44.   Stealing (19:11)
Congress and much of the legal system is so screwed...

45.   Lying (19:11)
Is there anything Congress CAN do then?

46.   Swearing falsely on God's name (19:12)
Pat Robertson and Congress apparently makes Jehovah wroth...

47.   Defrauding your neighbor (19:13)
Real estate and much of America is boned. You'll note how wroth folks are about this one, while being ghey is just the work of the Debbil...

48.   Holding back the wages of an employee overnight (19:13)
Paychecks are the work of the Debbil...

49.   Cursing the deaf or abusing the blind (19:14)
God is hard on douchebags...

50.   Perverting justice, showing partiality to either the poor or the rich (19:15)
Congress in both houses are boned...

51.   Spreading slander (19:16)
As are the tabloids...

52.   Doing anything to endanger a neighbour's life (19:16)
Most of America and the "here, hold my beer" crowd is screwed...

53.   Seeking revenge or bearing a grudge (19:18)
Congress...you are sooooooooo going ALL of you to Hell...

54.   Mixing fabrics in clothing (19:19)
Walmart, Sears, and Target. Agents of Satan...

55.   Cross-breeding animals (19:19)
God IS against GMO husbandry...

56.   Planting different seeds in the same field (19:19)
Put down the basil and the tomatoes. I don't care if they DO complement one another's growth, it's BAD!

57.   Sleeping with another man's slave (19:20)
Seriously. Bad form folks. Bad form.

58.   Eating fruit from a tree within four years of planting it (19:23)
The apple industry is the work of the Debbil...

59.   Practicing divination or seeking omens (tut, tut astrology) (19:26)
Miss Cleo is the work of the Debbil, and here we have this sin IN OUR PAPERS!

60.   Trimming your beard (19:27)
Look at all the dirty bastiches who do this. LOOK AT THEM!

61.   Cutting your hair at the sides (19:27)
The Marines are the work of the Debbil...

62.   Getting tattoos (19:28)
Tramp stamps and memorial tattoos are the work of the Debbil...

63.   Making your daughter prostitute herself (19:29)
Daytime TV is SUCH a sinful place...

64.   Turning to mediums or spiritualists (19:31)
Miss Cleo. Leading a nation into sin and depravity...

65.   Not standing in the presence of the elderly (19:32)
Welp, this one seems right out today...

66.   Mistreating foreigners - "the foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born"  (19:33-34)
Guess that means we can stop those Oathkeepers and Sheriff Joe from being mean to the immigrants then, right? Border fences are the Debbil's chopsticks I guess...

67.   Using dishonest weights and scales (19:35-36)
My industry is boned as a whole, as is pretty much most of the oil industry as well...

68.   Cursing your father or mother (punishable by death) (20:9)
Maury and the rest could have made a few bucks by televising the stonings though...

69.   Marrying a prostitute, divorcee or widow if you are a priest (21:7,13)
Odd, that you don't see more folks incensed by this...

70.   Entering a place where there's a dead body as a priest (21:11)
Which pretty much means that all our chaplains are boned.

71.   Slaughtering a cow/sheep and its young on the same day (22:28)
And in fairness, it's rude too. Eating mama and her babies is just greedy...

72.   Working on the Sabbath (23:3)
Sadly, this means no liquor stores open on Saturday or Sunday...

73.   Blasphemy (punishable by stoning to death) (24:14)
Man, we are going to need a LOT of stones. Just in the State legislatures, and let's not even get onto Congress...

74.   Inflicting an injury; killing someone else's animal; killing a person must be punished in kind (24:17-22)
This WOULD end cockfighting and dogfighting quick though...

75.   Selling land permanently (25:23)
Odd, you don't see more protests and signs around real estate agencies...

76.   Selling an Israelite as a slave (foreigners are fine) (25:42)
So, I guess we should be OK with slaves again?


That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.
 
2013-07-15 08:11:24 PM  

hubiestubert: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

The sin of Soddom wasn't the gayness, but the whole idea of raping the visitors.

"Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them." But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, "Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof." But they said, "Stand aside." Furthermore, they said, "This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them." So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door. But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the doorway. Then the men said to Lot, "Whom else have you here? A son-in-law, and your sons, and your daughters, and whomever you have in the city, bring them out of the place; for we are about to destroy this place, because their outcry has become so great before the Lord that the Lord has sent us to destroy it."

The wickedness is less about the "relations" that they weren't upon having, but the capriciousness and the rudeness to guests. Fathers, owned their daughters, so offering up the girls was ...


Epic post is epic.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-15 08:12:08 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: ReverendJynxed: HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?

Progays are tasty.

Delicious delicious progays...

It's true progays can be very yum : )


Well...yeah. Oh. OH! Yeah, them, too ;)
 
2013-07-15 08:12:13 PM  
How do I score some of that sweet pro-gay money? Does being an atheist disqualify me?
 
2013-07-15 08:12:44 PM  

TopoGigo: letrole: the good thing about all the old testament strawman arguments is that they can be used to mop up the spooge from the full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk

/ b-b-but lobster, answer that!

Lobster is my surname, you ass.


Nice!

I wonder, though, do you suppose it's just more trolling when he talks about "strawman arguments," or is "strawman" being redefined to mean "an argument I don't like"?

Also, it's not lobster, it's shrimp, silly troll people!
 
2013-07-15 08:17:08 PM  

rev. dave: hubiestubert:
Very good point.  Though you missed a few hundred more laws but essentially they are similar to those.


Considering how much time and effort is put into condemning gays, you'd think more folks would join this courageous young woman..

lh5.googleusercontent.com
 
2013-07-15 08:18:06 PM  
They were the type of people who voted for Hubert Humphrey...and they killed Jesus!
 
2013-07-15 08:19:44 PM  

letrole: full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk


Keith Morris, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Simmons walk into a bar...
 
2013-07-15 08:23:13 PM  

Ed Grubermann: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

Some of us have a problem with people who support kiddie-diddlers.


According to DoE research, pedophilia and associated cover ups are considerably worse in California's public schools than they ever were in the Catholic Church. Therefore, anyone who has not chosen to move away from California, and pays state taxes, supports kiddie-diddlers.
 
2013-07-15 08:23:37 PM  

megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.


Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

/BTW been a while girl : )
 
2013-07-15 08:27:15 PM  

ciberido: TopoGigo: letrole: the good thing about all the old testament strawman arguments is that they can be used to mop up the spooge from the full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk

/ b-b-but lobster, answer that!

Lobster is my surname, you ass.

Nice!

I wonder, though, do you suppose it's just more trolling when he talks about "strawman arguments," or is "strawman" being redefined to mean "an argument I don't like"?

Also, it's not lobster, it's shrimp, silly troll people!


They're both crustaceans and wasn't the law against bottom feeders? It's been awhile but I know Southern Baptist that love their catfish.
 
2013-07-15 08:34:02 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: They're both crustaceans and wasn't the law against bottom feeders? It's been awhile but I know Southern Baptist that love their catfish.


Hell, I don't know any that don't.
 
2013-07-15 08:34:54 PM  

factoryconnection: I can only assume that this is going green on the Main Page because some people need to go back to school with their trolling.

This guy... this guy can troll.


So can a lot of farkers with a fark axe to grind.
 
2013-07-15 08:35:55 PM  

ten foiled hats: letrole: full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk

Keith Morris, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Simmons walk into a bar...


It's a pity when folks of faith aren't knee jerking asshats who hate folks for the folks that they love. That is the REAL lesson here. If you want to be someone who is known for your faith, it's about what you hate, not what you love. Anything else, and you're just another atheist, even if you are an adherent to a faith. I'm so glad that folks are here to ifrom us about what we ought to be.

Of course, there was that pesky Matthew...

7Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
 
2013-07-15 08:36:18 PM  
Question: Why can't Christian deal with homosexuality like they deal with the whole being stoned to death for eating shellfish on the wrong day thing, by completely ignoring it?

These people are farking Biblical cherry pickers. There are tons of completely stupid laws in the Bible that not even the most ardent believer follows. Its almost as if these people refer to the Bible when they want to find some justification for their own personal prejudices and hang-up, but no, that can't be it.

