Yeah I've known that for years.

this is boring where the **** is antony

I agree, meta-discussion in an effort to motivate change is an ineffective but time-saving alternative to guiding the discourse by contributing to it meaningfully in the manner you describe.

I'm sure you mean THE WISEST MAN.

Anyway, here's another "Christian" American reacting to gay marriage (or several, if you count his highly appreciative audience):

I'm not sure you get to arbitrarily quote "Christian" in this case. If he truly believes in the Bible, then the hypothetical son wearing a dress is in fact an abomination.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/clothing.html


Unless of course not following the Bible (and eschewing porridge-sugar) is what makes a True Christian.

If he truly believed in / followed the Bible, he would realize that legalism is an untenable position and that Christians are not subject to the ancient Hebrew laws. Specifically they are rejected as having been written by men, to shepherd early men, that they are no longer necessary thanks to Christ, and Christians are specifically cautioned to understand the real purposes of these laws before subjecting themselves to them blindly.

In other words, yes, someone who follows Deuteronomy 22:5 is indeed a "Christian."

Let me count the number of Christians that believe this way:

Galatians 3:23-25
Colossians 2:16-23
Romans 14

"Christians" are free to believe whatever they want about the book they've never read.

You're doing it backwards.

So just to be on the same page I think, True Christians are only those who do not follow any of the laws and rules before/outside of Jesus's teachings? E.g, does this also include rejecting teachings in the NT from the disciples (eg Paul) who added a great deal on to the teachings of Jesus?

For that matter, did the coming of Jesus fulfill the Ten Commandments as well, or are those not counted under the Moseic covenants?

Edit: Based on reading this at least: http://godstenlaws.com/law-grace/new-covenant.html
It appears that the laws and commandments are no longer required of the true believer since the Holy Spirit will guide them to do what is right in the eyes of god instead. And that basically the only thing Christians are required to do to be actual Christians is to love each other, their brothers, and neighbors.

So anyone who still preaches from the OT laws or the 10 Commandments (eg wants them installed in courthouses) is by Jesus' definition not a True Christian. Am I following?

Yeah, any work of fiction will fall apart if you subject it to enough scrutiny.

-I always thought that Jesus should totally have turned out to have faked his death and gone into hiding in a foreign country, and eventually became Elvis.

I think you mean Tupac.

Nah, Tupac hangs out with Elvis Christ. I suspect they live across the street from one another in Monaco, and have adventures and solve crimes between releasing "newly discovered material" to fund their insane mortgages.

-Tupac probably is the laziest death faker I've ever heard of, though. I mean, appearing live on stage at a festival that began years after you died, man? Poor form.

if you want a really simplified way of looking at it... old testament: God lays down massive amounts of complicated rules and the punishment for breaking said rules is doled out by fellow men and by god.
New testament: god says "scratch that... Mr. Jesus here has now payed the price for any of the rules you a**holes keep breaking. now just worry about loving God and each other."

like i said, very over simplified and elementary. if your just looking for weak links to poke at and shout AHA!!! when someone is stumped then never mind the aforementioned example.

also if your asking, are people who use the old testament to condemn and spew hatred at others wrong in doing so? I believe that, yes they are. But if your asking does that "disqualify" them from being christian? i personally dont think it does. just means they are poor examples and human.

Saying that heterosexuality is disgusting and should be avoided at all costs makes you no different than people who talk about how they're repulsed by gay people because anal sex is unnatural. Way to spread the hate, Vin.




It's really great to see someone deliberately pigeonholing themselves along with millions of others. I'm glad that, as a member of the group, you are able to speak intelligently about the entire group. It's incredible how no one sees the ignorance in that.




See above. Additionally, did you ever consider that maybe it's just the gay people you hang out with? I mean, call me crazy, but I would venture a guess that the gay meth amphetamine subculture might be a little different than gay culture at large. I assume you and Barney Frank don't share too many characteristics other than your preference for other dudes.




Actually homophobia is exactly what you just described. Saying that a group of people are more likely to do something based on a characteristic like sexual orientation (unless you're talking about gay sex) is exactly homophobia. This is no different than saying that black people are more likely to do something because they're black. Please stop pigeonholing people.




Right here, buddy. Right here.

Making scientific/statistical observations about groups of people does not automatically make you an -ist. That is what sociologists do for a living. When Vin says that gays are messed up as a group, notice that he is not necessarily implying that the cause of this behavior is genetic. If I had to hazard a guess, people who are ostracized or otherwise treated differently tend to behave differently. Is that such a stretch? Gays have a higher rate of suicide than straights, after all. Or is that forbidden to point out by the PC police?

Apparently it DOES make you an -ist!

And maybe if we were discussing specific behaviors, I might lend a little more credibility to this. Saying that group x is the most ****ed up group in the world without providing any examples is ridiculous.

MULTIPLE ENTENDRE

I'd like to think I'm not ****ed up. Then again, I'm not a meth-head.

-... I just like dick.

