• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

I believe it is wrong to believe in Christianity.

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
After a recent and fairly amiable discussion in a thread about living authentically, I came to the conclusion that it was fine for people to believe that homosexuality was wrong and that as long as people did not denigrate, dehumanize, or persecute gays and lesbians that their beliefs did not entail any degree of hatred.

I believe that believing in Christianity is wrong. I think it is wrong that some people believe that the Bible is God's authority on how people should live and that it is infallible and above any criticism. Furthermore, I find it wrong that some people put their faith in Paul who clearly held sexist and anti gay sentiments. Now obviously, he was a man who came from a culture very different than the one we live in now, but that is not how the people who follow his words view him. They see him as speaking on behalf of God. Personally, I think Paul was a con man, a guy who may very well have believed what he was preaching, but was ultimately nothing but a cult leader, perhaps even a Roman spy who became enculturated and then got too big for his own britches. I also believe that Christianity has often worked in opposition to progress, has been used to oppress groups like women and gays, and has even been used by its believers to justify horrible atrocities.

Now does that make me anti Christian? Does that make me a hater of Christians? If someone is entitled to believe that homosexuality is wrong, am I not similarly entitled to believe that Christianity is wrong? Can I do so without dehumanizing, denigrating, or persecuting Christians? Am I not as entitled to speak up about how I feel Christianity is wrong if others are entitled to openly share their beliefs that homosexuality is wrong? Can I hate Christianity without hating Christians? Where is the line?
 

Catz Part Deux

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
28,721
Reaction score
6,738
Location
Redneck Riviera
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I think that you can disagree with and/or even hate a set of beliefs (I hate racism, for instance), without hating individuals who practice those beliefs.

Let me put it like this...my mother, in particular, has some racist beliefs. My kids are half filipino, and my mom distrusts/disdains brown people. In general, she considers people who are brown/black to be lazy/shiftless/untrustworthy/dangerous. It has been very difficult at times to deal with my mom's beliefs, but she is still my mother and I still love her. I can separate how I feel about her beliefs and/or some of her behaviors from her, as a person.

This is exactly how I feel about Christianists. As human beings, I don't hate them, but I find their beliefs loathesome and offensive.
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
:shrug:I believe it's wrong, that you believe it's wrong.
 

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
:shrug:I believe it's wrong, that you believe it's wrong.

Fine with me. Just as long as I'm allowed to believe it is wrong without you or anyone else calling me a Christian hater.

I rather detest Christianity, but people seem to agree that it is possible to hate a behavior without hating the people who do it.
 

Arcana XV

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
6,405
Reaction score
4,811
Location
Geneva, Switzerland and Rochester, NY
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
I believe all religions are wrong and all religious people are very misguided, but I would fight for their right to practice their religion and worship their deities in peace, as long as they harm no one.

It's totally possible to be personally against a given concept, without trying to remove the right of others to support that same concept. And vice versa.
 

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I believe all religions are wrong and all religious people are very misguided, but I would fight for their right to practice their religion and worship their deities in peace, as long as they harm no one.

It's totally possible to be personally against a given concept, without trying to remove the right of others to support that same concept. And vice versa.

People are free to practice Christianity all they want. Just because I consider it immoral does not mean I am entitled to tell them how to live their lives.

I consider it immoral because it seems like an incredibly inauthentic way to live. If humans were meant to believe things without any degree of empirical evidence then we would not have evolved the ability to reason. I find Christianity to be a counterfeit way of living. People seek to conform and to belong to a group by buying into a delusion of a grand punishment/reward after death orchestrated by a deity who constantly judges them in accordance to patriarchal standards inherent to ancient Middle Eastern culture.

Just because they choose to believe and practice such immoral ideas does not mean I hate them for it. They are free to do so as long as they don't try to convert me to their lifestyle.
 
Last edited:

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is exactly how I feel about Christianists. As human beings, I don't hate them, but I find their beliefs loathesome and offensive.