/Looks forward to the day where superstition isn't the primary belief system of a majority of Americans
 
2013-07-15 08:37:28 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.


Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...
 
2013-07-15 08:38:22 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?


It's apparently some kind of insult.
 
2013-07-15 08:38:26 PM  

ten foiled hats: tinfoil-hat maggie: They're both crustaceans and wasn't the law against bottom feeders? It's been awhile but I know Southern Baptist that love their catfish.

Hell, I don't know any that don't.


Oh, I know I guess technically I'm a G.R.I.T.S. but I don't think they'd let me into their club : )
 
2013-07-15 08:39:47 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


And I'll bet each of them would not consider themselves to be a bigot, despite displaying bigoted opinions.
 
2013-07-15 08:39:53 PM  

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...


I thought about mentioning something about hot pics but that would have been too much... opps ; )
 
2013-07-15 08:44:19 PM  

ciberido: TopoGigo: letrole: the good thing about all the old testament strawman arguments is that they can be used to mop up the spooge from the full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk

/ b-b-but lobster, answer that!

Lobster is my surname, you ass.

Nice!

I wonder, though, do you suppose it's just more trolling when he talks about "strawman arguments," or is "strawman" being redefined to mean "an argument I don't like"?

Also, it's not lobster, it's shrimp, silly troll people!


Either everything he says is a clumsy attempt at trolling, or his surname really is letrole and he's just a clumsy bigot. Your choice.
 
2013-07-15 08:45:14 PM  

ciberido: I wonder, though, do you suppose it's just more trolling when he talks about "strawman arguments," or is "strawman" being redefined to mean "an argument I don't like"?


Years ago after reading one too many internet arguments about religion, I proposed the classification of the "ontological strawman defense," which is basically a specific form of question-begging. It goes something like this:

The first person presents his argument:

Premise 1: (blah blah blah)
Premise 2: (blah blah blah)
...
Premise X: This is one of the best arguments in the history of philosophy and is totally sound.
...
Ergo, Conclusion.

The second person, unimpressed, argues against premises 1 through X-1.
The first person fires back and says "Aha! You refuse to acknowledge premise X, 'This is one of the best arguments in history,' therefore, you're attacking a strawman, and not my real position. I win."

/ All this to say that cries of "strawman" are pretty much the first thing learned by erstwhile keyboard warriors who imagine themselves to have a good grasp of logic and argumentation. Frequently it's the only thing.
// And if your only tool is a hammer...
/// Seriously, when was the last time you heard someone call out "Inverse Gambler's Fallacy!" in an internet argument?
 
2013-07-15 08:45:44 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


I'll pick the one the rises again first

so...God

/off my lawn
 
2013-07-15 08:48:30 PM  

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...


But it's true,you're well informed and can be funny as hell. I have you favorited with the word Rocket Caskets.
 
2013-07-15 08:55:09 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?


I'm fine with it, personally.  I use the terms "pro-gay rights,"  "gay-friendly," and "gay-positive" pretty much interchangeably.  I don't mind using or being called "pro-gay" or "progay."

Why, is there something bad about the term "pro-gay"?
 
2013-07-15 08:55:38 PM  
This is just crazy. How can you possibly recognize that people used their religion to justify horrible things then turn right around and act like religious people who are AGAINST using their religion to justify a horrible thing (IE, denying equal rights to gays) are the bad guys?
 
2013-07-15 08:55:48 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

/BTW been a while girl : )


Missed ya!

Happy to see your pretty aqua color show up in the comments! Win.
 
2013-07-15 08:58:36 PM  

cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"


I honestly don't understand this...  If you merely called yourself Christian you would be able to cite numerous verses that support a fair and equal treatment of the members of the LGBTQ community.  You could say you aren't held to Rabbinical law by Jesus' teaching.  But in calling yourself Catholic you are claiming to be a member of an organization you don't agree with.  Why not join a church whose teachings are compatible with your beliefs?
 
2013-07-15 08:58:51 PM  
25.   Having sex with your mother (18:7), 26.   Having sex with your father's wife (18:8), 27.   Having sex with your sister (18:9), 28.   Having sex with your granddaughter (18:10), 29.  Having sex with your half-sister (18:11), 30.   Having sex with your biological aunt (18:12-13), 31.   Having sex with your uncle's wife (18:14), 32.   Having sex with your daughter-in-law (18:15), 33.   Having sex with your sister-in-law (18:16), 34.   Having sex with a woman and also having sex with her daughter or granddaughter (18:17), 35.   Marrying your wife's sister while your wife still lives (18:18), 37.   Having sex with your neighbour's wife (18:20), 40.   Having sex with an animal (18:23)



What the holy fark  were people doing in the ancient near east that these rules had to be codified?!?!  Was everyone just boning everyone and anyone and everything and anything in sight? These rules make the Bunny Ranch look like a convent for crissakes! Seriously, what the fark people, just because there's a hole there doesn't mean you have to stick your dick into it!

38.   Giving your children to be sacrificed to Molek (18:21)


Curious: Why Molek specifically? Are there other god/demon/scary-ass statues that it's OK to sacrifice your children to? Or is this Molek representative of all gods/demons/scary-ass statues that demand child sacrifice? And, so your children are right out, but does that mean that other people's children are OK? Or adults are OK? Or animals? What about this random old shoe I found on the side of the road. It's kind of dirty and smelly and I'm pretty sure there's an advanced form of mold life growing on it. Can I sacrifice that to Molek? On second thought, maybe I shouldn't, that might just piss him off. Molek doesn't sound like the name of someone you want to piss off.
 
2013-07-15 08:59:48 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...

I thought about mentioning something about hot pics but that would have been too much... opps ; )


You know I can't stay mad at a pretty gal. ;)
 
2013-07-15 09:03:04 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


Wrong. Also the Bible never condemns spanking it. The sin of Onan was not blowing his load inside his dead brother's wife, as the law expected him to do. See back then if your brother was married and you weren't and he died, you were expected to take over as her husband without question. And that included having kids with her. And Onan just wasn't into that. Calling masturbation Onanism is about as valid as calling teh buttsex Sodomy, it represents a complete misunderstanding of what the Biblical story is actually about.
 
2013-07-15 09:05:40 PM  

42_42_42: What the holy fark were people doing in the ancient near east that these rules had to be codified?!?!


Not to freak you out, but they're still codified in the law. Oh sure the law may be a little less specific, but you look up the laws for any state and you'll find the same things explicitly outlawed.
 
2013-07-15 09:06:51 PM  

letrole: the good thing about all the old testament strawman arguments is that they can be used to mop up the spooge from the full-tilt homosexual-atheist circle-jerk

/ b-b-but lobster, answer that!


Feel the wrath of the claw, Nazi scum!
fc06.deviantart.net
/hot
 
2013-07-15 09:07:15 PM  

Diogenes: I was fully prepared to be angered by this and primed to offer a refutation.  But I'm really more confused than anything.

factoryconnection: This guy... this guy can troll.

No doubt!


Ditto. I missed the part where what he was saying made sense.
 
2013-07-15 09:08:12 PM  

megarian: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

/BTW been a while girl : )

Missed ya!

Happy to see your pretty aqua color show up in the comments! Win.


LOl : ) And I got a pretty color win ; )
 
2013-07-15 09:08:19 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: ten foiled hats: tinfoil-hat maggie: They're both crustaceans and wasn't the law against bottom feeders? It's been awhile but I know Southern Baptist that love their catfish.

Hell, I don't know any that don't.

Oh, I know I guess technically I'm a G.R.I.T.S. but I don't think they'd let me into their club : )


A lot of them are actually alright, I just have no desire to join that club.  It's just that, like a lot of other instances,  the really loud ones that are the biggest assholes.  (Just my assessment.)

I'll eat catfish with 'em, though.  (And do I fall under B.R.I.T.S.?  I'm mainly Scottish descent...)

TopoGigo: Either everything he says is a clumsy attempt at trolling, or his surname really is letrole and he's just a clumsy bigot. Your choice.


I think the former.  I found the gay circle jerk line funny, though.  (Not sure if that's how he meant it.)
 
