emp
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 15, 2006
Posts: 1001
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 8:23 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Paula wrote: | | I think those rules were just aimed at people who have a religious belief, as they sure aren't enforced when those of faith are under attack everytime they post a thread. Those who don't have Spiritual beliefs can say anything they want |
People are entitled to express their disagreement with things that you or anyone posts. You cannot reasonably expect to have a rule that effectively limits replies to only those who agree with you.
Altho' you might be right in saying that the rules are aimed at religious people:
* The rules say no hate speech. True, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is loaded with hate speech.
* The rules also say no homophobia. Again, true, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is homophobic (it says that homosexuals should be killed).
* The rules also say no sexist statements. True, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is very sexist against women (it says they are inferior to men and should submit to men etc). |
|
| Back to top |
|
Barracuda
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 13, 2006
Posts: 690
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emp wrote: | | Paula wrote: | | I think those rules were just aimed at people who have a religious belief, as they sure aren't enforced when those of faith are under attack everytime they post a thread. Those who don't have Spiritual beliefs can say anything they want |
People are entitled to express their disagreement with things that you or anyone posts. You cannot reasonably expect to have a rule that effectively limits replies to only those who agree with you.
Altho' you might be right in saying that the rules are aimed at religious people:
* The rules say no hate speech. True, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is loaded with hate speech.
* The rules also say no homophobia. Again, true, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is homophobic (it says that homosexuals should be killed).
* The rules also say no sexist statements. True, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is very sexist against women (it says they are inferior to men and should submit to men etc). |
I find your hate speech toward christians disturbing. You don't have to be religous to do any of these things.
You are also using the old testement to argue against christians there has been a thread about christians following old law.
I think a new rule is in order. If you are going to argue with someone, please back up your statements with logical reasoning. It's hard to debate someone who doesn't give logic in their arguements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Barracuda
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 13, 2006
Posts: 690
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emp wrote: | | Paula wrote: | | I think those rules were just aimed at people who have a religious belief, as they sure aren't enforced when those of faith are under attack everytime they post a thread. Those who don't have Spiritual beliefs can say anything they want |
People are entitled to express their disagreement with things that you or anyone posts. You cannot reasonably expect to have a rule that effectively limits replies to only those who agree with you.
Altho' you might be right in saying that the rules are aimed at religious people:
* The rules say no hate speech. True, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is loaded with hate speech.
* The rules also say no homophobia. Again, true, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is homophobic (it says that homosexuals should be killed).
* The rules also say no sexist statements. True, this does seem aimed at religious people because the christian bible is very sexist against women (it says they are inferior to men and should submit to men etc). |
I am very very very sorry about the doulbe post, but I must say, congratulations for proving Paula's point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
emp
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 15, 2006
Posts: 1001
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Barracuda wrote: | | I find your hate speech toward christians disturbing. |
Hi, you are demonstrating the manipulative technique of accusing people of your own bad behavior. i.e. the hate speech is in the christian bible (it says that homosexuals are an abomination and should be killed, see Lev 18:22, 20:13), and you are christian, and you are accusing me of hate speech. Therefore you are accusing me of your own bad behavior. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Barracuda
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 13, 2006
Posts: 690
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emp wrote: | | Barracuda wrote: | | I find your hate speech toward christians disturbing. |
Hi, you are demonstrating the manipulative technique of accusing people of your own bad behavior. i.e. the hate speech is in the christian bible (it says that homosexuals are an abomination and should be killed, see Lev 18:22, 20:13), and you are christian, and you are accusing me of hate speech. Therefore you are accusing me of your own bad behavior. |
I do not follow your logic at all. In fact, I don't think there is any logic in there. I was noting that you were doing the things you accused the bible of. Funny, isn't it?