You summed it up well. I think I could replace "Christian" with a few other words and it would fit. One reason why we as humans will never please everyone, especially when it comes to the topic of religion, politics, and personal beliefs. We can get along as agree to disagree with respect.
 

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,490
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Fine with me. Just as long as I'm allowed to believe it is wrong without you or anyone else calling me a Christian hater.

I rather detest Christianity, but people seem to agree that it is possible to hate a behavior without hating the people who do it.

It is, but it depends on how you present things. At times, you present your disagreement with Christianity in a denegrating, insulting way. At times you do not. Those who would do the former are as bad as those who would do that in regards to homosexuals regardless of what they say. Those who would do the latter are fine.

Also, be careful. This seems like a bait thread to me.
 

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,490
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
People are free to practice Christianity all they want. Just because I consider it immoral does not mean I am entitled to tell them how to live their lives.

I consider it immoral because it seems like an incredibly inauthentic way to live. If humans were meant to believe things without any degree of empirical evidence then we would not have evolved the ability to reason. I find Christianity to be a counterfeit way of living. People seek to conform and to belong to a group by buying into a delusion of a grand punishment/reward after death orchestrated by a deity who constantly judges them in accordance to patriarchal standards inherent to ancient Middle Eastern culture.

Just because they choose to believe and practice such immoral ideas does not mean I hate them for it. They are free to do so as long as they don't try to convert me to their lifestyle.

OK... I'm going to place in bold every statement that is denigrating to those who are religious. Let's address each statement one by one.

If humans were meant to believe things without any degree of empirical evidence then we would not have evolved the ability to reason. This comment infrers that those who are religious do not have the ability to reason.

delusion. People who are religious are delusional.

Just because they choose to believe and practice such immoral ideas. People who are religious are immoral.

You need to word things differently as these statements are doing exactly what you do not want to see from the anti-gay crowd. Think about it. Are homosexuals delusional? Are they not rational? Are the immoral? Are their behaviors or feelings any of those things?

Very poor presentation, CT, and very poor execution of what you are trying to do. Bait is what this seems like.
 

Panache

Irrelevant Pissant
DP Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
4,194
Reaction score
1,041
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
After a recent and fairly amiable discussion in a thread about living authentically, I came to the conclusion that it was fine for people to believe that homosexuality was wrong and that as long as people did not denigrate, dehumanize, or persecute gays and lesbians that their beliefs did not entail any degree of hatred.

I believe that believing in Christianity is wrong. I think it is wrong that some people believe that the Bible is God's authority on how people should live and that it is infallible and above any criticism. Furthermore, I find it wrong that some people put their faith in Paul who clearly held sexist and anti gay sentiments. Now obviously, he was a man who came from a culture very different than the one we live in now, but that is not how the people who follow his words view him. They see him as speaking on behalf of God. Personally, I think Paul was a con man, a guy who may very well have believed what he was preaching, but was ultimately nothing but a cult leader, perhaps even a Roman spy who became enculturated and then got too big for his own britches. I also believe that Christianity has often worked in opposition to progress, has been used to oppress groups like women and gays, and has even been used by its believers to justify horrible atrocities.

Now does that make me anti Christian? Does that make me a hater of Christians? If someone is entitled to believe that homosexuality is wrong, am I not similarly entitled to believe that Christianity is wrong? Can I do so without dehumanizing, denigrating, or persecuting Christians? Am I not as entitled to speak up about how I feel Christianity is wrong if others are entitled to openly share their beliefs that homosexuality is wrong? Can I hate Christianity without hating Christians? Where is the line?

Is it fair to say that you are supporting a christianitiphobic agenda?
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My opinion of Paul is that he is the wolf in sheep's clothing Jesus warned about, and that if more Christians simply took to heart the red letters, the religion would be far better off.
 

scourge99

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
6,233
Reaction score
1,462
Location
The Wild West
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
After a recent and fairly amiable discussion in a thread about living authentically, I came to the conclusion that it was fine for people to believe that homosexuality was wrong and that as long as people did not denigrate, dehumanize, or persecute gays and lesbians that their beliefs did not entail any degree of hatred.
Poor beliefs result in poor actions because our beliefs inform our actions. Those who base their beliefs on weak, unsubstantiated, or faulty bases often act poorly as a result.