2013-07-15 09:09:25 PM  

reklamfox: ALL GIRLS AGREE TO PULL PANTIES DOWN: Brick-House: Looking how the female vote slanted toward BOB, I'm still opposed to women coating.

Women have always been a fan of Battery-Operated Boyfriends.

Keep mine in the top shelf of the nightstand right next to the bed. Ready for action.


Good answer, and the judges will also accept "Plugged in and under the bed." Bonus points for everyone!
 
2013-07-15 09:10:54 PM  

megarian: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

/BTW been a while girl : )

Missed ya!

Happy to see your pretty aqua color show up in the comments! Win.


Oh and really ask Hubie for pics if you haven't ; )
/Well since he said he can't stay made at me : )
 
2013-07-15 09:18:20 PM  

CruJones: Broseph 12: 27  Douche not unto others, lest thou be spoken of as a douche.  Be cool to all.

Or a favorite of mine from Bill S. Preston, Esquire and Ted Theodore Logan:  Be excellent to each other.  And party on dudes.

/article's logic makes as much sense as quoting Bill and Ted


Sadly, I find the fictional words of bill and ted to be far more reasonable than those of a real person. Lots of idiots on this world.
 
2013-07-15 09:18:25 PM  

42_42_42: 25.   Having sex with your mother (18:7), 26.   Having sex with your father's wife (18:8), 27.   Having sex with your sister (18:9), 28.   Having sex with your granddaughter (18:10), 29.  Having sex with your half-sister (18:11), 30.   Having sex with your biological aunt (18:12-13), 31.   Having sex with your uncle's wife (18:14), 32.   Having sex with your daughter-in-law (18:15), 33.   Having sex with your sister-in-law (18:16), 34.   Having sex with a woman and also having sex with her daughter or granddaughter (18:17), 35.   Marrying your wife's sister while your wife still lives (18:18), 37.   Having sex with your neighbour's wife (18:20), 40.   Having sex with an animal (18:23)

What the holy fark  were people doing in the ancient near east that these rules had to be codified?!?!  Was everyone just boning everyone and anyone and everything and anything in sight? These rules make the Bunny Ranch look like a convent for crissakes! Seriously, what the fark people, just because there's a hole there doesn't mean you have to stick your dick into it!


In fairness, have you watched daytime TV in the last fifteen, twenty years? Seriously. There are some messed up folks in this world, and not just from the hills up in the Appalachians. And apparently, they has been messed the f*ck up for more than a few thousand years. Just LOOK at the tales of the Greek gods, even the Norse for that matter. Cripes, my own mother's people. Amaterasu, Goddess of the Sun, was tricked to come out of Ama-no-Iwato by a cootchie dance. People have been messed up for a LONG ass time...
 
2013-07-15 09:18:58 PM  

ciberido: HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?

I'm fine with it, personally.  I use the terms "pro-gay rights,"  "gay-friendly," and "gay-positive" pretty much interchangeably.  I don't mind using or being called "pro-gay" or "progay."

Why, is there something bad about the term "pro-gay"?


No, there is nothing bad about the term itself.  Can you define what "progay" means though?  Obviously the haters are using it as an insult.  I support equal rights for everyone.  I've never called myself "problack" or "prowomen".  I don't think I've ever heard those terms used before.  They aren't bad, they just don't make sense.
 
2013-07-15 09:19:28 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

/BTW been a while girl : )

Missed ya!

Happy to see your pretty aqua color show up in the comments! Win.

Oh and really ask Hubie for pics if you haven't ; )
/Well since he said he can't stay made at me : )


*shakes a fist inna air*
 
2013-07-15 09:24:28 PM  

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

/BTW been a while girl : )

Missed ya!

Happy to see your pretty aqua color show up in the comments! Win.

Oh and really ask Hubie for pics if you haven't ; )
/Well since he said he can't stay made at me : )

*shakes a fist inna air*


Yes I'm just so wrong I may be right ; )
 
2013-07-15 09:27:31 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


Replace "cock" with "money" and the same argument could be made about capitalism.
 
2013-07-15 09:28:02 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.


No, it really isn't, or else adultery and idolatry would be the same commandment, rather than two separate sins listed in the Ten Commandments.  Why do you think you know theology better than God Himself?


Mouser: Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

I'm reminded of a parable.  Jesus liked parables.  You should like parables.

Two traveling monks reached a river where they met a young woman. Wary of the current, she asked if they could carry her across. One of the monks hesitated, but the other quickly picked her up onto his shoulders, transported her across the water, and put her down on the other bank. She thanked him and departed.

As the monks continued on their way, the one was brooding and preoccupied. Unable to hold his silence, he spoke out. "Brother, our spiritual training teaches us to avoid any contact with women, but you picked that one up on your shoulders and carried her!"

"Brother," the second monk replied, "I set her down on the other side, while you are still carrying her."


So, I ask you, who is the one serving two masters: the one with the healthy sex life, or the one who denies himself sexual pleasure while always struggling against his urges?

/Yes, it's a Buddhist parable, but that's really not the point.
 
2013-07-15 09:32:09 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...

I thought about mentioning something about hot pics but that would have been too much... opps ; )


Wait wait wait...

Pics or it didn't happen?

/*shrug*
//a girl can try
 
2013-07-15 09:34:41 PM  

Pincy: ciberido: HotWingConspiracy: So they're pushing "progay" as a word?

I'm fine with it, personally.  I use the terms "pro-gay rights,"  "gay-friendly," and "gay-positive" pretty much interchangeably.  I don't mind using or being called "pro-gay" or "progay."

Why, is there something bad about the term "pro-gay"?

No, there is nothing bad about the term itself.  Can you define what "progay" means though?  Obviously the haters are using it as an insult.  I support equal rights for everyone.  I've never called myself "problack" or "prowomen".  I don't think I've ever heard those terms used before.  They aren't bad, they just don't make sense.


Here is kind of my thing, and I asked earlier, but I still don't get it.  I mean, I use the term as well, and have no qualms whatsoever about it, but it doesn't make the most sense to me, just on it's face.  It's superfluous and creates a dichotomy where none should exist.  I'm a straight white male, and I'm pretty f*cking pro-straight-white-male rights, except I'm pro those rights being everyone's rights, whether it's minorities voting or gays getting married or what have you.  What gay rights?  Do they mean straight rights for gays?  Does that then make the rights gay?  Do my straight rights become gay rights?  Or are we just talking about the same damned rights, and they're rights and that's it?
 
2013-07-15 09:38:46 PM  

ciberido: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

No, it really isn't, or else adultery and idolatry would be the same commandment, rather than two separate sins listed in the Ten Commandments.  Why do you think you know theology better than God Himself?


Mouser: Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

I'm reminded of a parable.  Jesus liked parables.  You should like parables.

Two traveling monks reached a river where they met a young woman. Wary of the current, she asked if they could carry her across. One of the monks hesitated, but the other quickly picked her up onto his shoulders, transported her across the water, and put her down on the other bank. She thanked him and departed.

As the monks continued on their way, the one was brooding and preoccupied. Unable to hold his silence, he spoke out. "Brother, our spiritual training teaches us to avoid any contact with women, but you picked that one up on your shoulders and carried her!"

"Brother," the second monk replied, "I set her down on the other side, while you are still carrying her."

So, I ask you, who is the one serving two masters: the one with the healthy sex life, or the one who denies himself sexual pleasure while always struggling against his urges?

/Yes, it's a Buddhist parable, but that's really not the point.


Have you watched "The Man From Earth"? And yea I do get into the Buddhist parables, I like the one about the cat at the Buddha's funeral : )
 
2013-07-15 09:39:08 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: Many Christians were slave owners and opposed suffrage.


I think you meant "Many slave owners were Christian," unless you're going for a logical fallacy on purpose.
 
2013-07-15 09:42:20 PM  

megarian: tinfoil-hat maggie: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...

I thought about mentioning something about hot pics but that would have been too much... opps ; )

Wait wait wait...

Pics or it didn't happen?