I would also like to point to my last post. It seems that religous people can't get a thread in without it being immeditly attacked. I think this has to stop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
emp
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 15, 2006
Posts: 1001
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Barracuda wrote: | | I do not follow your logic at all. In fact, I don't think there is any logic in there. I was noting that you were doing the things you accused the bible of. Funny, isn't it? |
No, I was merely listing in a factual manner how the forum rules prohibit some of the things expressed in the christian bible, and therefore Paula may be correct in saying that the forum rules are aimed at religious people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Paula
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
Age: 52
Posts: 762
Location: San Diego Calif
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If what I post was as hostile as what you post, I would be banned from this website. I've seen it done. You post like this to other people who posts threads you would be banned. Noone can post anything remotely spiritual without you being hostile towards them. Just as we have the right to post....yeah I get.....so do you. But don't you think you have better things to do with your anger? Or is your soul purpose for being at WP is to bash Christians? I don't know whats been done to you in the past to make you wanna hate us so much. For that I am truely sorry. But honestly, you shouldn't get all up in arms over us, we aren't going to go away. But I guess as long as the monitors are ok with it, no matter what we post, we will be getting a hassle from you. Personally I don't see why you bother to read our post. I don't read yours. No reason, but then again, I don't look to pick fights with anyone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
emp
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 15, 2006
Posts: 1001
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Paula wrote: | | If what I post was as hostile as what you post, I would be banned from this website. I've seen it done. You post like this to other people who posts threads you would be banned. Noone can post anything remotely spiritual without you being hostile towards them. |
I am merely stating my opinion, my viewpoint, same as you are doing. You state your opinion. I state my opinion. The difference is that apparently you wish to have my opinion censored and banned simply because you disagree with it and dislike it. I am not trying to censor your opinion.
People have a right to express their disagreement with things you say. They even have a right to criticise points you make. What sort of society would we have if no-one was allowed to criticise a point? If everyone was forced to agree with everything or be silent?
BTW, religion is not spirituality. Those are 2 entirely different topics. Religion is a branch of politics, and spirituality is something else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Barracuda
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 13, 2006
Posts: 690
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| No enp, we would like your opinion censored and banned because it come of as hostile. Reading your posts, I can feel your hate. You also come into a formerly peaceful thread, usual a discussion amoug christians, and cause chaos, completely changing the topic. Frankly, I think it is scaring people away. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Paula
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
Age: 52
Posts: 762
Location: San Diego Calif
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thankyou Barracuda, thats exactly what I'm trying to say. A person can express their opinions without trying to pick a fight. They don't have to agree with me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
anandamide
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Age: 49
Posts: 735
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I like emp's posts. I might not always agree but I find that his posts are well reasoned. And I think it is admirable that he has the guts to say what he believes even if it draws criticism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
bmwflora
Emu Egg
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:00 pm Post subject: This forum |
|
|
I assumed that this thread would include discussion about any of the three topics.... politics, philosophy and/or religion , right? Maybe religion should have it's own thread? Anyway, interesting thus far.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
sigholdaccountlost
Hatchling allosaurus
Joined: Jul 11, 2006
Posts: 2740
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 11:35 am Post subject: Emp - here have a post named after you. |
|
|
I can see why some may think Emp's posts come off as hostile. They can be construed (or misconstrued IMHO) in that way but I personally disagree.
I mean, sure, Emp's post can be a little harsh and in serious want of tact, but I don't think they count as hostility.
Anyway, if we could all communicate perfectly all the time, we wouldn't all be on WP, would we?
I don't think so.
_________________
<a href="http://www.kia-tickers.com><img src="http://www.kia-tickers.com/bday/ticker/19901105/+0/4/1/name/r55/s37/bday.png" border="0"> </a> |
|
| Back to top |
|
4lex
Tufted Titmouse
Joined: Dec 12, 2006
Posts: 38
Location: San Diego, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emp wrote: | | Barracuda wrote: | | I find your hate speech toward christians disturbing. |
Hi, you are demonstrating the manipulative technique of accusing people of your own bad behavior. i.e. the hate speech is in the christian bible (it says that homosexuals are an abomination and should be killed, see Lev 18:22, 20:13), and you are christian, and you are accusing me of hate speech. Therefore you are accusing me of your own bad behavior. |
Foreward; I am not a Christian. I do however respect some of their ideals.
Judge a man on his actions, not what he reads, thinks in private, etc. Words are actions, but the only hate speech I have seen on this topic so far has been aggressively anti-Christian. I don't see anyone who considers themselves a Christian defending the aggressiveness of the Old Testimate; most Christians have moved to embrace the New Testiment; which embraces peace, love, and acceptance. So rather than ranting against the bible as a whole, if you're going to attack Christians, attack what they do; not what they have read in the past and no longer adhere to. You might as well persicute all Germans alive today for Hitler's actions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
McJeff
Banned
Joined: Nov 05, 2005
Posts: 361
Location: The greatest country in the world: The USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For people wishing to continue the debate...
Emp is long gone from the Politics, Philosophy and Religion forum. Regardless of the validity of his points and whether or not his way of making them was acceptable, the issue is now moot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