I believe that believing in Christianity is wrong. I think it is wrong that some people believe that the Bible is God's authority on how people should live and that it is infallible and above any criticism. Furthermore, I find it wrong that some people put their faith in Paul who clearly held sexist and anti gay sentiments. Now obviously, he was a man who came from a culture very different than the one we live in now, but that is not how the people who follow his words view him. They see him as speaking on behalf of God.
I have learned that religious beliefs are vast and very different even within Christianity

A majority in our country have Biblical literalist/inerrantist/fundamentalist tendencies and are taught such things by the likes of mega-church and TV personalities as Falwell. This is in stark contrast to the majority of religious scholars and "educated theists" (E.G., those who have obtained degrees in philosophy, theology, or have attended a renowned seminary). Such "educated theists" often do NOT claim the Bible is literally true, or that the Bible's words are inerrant, or any other such dogmatic belief. They acknowledge that their beliefs are more correctly described as an orientation and therefore not evidence based. That their religion is "an emotional, aesthetic, and willful stepping into an unfolding myth that might point to something real outside our perception and seems to enrich our lives."

This type of approach is very similar to that of some Jews I have talked with.

Though I still disagree with the reasoning of such theists, I find their approach far less controversial, divisive, and wrong. The problem is that such people are a minority and for one reason or another these "educated theists" cannot seem to overcome the Biblical literalism/inerrantism/fundamentalism that is held by the typical believer.



Now does that make me anti Christian? Does that make me a hater of Christians? If someone is entitled to believe that homosexuality is wrong, am I not similarly entitled to believe that Christianity is wrong? Can I do so without dehumanizing, denigrating, or persecuting Christians? Am I not as entitled to speak up about how I feel Christianity is wrong if others are entitled to openly share their beliefs that homosexuality is wrong? Can I hate Christianity without hating Christians? Where is the line?

I believe everyone should openly criticize and combat those who make claims that cannot be shown as true. This goes for atheists and theists alike. It just so happens that Christians and other religious people often make many claims about reality that cannot be supported by anything more than opinion, conjecture, hear-say, or holybook tales. This is why the religious are often the target of skeptics and other critical thinkers who do NOT blindly accept their claims without evidence or some other means of verification.

Sadly, most people are ill-equipped to analyze the integrity of religious claims. Conversion often follows.
 

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
If humans were meant to believe things without any degree of empirical evidence then we would not have evolved the ability to reason. This comment infrers that those who are religious do not have the ability to reason.

To the contrary. I was arguing that every human has the ability to reason and the religious choose not to use it. I'm sure you are familiar with the term "leap of faith". It is the act of believing something without empirical evidence. That by definition is deliberately choosing to disregard reason.

delusion. People who are religious are delusional.

Delusion means "false belief". Just because religious people buy into one false belief does not make them delusional.

Just because they choose to believe and practice such immoral ideas. People who are religious are immoral.

Immoral means to deliberately violate accepted principles of right and wrong. As I stated in my OP, I believe it is wrong to deliberately disregard reason and therefore those who choose to believe in Christianity are behaving in an immoral way.

You need to word things differently as these statements are doing exactly what you do not want to see from the anti-gay crowd.

Many of the people you have specifically listed as not "anti-gay" have made posts arguing that homosexuality is immoral. I feel I am no less entitled to use the same terminology to describe their behavior that I feel is wrong. Here are a couple examples...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/loft/85981-homophobia-any-other-name-4.html#post1059108954
http://www.debatepolitics.com/news-...ndidate-criticizes-gays-3.html#post1059038391

Very poor presentation, CT, and very poor execution of what you are trying to do. Bait is what this seems like.

I simply desire to know where the line is so that I can stay within it harmoniously. If people on this forum are free to argue that homosexuality is immoral without fear of consequence or reprisal then I should have the same right regarding Christianity.
 