/*shrug*
//a girl can try


Just ask Hubie, although yes I do have pics well I have no problems with that I just need to be asked I don't wanna send unwanted pics ; )
 
2013-07-15 09:47:11 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry. It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.


Prove it.

/pro-tip: YOU CAN'T
 
2013-07-15 09:56:03 PM  

Kurmudgeon: Same as anti-Theists who want to hold the whole thing in contempt without giving what is actually written any study other than what can be used to support a preconceived bias.


You typed "anti-Theist" when you meant to type "Theist," so I FTFY.

/you're welcome
 
2013-07-15 10:04:42 PM  

artemusprine: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I honestly don't understand this...  If you merely called yourself Christian you would be able to cite numerous verses that support a fair and equal treatment of the members of the LGBTQ community.  You could say you aren't held to Rabbinical law by Jesus' teaching.  But in calling yourself Catholic you are claiming to be a member of an organization you don't agree with.  Why not join a church whose teachings are compatible with your beliefs?


As a Catholic generally in cookiefleck's shoes, it's just not that simple.  It's like being a Browns fan.

Each and every year, you go out, hoping you'll finally have a good team (change stances on key issues).  But inevitably, they let you down (and fire someone who advocated support for gay marriage, or whatever).  But you can't just leave, you grew up with this team and you genuinely want them to succeed.  So maybe, to show your displeasure, you stop going to the games (mass) and stop buying their merchandise (collections), but once your diehard-fan family finds out, they start accusing you of abandoning the team (leaving the faith).
Maybe, if you're old enough, you can remember a time when they were a good team and hadn't yet lost sight of what was really important, the fans (helping the poor).  They're different now, though, and only seem to care about the fundamentals (fundamentalists), even if it costs them the game (membership, especially young people).
So really, there's not much you can do.  You don't really want to switch to another, better managed team (switching religions), although it would be nice to finally be part of a winning organization.  Maybe, you hope, enough people will just stop going and management will get the message and start making some changes.  But until some of the older, more die-hard fans (fundamentalists) die off, you don't think you'll see any changes.  One day, though, they'll be good again...
 
2013-07-15 10:14:37 PM  

Tomahawk513: As a Catholic generally in cookiefleck's shoes, it's just not that simple. It's like being a Browns fan.

Each and every year, you go out, hoping you'll finally have a good team (change stances on key issues). But inevitably, they let you down (and fire someone who advocated support for gay marriage, or whatever). But you can't just leave, you grew up with this team and you genuinely want them to succeed. So maybe, to show your displeasure, you stop going to the games (mass) and stop buying their merchandise (collections), but once your diehard-fan family finds out, they start accusing you of abandoning the team (leaving the faith).
Maybe, if you're old enough, you can remember a time when they were a good team and hadn't yet lost sight of what was really important, the fans (helping the poor). They're different now, though, and only seem to care about the fundamentals (fundamentalists), even if it costs them the game (membership, especially young people).
So really, there's not much you can do. You don't really want to switch to another, better managed team (switching religions), although it would be nice to finally be part of a winning organization. Maybe, you hope, enough people will just stop going and management will get the message and start making some changes. But until some of the older, more die-hard fans (fundamentalists) die off, you don't think you'll see any changes. One day, though, they'll be good again...


Catholics are more popular than the Browns, though.  As a Cubs fan, may I recommend the Cubs.  (Although I guess if you're more comfortable with the Browns, it still works.  And in both cases, fans of other teams sure look at you funny.)

Whup, Bubble Show's back on!
 
2013-07-15 10:18:52 PM  
42_42_42
What the holy fark  were people doing in the ancient near east that these rules had to be codified?!?!  Was everyone just boning everyone and anyone and everything and anything in sight? These rules make the Bunny Ranch look like a convent for crissakes! Seriously, what the fark people, just because there's a hole there doesn't mean you have to stick your dick into it!

I always think of the Commandments as being a little like the Bill of Rights, fairly clear in intent but vague enough to be broadly applied.  Eventually the Rabbis took it upon themselves to add to the law and it became as confusing and conflicted as the current tax codes.  You can imagine that each of those laws was likely a response to a specific incident.  Someone comes to the Rabbi with a dispute over what constitutes working on the Sabbath and the Rabbi had to provide a hard definition to what was before then open to individual interpretation.  A family fights over the son's new tattoo, so the Rabbi declares tattoos forbidden, someone gets sick from a blood-borne illness and so menstruating women are from then on to be sent off to the huts.  And of course, lots of boning happened too.
 
2013-07-15 10:27:29 PM  

artemusprine: 42_42_42
What the holy fark  were people doing in the ancient near east that these rules had to be codified?!?!  Was everyone just boning everyone and anyone and everything and anything in sight? These rules make the Bunny Ranch look like a convent for crissakes! Seriously, what the fark people, just because there's a hole there doesn't mean you have to stick your dick into it!

I always think of the Commandments as being a little like the Bill of Rights, fairly clear in intent but vague enough to be broadly applied.  Eventually the Rabbis took it upon themselves to add to the law and it became as confusing and conflicted as the current tax codes.  You can imagine that each of those laws was likely a response to a specific incident.  Someone comes to the Rabbi with a dispute over what constitutes working on the Sabbath and the Rabbi had to provide a hard definition to what was before then open to individual interpretation.  A family fights over the son's new tattoo, so the Rabbi declares tattoos forbidden, someone gets sick from a blood-borne illness and so menstruating women are from then on to be sent off to the huts.  And of course, lots of boning happened too.


3000 years ago they had to put down "don't screw around on your betrothed."  People think adultery is something new, or that it isn't ingrained in us to seek out new places to deposit our sperm. But it's at least that old.
 
2013-07-15 10:29:48 PM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.


Also, even if you're basically correct, what makes you the authority on what is and isn't sexual immorality?

And before you say "the Bible" do you even KNOW what the Bible says about sex?  I bet you couldn't name all the rules in the Old Testament addressing sexual relations if your life depended on it, without using an Internet search or going to a library.
 
2013-07-15 10:30:35 PM  
Some of the early Gnostic churches seemed really fun of course the were all killed of or went into hiding., well now eh i got my mixed up hodge poge beliefs and am very queer and well if the bigots stopped having a say on my rights I wouldn't care until that day well, and may it be soon not that I have anyone to marry but it would make a huge difference once it becomes okay.
 
2013-07-15 10:35:39 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: I've got you farkied as "cool preacher dude" so I may be reading that soon.


I'm honored.  I have you as "funny outdoorsy chick"

Also, I'll just leave this here regarding the Bible.
 
2013-07-15 10:43:47 PM  

jonny_q: Coco LaFemme: Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays. There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.

This is just plain not true. I don't really want to argue the finer points of it, and I don't have a problem with people being for or against gay marriage. By saying that those against gay marriage logically must hate guys, you have a bad starting point for discussion, because there is plenty of room for A to be true and B to be false.


They're actively supporting denying other people rights. I don't think anyone gives a shiat as to why. Maybe they should, but when you've got the same end result either way...
 
2013-07-15 10:49:22 PM  

Sgt Otter: FTA: But there exists no such financial benefit for people who correctly interpret scripture in reference to homosexual practices. No one who believes, teaches and upholds the sexual standards of the bible stands to benefit financially from doing so.

[txvalues.org image 500x386]


That guy is so asking for Jesus to overturn his tables and drive them out of the temple with a whip. Such a thing is nothing more than trying to make a quick buck on God's name.
 
2013-07-15 10:50:26 PM  

WhyteRaven74: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

Wrong. Also the Bible never condemns spanking it. The sin of Onan was not blowing his load inside his dead brother's wife, as the law expected him to do. See back then if your brother was married and you weren't and he died, you were expected to take over as her husband without question. And that included having kids with her. And Onan just wasn't into that. Calling masturbation Onanism is about as valid as calling teh buttsex Sodomy, it represents a complete misunderstanding of what the Biblical story is actually about.