Last edited:

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
This is in stark contrast to the majority of religious scholars and "educated theists" (E.G., those who have obtained degrees in philosophy, theology, or have attended a renowned seminary). Such "educated theists" often do NOT claim the Bible is literally true, or that the Bible's words are inerrant, or any other such dogmatic belief. They acknowledge that their beliefs are more correctly described as an orientation and therefore not evidence based. That their religion is "an emotional, aesthetic, and willful stepping into an unfolding myth that might point to something real outside our perception and seems to enrich our lives."

That sounds like a considerably more authentic way to explore theism.

I believe everyone should openly criticize and combat those who make claims that cannot be shown as true. This goes for atheists and theists alike. It just so happens that Christians and other religious people often make many claims about reality that cannot be supported by anything more than opinion, conjecture, hear-say, or holybook tales. This is why the religious are often the target of skeptics and other critical thinkers who do NOT blindly accept their claims without evidence or some other means of verification.

Sadly, most people are ill-equipped to analyze the integrity of religious claims. Conversion often follows.

Memetic social control mechanims. I think you did an excellent of explaiing why I feel that Christianity is immoral. Not only does it lead people to disregard reason, but then it drives them forth to get others to do the same.
 

Guy Incognito

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
2,818
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Memetic social control mechanisms.

Why don't we apply some critical thought to nonsensical phrases like "memetic control mechanism?" So memes are conscious now, and implementing control mechanisms, eh? Sure...

It amazes me that people like Dawkins promote such pseudoscience as memetics, or Neil Harris promoting reincarnations and ESP, and yet look down on the religious people as credulous and naive.
 

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Why don't we apply some critical thought to nonsensical phrases like "memetic control mechanism?" So memes are conscious now, and implementing control mechanisms, eh? Sure...

I never suggested that memes are conscious. I use the term loosely in the context of ideas which survive simply because they are formed in such a way as to take advantage of humanity's disposition to favor Type I errors.
 

scourge99

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
6,233
Reaction score
1,462
Location
The Wild West
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Memetic social control mechanims. ... Not only does it lead people to disregard reason, but then it drives them forth to get others to do the same.

That may apply to some religious people but not all and probably not even most. People believe in or accept religious claims for a variety of reasons.

In my experience, the average religious person usually uses piss-poor reasoning and critical thinking skills when it comes to their beliefs, if any at all. This isn't necessarily intentional. This may occur if you have never been introduced or studied other religious beliefs or criticisms of your own beliefs.
 
Last edited:

Guy Incognito

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
2,818
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
After a recent and fairly amiable discussion in a thread about living authentically, I came to the conclusion that it was fine for people to believe that homosexuality was wrong and that as long as people did not denigrate, dehumanize, or persecute gays and lesbians that their beliefs did not entail any degree of hatred.

I disagree with the premise. A number of Christians may have noxious beliefs, for instance that homosexuality is wrong, but that doesn't mean it is what Jesus actually preached.

Jesus never railed against homosexuals like the so-called Christians who do today. In fact, there is a famous parable with Jesus and gay Roman soldier who asks Jesus's help to heal his sick boyfriend (the literal Greek word from the Bible is boyfriend). Jesus says, bring me to him. The Roman soldiers, who is a pagan, says "no if you say it will be done it will be done." And Jesus turns to his disciples and says something like: This gay pagan is holier than all you hypocritical schmucks put together. Or something like that, I'm paraphrasing here.
 

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,490
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
To the contrary. I was arguing that every human has the ability to reason and the religious choose not to use it. I'm sure you are familiar with the term "leap of faith". It is the act of believing something without empirical evidence. That by definition is deliberately choosing to disregard reason.

That's not real different than what I said. And, you are generalizing and speaking in absolutes. It's like saying that being gay is equivelent to having anal sex. Do all gay folks have anal sex? Do those who are religious always choose faith over reason? Are these the defining characteristics of each?