Eh, the Bible may not condemn spanking it specifically, but it's kind of a big leap to say that "the Bible" is okay with it, (if the Bible can be said to have a unified, coherent view on topics, which is a separate, lengthy discussion.) There are also a couple of other passages that address the topic in a somewhat more roundabout way: First, in Leviticus, ejaculating is said to make a man ceremonially unclean for the day, unable to take part in religious observances involving the Tabernacle. This is pretty minor as things go, but it does establish that as far back as the early Old Testament sexual function was viewed as being at odds with piety. Interestingly enough, if a woman happened to be, um, "present," when said emission occurred, she was considered unclean also.

Second, (and most importantly,) in Matthew 5, Jesus goes on a very famous rant where he declares that lust is equivalent to adultery as far as your moral culpability is concerned, and he strongly implies that any sacrifice necessary to avoid lust is ultimately worth it for the sake of your soul. (My old pastors also used to intimate that Jesus' reference to "if you eye/right hand causes you to sin" was far from accidental.) I think it's safe to say that most people cannot masturbate without at least fantasizing about something that would be considered lust, so using Jesus' "the sin is in the motivation" rule, masturbation is usually considered to be a moral failing and a betrayal of your sexual purity. Porn is even worse.

Finally, let's face it: Christianity would not be what it is without Paul. He was the first one to actually carve some sort of soteriological message out of the demise of an itinerant preacher, and his teachings are generally thought to have influenced the content of the Gospels, which were written at least 20 years after Paul wrote. Paul was very negative about sexual relationships in general, and viewed people who were able to go without sex as being able to serve God better. Marriage was the only alternative that Paul offered to celibacy, because "it is better to marry than to burn." (See 1 Corinthians 7. "Burn" here may be something of double entendre.) Paul was tremendously hung up on standards of purity and advocated shunning anyone who didn't adhere to what he viewed as a self-evident code of sexual ethics, so it's definitely not safe to assume that he viewed arm-wrestling the purple-helmeted storm trooper as a harmless little bit of release.

/ Also, the best response to the troll you quoted is the one I haven't seen yet: "Well, I'm quite sure my cock exists...."
 
2013-07-15 10:50:56 PM  

cjoshuav: tinfoil-hat maggie: I've got you farkied as "cool preacher dude" so I may be reading that soon.

I'm honored.  I have you as "funny outdoorsy chick"

Also, I'll just leave this here regarding the Bible.


As I said I'm not a christen but I'm not a hater either, that was pretty cool and yea try and take the Bible literally it can't happen but some good things were said, and other story's had good things said and I mix it up to work for me. My church is the woods I go out into a forest of trees and I can resolve just about anything. But I respect those that need or do whatever as long as no disrespect comes back on me.
 
2013-07-15 10:52:54 PM  

Martian_Astronomer: / Also, the best response to the troll you quoted is the one I haven't seen yet: "Well, I'm quite sure my cock exists...."


LoL ; )
 
2013-07-15 10:56:59 PM  

Martian_Astronomer: / Also, the best response to the troll you quoted is the one I haven't seen yet: "Well, I'm quite sure my cock exists...."


Oh and hedonism is considered more as a way a of life or something but in early Christian Gnostic practices well, the Roman catholic church didn't like them.
 
2013-07-15 11:08:25 PM  
Way to desperately try to deny that you're on the wrong side of history.
 
2013-07-15 11:09:51 PM  

lemonysprite: Guys, guys, calm down it's obviously a satirical site. Just look at this one! http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content /nothing-safe-austin-ruse-upset-h e-had-see-lesbian-food-network


Sweet, delicious homophobe butthurt..... mmmmm
 
2013-07-15 11:17:22 PM  

ciberido: lemonysprite: Guys, guys, calm down it's obviously a satirical site. Just look at this one! http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content /nothing-safe-austin-ruse-upset-h e-had-see-lesbian-food-network

Sweet, delicious homophobe butthurt..... mmmmm


And you wonder why I find you interesting.
 
2013-07-15 11:32:55 PM  

megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.


Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.
 
2013-07-15 11:41:27 PM  

Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.


True it would be pretty difficult but I've even heard weirder translations of that from some people that say you just can't have sex in the woman's bed, just putting that out there.
 
2013-07-15 11:45:26 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.

True it would be pretty difficult but I've even heard weirder translations of that from some people that say you just can't have sex in the woman's bed, just putting that out there.


So, apparently Leviticus is very harsh on cuddling, and then falling asleep in the middle of conversation? I'm confused...
 
2013-07-16 12:06:29 AM  

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.

True it would be pretty difficult but I've even heard weirder translations of that from some people that say you just can't have sex in the woman's bed, just putting that out there.

So, apparently Leviticus is very harsh on cuddling, and then falling asleep in the middle of conversation? I'm confused...


I just choose to go to good seafood places and not worry about it ; ) And who does menstruation hut's anymore? So many F'd up thing's there.
 
2013-07-16 12:16:25 AM  

Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.


Holy fark.

EVERYONE WINS!
 
2013-07-16 12:20:21 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.

True it would be pretty difficult but I've even heard weirder translations of that from some people that say you just can't have sex in the woman's bed, just putting that out there.

So, apparently Leviticus is very harsh on cuddling, and then falling asleep in the middle of conversation? I'm confused...

I just choose to go to good seafood places and not worry about it ; ) And who does menstruation hut's anymore? So many F'd up thing's there.


In fairness, the hut was from a time before proper sanitation, and for tribal folks, that a woman could bleed for days, and NOT die, that was signs of powerful magics at work. With EVERY woman. Your sex had power, beyond just bewitching the men folks with scents and voice and touch and all the rest that makes menfolk go all wriggly inside. Is it any wonder that shamans wound up trying to steer their societies away from the competition? Not all of them, to be certain, but when you are trying to convince folks to follow your boogedy-boogedy shoo to get folks to give you stuff, and women just keep batting their eyes and inhaling suggestively, and getting the same sort of treatment, you have to give them credit for coming up with some whoppers for explaining why you shouldn't fall for women's magic, and instead invest heavily in the kind that the priests were selling. It was a sh*tty thing, but from the perspective of a long con, you have to give them credit for edging out the competition. Women. Moloch. All those other odd gods with funny names. God is jealous, and he won't stand for women folk getting the spotlight, or that fire god from across the river, with his flashy rituals and nekkid dancing with nubile girl critters who might convince God-fearing Israelites that mebbe they could face the danger, for a while...
 
2013-07-16 12:20:34 AM  
ciberido: It's also worth pointing out that the Bible wasn't written in English, nor did Jesus ever speak English.  Any time someone "quotes" Jesus in English, it is at best a paraphrase (even if the original written record really were a perfect transcription, which they almost certainly weren't).  One must acknowledge that the real meaning could be lost in translation.

My favorite example of this, silly as it might be, is "thigh," which was used at the time as a euphemism for "penis."  So all of those stories in the Bible in which a man was "struck in his thigh" or "suffered an injury to his thigh" refer to nasty things happening to their penises.


codergirl42: The Bible was also written 200 years after Jesus. So any quotes attributed to him are gossip at best and outright lies at worst.


Yes, that was the "even if the original written record really were a perfect transcription, which they almost certainly weren't" part.  One would have to believe that generations of followers echoed what Jesus said, word-for-word, like a game of telephone (except without the errors which are inevitable without supernatural aid).

... which is the standard "inerrancy/infallibility" answer, by the way, that every word of the Bible reads exactly as God wished it to because he essentially dictated the entire thing.  Every person involved in writing the Bible was essentially just a secretary transcribing God's voice.  Some Christians take it a step further and claim that the King James version of the Bible IS an inhumanly-perfect translation because God basically told the people working on it what to write down in English.

It makes sense, I suppose, as much as believing that the world was made in seven days.  But it does cause problems in that any errors or contradictions the Bible may have would rather go against the idea.  So if you buy into "Biblican inerrancy" you have to somehow explain away the errors and (perhaps more damningly) contradictions.
 
2013-07-16 12:32:41 AM  

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.

True it would be pretty difficult but I've even heard weirder translations of that from some people that say you just can't have sex in the woman's bed, just putting that out there.

So, apparently Leviticus is very harsh on cuddling, and then falling asleep in the middle of conversation? I'm confused...

I just choose to go to good seafood places and not worry about it ; ) And who does menstruation hut's anymore? So many F'd up thing's there.