Delusion means "false belief". Just because religious people buy into one false belief does not make them delusional.

Then you are making a very poor choice of words. You know that there are other more standard meanings of the word and using it evokes an implication. Further, until you can prove that it is a false belief, it is nothing but your opinion. Kinda similar to saying that until you can prove that God didn't intend for one to have sex with someone of the same sex, your belief that this is true is nothing but opinion.



Immoral means to deliberately violate accepted principles of right and wrong. As I stated in my OP, I believe it is wrong to deliberately disregard reason and therefore those who choose to believe in Christianity are behaving in an immoral way.

Note the word in bold. Again, your presentation is VERY poor. Morality is relative. YOUR accepted is not THE accepted. You are saying the latter and then applying it as the former, a contradiction.



Many of the people you have specifically listed as not "anti-gay" have made posts arguing that homosexuality is immoral. I feel I am no less entitled to use the same terminology to describe their behavior that I feel is wrong. Here are a couple examples...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/loft/85981-homophobia-any-other-name-4.html#post1059108954
http://www.debatepolitics.com/news-...ndidate-criticizes-gays-3.html#post1059038391

In other words, because others make poor arguments and present thing inaccurately, you feel entitled to do the same. Did I say that your presentation is very poor?



I simply desire to know where the line is so that I can stay within it harmoniously. If people on this forum are free to argue that homosexuality is immoral without fear of consequence or reprisal then I should have the same right regarding Christianity.

Firstly, CT, I am both very religious and pro-gay. You are not going to make a dent in my argument because I can see both sides. I will, in turn demonstrate the lack of logic in yours, since I can see the actual analogies. But don't try to tell us that you are trying to understand the where the line is. You are annoyed and you are using this thread as bait to present your annoyance. Now, if you want to present yourself towards religion in the same way as those who are anti-gay present themselves towards homosexuality, you are free to do so. Generally, it's how you present, anyhow. Just understand that you become what annoys you.
 

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I disagree with the premise. A number of Christians may have noxious beliefs, for instance that homosexuality is wrong, but that doesn't mean it is what Jesus actually preached.

Christians do not follow the words of just Jesus. They follow the words of Paul. In fact, pretty much all NT condemnation of homosexuality can be attributed to Paul.

Jesus never railed against homosexuals like the so-called Christians who do today. In fact, there is a famous parable with Jesus and gay Roman soldier who asks Jesus's help to heal his sick boyfriend (the literal Greek word from the Bible is boyfriend). Jesus says, bring me to him. The Roman soldiers, who is a pagan, says "no if you say it will be done it will be done." And Jesus turns to his disciples and says something like: This gay pagan is holier than all you hypocritical schmucks put together. Or something like that, I'm paraphrasing here.

It cannot be proven whether that servant was in fact the lover of the Centurion. The word "pais" is translated differently by different people.
 

Catz Part Deux

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
28,721
Reaction score
6,738
Location
Redneck Riviera
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
My opinion of Paul is that he is the wolf in sheep's clothing Jesus warned about, and that if more Christians simply took to heart the red letters, the religion would be far better off.

QFT. I totally agree with this statement. Paul was as much of a prophet as Joseph Smith.
 

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,568
Reaction score
8,354
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That's not real different than what I said. And, you are generalizing and speaking in absolutes. It's like saying that being gay is equivelent to having anal sex. Do all gay folks have anal sex? Do those who are religious always choose faith over reason? Are these the defining characteristics of each?

If there is an error in my logic, then you are free to point it out. I'll lay it in syllogism for you.

Religious people make "leaps of faith"
"Leaps of faith" require that people disregard reason.
Therefore, religious people disregard reason.

Then you are making a very poor choice of words. You know that there are other more standard meanings of the word and using it evokes an implication. Further, until you can prove that it is a false belief, it is nothing but your opinion. Kinda similar to saying that until you can prove that God didn't intend for one to have sex with someone of the same sex, your belief that this is true is nothing but opinion.

Fine, I will retract the word "delusioin" and substitute the phrase "unsubstantiated belief".