In fairness, the hut was from a time before proper sanitation, and for tribal folks, that a woman could bleed for days, and NOT die, that was signs of powerful magics at work. With EVERY woman. Your sex had power, beyond just bewitching the men folks with scents and voice and touch and all the rest that makes menfolk go all wriggly inside. Is it any wonder that shamans wound up trying to steer their societies away from the competition? Not all of them, to be certain, but when you are trying to convince folks to follow your boogedy-boogedy shoo to get folks to give you stuff, and women just keep batting their eyes and inhaling suggestively, and getting the same sort of treatment, you have to give them credit for coming up with some whoppers for explaining why you shouldn't fall for women's magic, and instead invest heavily in the kind that the priests were selling. It was a sh*tty thing, but from the perspective of a long con, you have to give them credit for edging out the competition. Women. Moloch. All those other odd gods with funny names. God is jealous, and he won't stand for women folk getting the spotlight, or that fire god from across the river, with his flashy rituals and nekkid dancing with nubile girl critters who might convince God-fearing Israelites that mebbe they could face the danger, for a while...


O_O


C...can I keep you?!?
 
2013-07-16 12:34:41 AM  

ciberido: ciberido: It's also worth pointing out that the Bible wasn't written in English, nor did Jesus ever speak English.  Any time someone "quotes" Jesus in English, it is at best a paraphrase (even if the original written record really were a perfect transcription, which they almost certainly weren't).  One must acknowledge that the real meaning could be lost in translation.

My favorite example of this, silly as it might be, is "thigh," which was used at the time as a euphemism for "penis."  So all of those stories in the Bible in which a man was "struck in his thigh" or "suffered an injury to his thigh" refer to nasty things happening to their penises.

codergirl42: The Bible was also written 200 years after Jesus. So any quotes attributed to him are gossip at best and outright lies at worst.

Yes, that was the "even if the original written record really were a perfect transcription, which they almost certainly weren't" part.  One would have to believe that generations of followers echoed what Jesus said, word-for-word, like a game of telephone (except without the errors which are inevitable without supernatural aid).

... which is the standard "inerrancy/infallibility" answer, by the way, that every word of the Bible reads exactly as God wished it to because he essentially dictated the entire thing.  Every person involved in writing the Bible was essentially just a secretary transcribing God's voice.  Some Christians take it a step further and claim that the King James version of the Bible IS an inhumanly-perfect translation because God basically told the people working on it what to write down in English.

It makes sense, I suppose, as much as believing that the world was made in seven days.  But it does cause problems in that any errors or contradictions the Bible may have would rather go against the idea.  So if you buy into "Biblican inerrancy" you have to somehow explain away the errors and (perhaps more damningly) contradictions.


Have you ever read Jesus and the lost Goddess? Well it's worth the read.
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2013-07-16 12:36:44 AM  

megarian: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.

True it would be pretty difficult but I've even heard weirder translations of that from some people that say you just can't have sex in the woman's bed, just putting that out there.

So, apparently Leviticus is very harsh on cuddling, and then falling asleep in the middle of conversation? I'm confused...

I just choose to go to good seafood places and not worry about it ; ) And who does menstruation hut's anymore? So many F'd up thing's there.

In fairness, the hut was from a time before proper sanitation, and for tribal folks, that a woman could bleed for days, and NOT die, that was signs of powerful magics at work. With EVERY woman. Your sex had power, beyond just bewitching the men folks with scents and voice and touch and all the rest that makes menfolk go all wriggly inside. Is it any wonder that shamans wound up trying to steer their societies away from the competition? Not all of them, to be certain, but when you are trying to convince folks to follow your boogedy-boogedy shoo to get folks to give you stuff, and women just keep batting their eyes and inhaling suggestively, and getting the same sort of treatment, you have to give them credit for coming up with some whoppers for explaining why you shouldn't fall for women's magic, and instead invest heavily in the kind that the priests were selling. It was a sh*tty thing, but from the perspective of a long con, you have to give them credit for edging out the competition. Women. Moloch. All those other odd gods with funny names. God is jealous, and he won't stand for women folk getting the spotlight, or that fire god from across the river, with his flashy rituals and nekkid dancing with nubile girl critters who might convi ...


Only If you send me pics if y'all hook up ; )
 
2013-07-16 12:45:43 AM  

megarian: O_O

C...can I keep you?!?


I'll be here all month. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

tinfoil-hat maggie: Only If you send me pics if y'all hook up ; )


That would always be up to the lady. I am not good people, but I like to at least think that I'm a fair gentleman. :*
 
2013-07-16 12:48:56 AM  

hubiestubert: 14.   Drinking alcohol in holy places (10:9)
Catholics, we're looking right at you....


Transubstantiation takes care of that one.
 
2013-07-16 12:55:18 AM  

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...


But now what do we do with Congress? There aren't enough stones!
 
2013-07-16 12:57:04 AM  

hubiestubert: megarian: O_O

C...can I keep you?!?

I'll be here all month. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

tinfoil-hat maggie: Only If you send me pics if y'all hook up ; )

That would always be up to the lady. I am not good people, but I like to at least think that I'm a fair gentleman. :*


Well duh, that's why I posted to megarian. She can figure out what she will and won't do ; )
Same as mw mostly pics are right out no way but there are times, well ; )
 
2013-07-16 12:59:18 AM  

Gyrfalcon: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: megarian: That was detailed, informative, and just plain fun. Thanks.

Hubie may be one of the smartest most well reasoned people I know on fark, and that's no joke.

Aw shucks. Now I'mma blush...

But now what do we do with Congress? There aren't enough stones!


If we chiping away at him he'll runn maybe someone smart could post what a sitting senator makes : ).
 
2013-07-16 01:03:53 AM  

42_42_42: The thing is, those that use quotes from the Bible to support anti-homosexual bigotry are completely ignoring the historical and social context in which the Bible was written.

They are obviously cherry-picking which of all of the hundreds of Old  Covenant "laws" they want to follow--those same laws which Jesus's sacrifice and the New Covenant are supposed do away with, so they shouldn't be using those for justification for anything anyway.

And Paul didn't want anyone to fark anyone, period because he thought the world was going to end, like, tomorrow, so we all should spend all of our time praying. Obviously, the world didn't end when he thought it would and if everyone had done as he advocated, Christianity would have died out just like the Shakers.

These bigots are actually the ones misinterpreting/misunderstanding the Bible, not the pro-gay rights Christians.

The bigots are most certainly not following Jesus's message.

But, then, the vast majority of people who proclaim themselves Christian don't know anything really about the religion they profess. If they did, a lot of these problems would go away.

/Episcopalian, aka a Christian that doesn't throw logic and thinking out the window


This!

/Also Episcopalian.
//The last church I attended had a gay pastor who was married to the guy who ran the choir.
 
2013-07-16 01:25:26 AM  
ciberido: I wonder, though, do you suppose it's just more trolling when he talks about "strawman arguments," or is "strawman" being redefined to mean "an argument I don't like"?

Martian_Astronomer: Years ago after reading one too many internet arguments about religion, I proposed the classification of the "ontological strawman defense," which is basically a specific form of question-begging. It goes something like this:

The first person presents his argument:

Premise 1: (blah blah blah)
Premise 2: (blah blah blah)
...
Premise X: This is one of the best arguments in the history of philosophy and is totally sound.
...
Ergo, Conclusion.

The second person, unimpressed, argues against premises 1 through X-1.
The first person fires back and says "Aha! You refuse to acknowledge premise X, 'This is one of the best arguments in history,' therefore, you're attacking a strawman, and not my real position. I win."



What you're describing sounds a lot like the Gish Gallop, which Wikipedia calls "Shotgun argumentation."  Basically you give 100 crappy arguments in favor of your position (which might really be only 20 arguments, each reworded 5 times, or even 5 arguments reworded 20 times), and when your opponent trashes 99 of them, you claim victory because she "failed" to counter EVERY argument.  Very common on Fark (and probably many other places, for that matter).

But then again, that doesn't seem to be QUITE what you're talking about, either.  What you seems to be describing is like a combination of Gish Gallop with an appeal to authority, maybe?

Martian_Astronomer: / All this to say that cries of "strawman" are pretty much the first thing learned by erstwhile keyboard warriors who imagine themselves to have a good grasp of logic and argumentation. Frequently it's the only thing.
// And if your only tool is a hammer...
/// Seriously, when was the last time you heard someone call out "Inverse Gambler's Fallacy!" in an internet argument?


As to that, again, when Farker1 badly mischaracterizes something Farkette2 says, it's hard to tell from a single exchange whether it's an honest misunderstanding or a dishonest, deliberate strawman.  I try to go by Hanlon's Razor when it comes to that sort of thing: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."   But I also keep track and look for patterns.  If there is sufficient evidence that it's NOT stupidity, then I'm forced to conclude it's malice.
 
2013-07-16 01:31:49 AM  
So, wouldn't that make you a hero?
 
2013-07-16 01:32:57 AM  
FTFA: "If the progay clerics and organizations and [sic] had any intellectual honesty, they would inform their followers that they are part of a longstanding tradition of lying for financial gain."

Maybe this is my experience debating, but as soon as "intellectual honesty" is called into question, you usually find out the person making the claim defines it as basically the opposite of what "intellectual honesty" actually is.

If you're going to call out a fallacy, you call out the argument. If you've got nothin', you just act shocked, shocked at the person's approach.
 
2013-07-16 01:37:41 AM  

fusillade762: Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.

Jesus said a man cannot serve two masters.  You can serve God, or you can serve your cock.  Pick one.

Replace "cock" with "money" and the same argument could be made about capitalism.


Point of order: Money is not evil, per se.  The love of money is (1 Timothy 6:10).  Yet Jesus said, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God" (Mark 10:25).  So the distinction is rather fine: while money is not evil TECHNICALLY, you shouldn't want money, and if you have it, you really shouldn't keep it.

So, yeah, many Christians (myself included) would argue that greed and selfishness are far worse sins than ANY sort of sexual immorality (excluding things which victimize another person, such as rape).  And it would seem that Jesus said as much.
 
2013-07-16 01:38:41 AM  

Mouser: "Sexual immorality", whether it's adultery, sodomy, fornication, or just spanking it to girly magazines, is a form of idolatry.  It is worship of one's sexuality above the God who created it.


You know what sexual immorality is? Anything that involves coercion, manipulation, or deception.

Aside from adultery, your examples don't cover that, and any God that could come up with prostate glands and bonobo chimps isn't going to be offended.
 
2013-07-16 01:48:56 AM  
ciberido: Why, is there something bad about the term "pro-gay"?

Pincy: No, there is nothing bad about the term itself.  Can you define what "progay" means though?  Obviously the haters are using it as an insult.  I support equal rights for everyone.  I've never called myself "problack" or "prowomen".  I don't think I've ever heard those terms used before.  They aren't bad, they just don't make sense.

ten foiled hats: Here is kind of my thing, and I asked earlier, but I still don't get it.  I mean, I use the term as well, and have no qualms whatsoever about it, but it doesn't make the most sense to me, just on it's face.  It's superfluous and creates a dichotomy where none should exist.  I'm a straight white male, and I'm pretty f*cking pro-straight-white-male rights, except I'm pro those rights being everyone's rights, whether it's minorities voting or gays getting married or what have you.  What gay rights?  Do they mean straight rights for gays?  Does that then make the rights gay?  Do my straight rights become gay rights?  Or are we just talking about the same damned rights, and they're rights and that's it?



I'm reminded of the tenancy of some people to refer to pro-choice as "pro-abortion."  It's inaccurate, because most pro-choice people aren't really pro-abortion so much as just wanting women to have the right to make their own decisions about abortion.  Personally, I'd be much happier if there were few if any abortions: it would be far better if women who didn't want to be pregnant never got impregnated in the first place.  But that doesn't mean that I or the government have any business taking that option out of any woman's hands.

Another example of what may be the same sort of thing: the idea that feminism is anti-men, or that feminists mean to reverse the relative positions of the sexes and replace patriarchy with matriarchy.

Maybe "pro-gay" is an attempt (deliberate or unintentional) to misrepresent what pro-gay-rights folks are about, as if there were some sort of "gay agenda" which would lead to gay people trampling over straight folks rights.

media.tumblr.com
Like so.
 
2013-07-16 01:52:52 AM  

Tomahawk513: artemusprine: cookiefleck: In my experience, here and on other online forums, once I've admitted to people that, yes I'm Catholic but am pro choice, supporting of the LGBTQ community, I get the whole "well, you can't be a good person, even though you donate time and money to those wanting to advance rights for all, just because you're Catholic"

I honestly don't understand this...  If you merely called yourself Christian you would be able to cite numerous verses that support a fair and equal treatment of the members of the LGBTQ community.  You could say you aren't held to Rabbinical law by Jesus' teaching.  But in calling yourself Catholic you are claiming to be a member of an organization you don't agree with.  Why not join a church whose teachings are compatible with your beliefs?

As a Catholic generally in cookiefleck's shoes, it's just not that simple.  It's like being a Browns fan.

Each and every year, you go out, hoping you'll finally have a good team (change stances on key issues).  But inevitably, they let you down (and fire someone who advocated support for gay marriage, or whatever).  But you can't just leave, you grew up with this team and you genuinely want them to succeed.  So maybe, to show your displeasure, you stop going to the games (mass) and stop buying their merchandise (collections), but once your diehard-fan family finds out, they start accusing you of abandoning the team (leaving the faith).
Maybe, if you're old enough, you can remember a time when they were a good team and hadn't yet lost sight of what was really important, the fans (helping the poor).  They're different now, though, and only seem to care about the fundamentals (fundamentalists), even if it costs them the game (membership, especially young people).
So really, there's not much you can do.  You don't really want to switch to another, better managed team (switching religions), although it would be nice to finally be part of a winning organization.  Maybe, you hope, enough peo ...


Sunk cost fallacy is a biotch.
 
2013-07-16 02:10:30 AM  
I'm not pro-gay, I'm just anti-government interference in our personal lives... Or to put it another way, I'm pro-liberty.
 
2013-07-16 04:33:45 AM  

vernonFL: Jesus supported traditional marriage so much that he himself never got married, and encouraged his followers to not get married.


Wrong. PAUL encouraged Jesus' followers not to get married. Correct, however, that Jesus never married.

Jesus also refused to murder an adulteress or even condemn her, but apparently, we're supposed to ignore that part and be judgmental little pricks because "GAWD wills it!" Or at least the preacher man does. Which is why I don't usually have much to do with most preacher men and take my cues from what Jesus actually did and said.

Even as a follower of Christ, I tend to think like Ghandi is alleged to have said: "I like your Christ; I do not like you Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
 
2013-07-16 06:28:26 AM  

ciberido: What you're describing sounds a lot like the Gish Gallop, which Wikipedia calls "Shotgun argumentation."


Eh, it's not quite like that, because the Gisp Gallop involves a litany of disparate and unrelated arguments, where the "ontological strawman defense" can involve a list of (mostly) coherent and related arguments that build towards a specific point. The final "I am right" premise isn't necessarily an appeal to authority either, just a generic question-begging assumption.
 
2013-07-16 06:43:29 AM  

gimmegimme: I know this sounds crazy, but why don't we just stop believing that Bronze Age myths are real?


Yeah. Stone Age myths are the one true path.

www.sewanee.edu
 
2013-07-16 07:10:57 AM  
I don't think this blithering moron is aware just how many schisms and opinions and differences there are in 'Christianity'... Make no mistake, it is not a united religion and it has as much diversity in thought and theology as there is diversity in people.

The blasphemous fundamentalist hate spewing anti-Jesus Christians (who would be first in line to crucify Jesus again if he were to come back tomorrow) who are so vocal and embarrassing do not represent Christianity as a whole.

The main point is is FARL ALL religion as a whole and do not confuse it with faith. The twisted mentally messed up arseholes who claim to be Christian, are no more representative of the group than a misogynist is of men as a whole, a gold-digger of women as a whole, a racist of white people as a whole, a jihad moron of Muslims or a drug dealer of a black people as a whole.
 