Note the word in bold. Again, your presentation is VERY poor. Morality is relative. YOUR accepted is not THE accepted. You are saying the latter and then applying it as the former, a contradiction.

I'm not arguing whether morality is or is not relative. The title of the thread is I believe it is wrong to believe in Christianity. Christianity violates my accepted principles.

In other words, because others make poor arguments and present thing inaccurately, you feel entitled to do the same. Did I say that your presentation is very poor?

You should be careful whose presentation you argue is poor. I believe you owe Blackdog and digsbe an apology for insinuating they are anti gay since they choose to believe that homosexuality is "immoral".

Firstly, CT, I am both very religious and pro-gay. You are not going to make a dent in my argument because I can see both sides. I will, in turn demonstrate the lack of logic in yours, since I can see the actual analogies. But don't try to tell us that you are trying to understand the where the line is. You are annoyed and you are using this thread as bait to present your annoyance. Now, if you want to present yourself towards religion in the same way as those who are anti-gay present themselves towards homosexuality, you are free to do so. Generally, it's how you present, anyhow. Just understand that you become what annoys you.

Oh I admit I'm quite pissed. I've never been a fan of double standards. But that is neither here nor there. Even Jesus said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." I've already pointed out two Christian individuals who, based on their beliefs, argue that homosexuality is immoral. I'm certainly inclined to answer in kind. Honestly I could care less if they regard homosexuality as immoral but I am just as entitled to use the terminology to describe their behaviors which I do not like and which I find wrong. I did not set that line; they did.
 
Last edited:

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,490
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If there is an error in my logic, then you are free to point it out. I'll lay it in syllogism for you.

Religious people make "leaps of faith"
"Leaps of faith" require that people disregard reason.
Therefore, religious people disregard reason.

VERY poorly worded, You are speaking in absolutes, and absolutes in general are illogical. Religious people do niot ALWAYS make leaps of faith, a leap of faith does not always require one to disregard reason. That was REALLY easy. Try again.



Fine, I will retract the word "delusioin" and substitute the phrase "unsubstantiated belief".

OK. I can accept that... in fact, I would say that's the term I most often use.



I'm not arguing whether morality is or is not relative. The title of the thread is I believe it is wrong to believe in Christianity. Christianity violates my accepted principles.

Good. Then remember to present it as your opinion and your position. There is nothing wrong with someone saying this: "I believe that homosexuality is immoral as it violates MY belief system"... nor is it a problem to say, "I believe that religion is immoral as it violates MY belief system." Personally, the latter statement sounds pretty absurd, semantically, but there is nothing wrong with that simple statement. Remember how you present it, though.



You should be careful whose presentation you argue is poor. I believe you owe Blackdog and digsbe an apology for insinuating they are anti gay since they choose to believe that homosexuality is "immoral".

Go check the thread. I argued that BD and digsbe were NOT anti-gay because they choose to believe that homosexuality is immoral. I said so quite clearly and emphatically. Here's one of two quotes that I made:

I disagree with the term "most". I think that most people who are opposed to GM, do so for moral reasons, or are just ignorant to the issue. A minority are folks who are bigotted. I can name you lots of folks at DP who have presented themselves as anti-GM. I could only name a handful of those who I would consider bigotted. Neither BD or digsbe are on that list.

At this point, CT, it might be a good idea to back out of this. You are getting beaten BADLY.



Oh I admit I'm quite pissed. But that is niether here nor there. Even Jesus said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." I've already pointed out two Christian indivduals who, based on their beliefs, argue that homosexuality is immoral. I'm certainly inclined to answer in kind. Honestly I could care less if they regard homosexuality as immmoral but I am just as entitled to use the terminology to describe their behaviors which I do not like and which I find wrong. I did not set that line; they did.

Well, at least you have admitted your motivation... and admitted that you are OK with doing exactly what others do that get you angry.

And use the terminology all you want. It sounds absurd in context, but if you prefer to argue from an emotional position rather than a logical one...
 
Top Bottom