2013-07-16 08:11:52 AM  

Ant: Ow! I just sprained my brain trying to do the mental contortions necessary to understand this.


DL Foster probably dislocated his shoulder reaching for the explanations of his opinion.
 
2013-07-16 10:05:10 AM  

jonny_q: Coco LaFemme: Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays. There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.

This is just plain not true. I don't really want to argue the finer points of it, and I don't have a problem with people being for or against gay marriage. By saying that those against gay marriage logically must hate guys, you have a bad starting point for discussion, because there is plenty of room for A to be true and B to be false.


Well, they may not "hate" in a full-blown ragey sense... But, they quite obviously must consider gay people to be something less than human, if they're in favor of denying them basic human rights... That may not be hate, per se, but it's at least disdain and superiority... I'm sure many slave-owners didn't "hate" their slaves either, but that doesn't make the way they treated them any better... (Since the moron from the article already made the slave-owner reference, I feel safe in returning the favor in the other direction without feeling like I'm making a pseudo-Godwin...)
 
2013-07-16 11:33:45 AM  

cjoshuav: tinfoil-hat maggie: I've got you farkied as "cool preacher dude" so I may be reading that soon.

I'm honored.  I have you as "funny outdoorsy chick"

Also, I'll just leave this here regarding the Bible.


As a liberal, gay-friendly Christian, this is the one claim fundamentalist attack me with most: that they are "Bible-Believing" Christians, whereas anyone less fundamentalist than them "doesn't really believe" the Bible.  Or they call us "Cafeteria Christians" because, they say, we "pick and choose the parts of Christianity we like and ignore the rest."

And that's true.  We do.  The problem is, they do as well, and don't admit it, or even know it.

But it's extremely frustrating, especially when they don't even know the parts of the Bible which they're ignoring exist.

My personal favorite, if you want a quick-and-easy go-to example when dealing with fundamentalists, is Ecclesiastes 9:8, "Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment."  Odds are any Christian (no matter how much they claim to take the Bible absolutely literally, word for word) won't be dressed in white from head to foot, and even if he or she is, there's still a pretty good chance they won't have anointed their head with ointment that day.  So it's pretty easy to spot that as soon as they open their mouth.

There's a book called "The Year of Living Biblically" that goes into this at some depth, if you want more examples.
 
2013-07-16 11:52:51 AM  

ciberido: There's a book called "The Year of Living Biblically" that goes into this at some depth, if you want more examples.


I have that book, it is great.
 
2013-07-16 12:01:16 PM  
ciberido:  There's a book called "The Year of Living Biblically" that goes into this at some depth, if you want more examples.

I actually reviewed his book and corresponded with him.  It's a good read.

I do have an article that lists a few key ones if you ever need it.
 
2013-07-16 12:07:36 PM  

PsiChick: jonny_q: Coco LaFemme: Because let's face it, if you're anti-gay rights, you hate gays. There's no way to intelligently defend a stance that assumes homosexuals should be afforded second-class citizen status to heterosexuals unless you hate homosexuals.

This is just plain not true. I don't really want to argue the finer points of it, and I don't have a problem with people being for or against gay marriage. By saying that those against gay marriage logically must hate guys, you have a bad starting point for discussion, because there is plenty of room for A to be true and B to be false.

They're actively supporting denying other people rights. I don't think anyone gives a shiat as to why. Maybe they should, but when you've got the same end result either way...



At the very least, the burden is on the anti-gay-marriage folks to defend their position, not to simply complain that calling them hateful "isn't true" or "isn't fair" while protesting that they don't have the time or inclination to argue the finer points.

Anti-gay-marriage folks, the presumption is, and SHOULD BE, that you are hateful bigots.  Don't like that?  Don't think it's fair?  Then make your case.

And, just to show I am fair-minded, here's a tip: "The Bible says so" by itself won't get you very far.  Not saying you can't possibly use it as part of your defense, but keep in mind you'll need a bit more.
 
2013-07-16 12:18:01 PM  

Government Fromage: megarian: 39.   Having sex with a man "as one does with a woman" (18:22)
There it is. THIS apparently is THE important one.

Since men don't have a vagina, this rule is stupid and unneeded. Problem solved.


Maybe by "as one does with a woman" he meant "bugging your boyfriend to put out even after he told you he had a headache"?
 
2013-07-16 12:31:45 PM  

ciberido: cjoshuav: tinfoil-hat maggie: I've got you farkied as "cool preacher dude" so I may be reading that soon.

I'm honored.  I have you as "funny outdoorsy chick"

Also, I'll just leave this here regarding the Bible.

As a liberal, gay-friendly Christian, this is the one claim fundamentalist attack me with most: that they are "Bible-Believing" Christians, whereas anyone less fundamentalist than them "doesn't really believe" the Bible.  Or they call us "Cafeteria Christians" because, they say, we "pick and choose the parts of Christianity we like and ignore the rest."

And that's true.  We do.  The problem is, they do as well, and don't admit it, or even know it.

But it's extremely frustrating, especially when they don't even know the parts of the Bible which they're ignoring exist.

My personal favorite, if you want a quick-and-easy go-to example when dealing with fundamentalists, is Ecclesiastes 9:8, "Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment."  Odds are any Christian (no matter how much they claim to take the Bible absolutely literally, word for word) won't be dressed in white from head to foot, and even if he or she is, there's still a pretty good chance they won't have anointed their head with ointment that day.  So it's pretty easy to spot that as soon as they open their mouth.

There's a book called "The Year of Living Biblically" that goes into this at some depth, if you want more examples.


Fundamentalists tend to be quite choosy about their interpretations. This isn't exactly a feature that is unique to Christianity. Muslims kill a LOT more Muslims over differences of opinion on the Koran, and how to live within its teachings. Jews differ wildly as well. Buddhists come in a LOT of camps, and the Dharma is pretty much right out there, but with layers of teachings from various folks, it is not easy to get two camps even near the same page. The difficulty is that each camp feels that theirs is the "right" way to worship, and everyone else is deluded. In this country even, before we adopted our Constitution, and under the Articles of the Confederation, we had official state faiths. And it got a fair number of people killed because of differences over how to worship the same deity. Which one might think was against that whole "thou shalt not kill" motif that the Bible has going on, well, except when it comes down to defending the faith it seems.

There are several inter-faith organizations, and the Unitarian-Universalists who bring folks of several faiths under one roof, and oddly enough, when folks get together to discuss their shared faith, they tend to find that they have more in common, but folks love to get wrothy over schisms. It makes them feel special. Chosen. And that is a heady feeling, and it's no wonder that so many folks are trying to bring in more folks with this sort of thing. It is the same thing with any good con: you make the mark feel smarter and sharper than everyone else. They can't fail, because they're just that good and that right and that special. It isn't about the passages, it isn't about the behavior, it's about feeling superior.
 
2013-07-16 01:28:18 PM  

ciberido: As a liberal, gay-friendly Christian, this is the one claim fundamentalist attack me with most: that they are "Bible-Believing" Christians, whereas anyone less fundamentalist than them "doesn't really believe" the Bible. Or they call us "Cafeteria Christians" because, they say, we "pick and choose the parts of Christianity we like and ignore the rest."


I, for one, certainly prefer the Christians who focus more on the New Testament and the actual words of Christ than those who seem hung up on the Old Testament and ignoring everything Christ actually said you should do... I'm not a believer, but I certainly think the world would be a lot more peaceful and friendly place if everyone who called themselves a Christian actually followed the teachings of Jesus Christ, rather than whatever OT nonsense they pick and choose (or just make up)... But, then I suppose it's hard to justify ones own hatreds and prejudices using only the words of Jesus, so that's presumably why so few pay any attention to what he said... I just wish they'd use some other name for themselves, so I could tell them apart from the actual Christ-following Christians, who are generally decent people...
 
2013-07-17 02:16:44 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Have you ever read Jesus and the lost Goddess? Well it's worth the read.


No, but I'll put it on my list, thanks.
 
Displayed 239 of 239 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report