Given the deeply (even violently) homophobic world most queer folk live in, is it any frigging wonder that so many more of us feel driven towards suicide than the straight people who aren't constantly oppressed and reviled based solely on ancient dogma?

Citation needed? " in a Southern Poverty Law Center 2010 Intelligence Report extrapolating data from fourteen years (1995-2008), which had complete data available at the time, of the FBI's national hate crime statistics found that LGBT people were " far more likely than any other minority group in the United States to be victimized by violent hate crime."[SUP][6]"
[/SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia

Also, to be fair, "sociologists" /are/ "-ists". Geeze.

Here is a good start. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_among_LGBT_youth

E.g,

That said, though, declaring all gay people as "really f***ed up" isn't by any remote stretch a scientific/statistical/sociological observation. It's a fairly bigoted and closed-minded blanket statement of an incredibly diverse group of people. Feel free to try applying it to other often-oppressed minority groups. "Blacks are really f***ed up", "Jews are really f***ed up". Does the existence of sociology prevent those from being racist statements?

I also don't see how "You're so whiny about being denied your civil rights due to your sexual orientation" somehow justifies "You should be denied your civil rights due to your sexual orientation."

-Then again, I'm not evil, so maybe it's just something that they pick up along the way.

Is that semen on his mouth LOLOLqwrw?afa???!?!?!?!! wtf is that

So, am I like, breaking rules by having ambiguous sexuality?

Maybe it's the combination of people thinking Marines are scary and deserve respect and not having a sexual identity that people easily identify as wrong, but I have run into nearly no issues when people (Marines even) discover that I have sex with whoever I want, men, women, inbetweeners. I don't understand how I am so lucky to avoid the hate that goes on so often.

Or maybe, just maybe, I am part of a large and diverse group of people that have incredibly different life experiences because, while your sexual orientation is a significant part of your identity, it does not define everything about you.

Or something. I don't ****ing know. I'm drunk since midday, so who cares.

"Mitt Romney sharpened his attacks on President Barack Obama’s economic record today, accusing him of presiding over “a moral failure of tragic proportion” by letting more Americans go without jobs and slip into poverty."

Mitt Romney made literally all of his money by paying himself out of loans he took out under LLCs. Yes, listen to Mitt Romney, industry-leading expert at moral failures that cause Americans to go without jobs.

“Sadly, it’s become clear that this president simply doesn’t understand or appreciate these fundamental truths of our economic system,” - Mitt Romney

Hmm, fundamental truths of the American economic system.

You know, what? I'm glad someone in the American government is being honest for a change. It's true: Mitt Romney knows more about the American economic system than Obama does.

A kleptocracy is an economic system formed when an entire legislative body undergoes regulatory capture by the financial industry. Kleptocracies are typified by a preponderance of economic agents who abuse legal and political processes to siphon total wealth without having to contribute anything at all to society in return. Symptoms of kleptocracy include accelerating economic inequality, decaying infrastructure and other public goods, declining total wealth, and a reduction in the legitimate creation and exchange of goods and services.

Not only is Mitt Romney a leading expert in American economics and a grandmaster kleptocrat, but he's very obviously the perfect choice for solving America's economic woes. After all, four years with Mitt Romney in the White House is four years without Mitt Romney on Wall Street.

Thanks for the pro-tip, Mittface.

Mitt Romney still literally on the payroll of his former financial firm while acting as governor and presidential candidate.

Just more proof that he's the perfect candidate for a kleptocratic america.

ugghh, Jon`C, you are such a retard. When Mitt Romney builds his palace of gold and ivory he is, like, totally gonna have to buy more food to feed his slaves. If you cut his taxes by 10% it means he can make his palace 10% bigger, which means 10% more slaves and 10% more food. It's trickle-down economics. Quit being a retard Jon`C.

A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote to make Mitt Romney's palace of gold and ivory 10% bigger.

I can't tell if JonC hates Obama AND Mitt Romney, or just Mitt Romney, or if he doesn't hate him.

Maybe he likes some of his ideas

Surely he isn't talking about an actual palace

don't be stupid couchman, I have a deep admiration for Mitt Romney and how he was able to steal so much money but still somehow isn't intelligent or creative enough to find anything interesting to do with it.

putting all of your money into self-managed trust funds and retiring into a half-witted vanity political career is the rich man's life equivalent of sitting around 24/7 in a downtown bachelor's apartment stoned out of your mind, spending all of your time watching simpsons reruns while lazily masturbating.

deep.

admiration.

For the record were watching South Park reruns

I was watching Simpsons reruns.

I'm watching hella re-runs.

[/URL]

A vote for Mitt Romney is support for Mormonism. Like all good Mormons, he pays 10% of his income to the church. Historically, being president makes you richer.

I'm actually really surprised how little his religion has been attacked. I guess conservatives hate liberals more than mormons.

which seems a little ridiculous. mormons are even crazier than most "conservatives."

Mitt Romney will get richer if he's elected, but not for the usual reasons that presidents get richer (increased speaker fees and such). Mitt Romney will get richer because as President, Mitt Romney's number one goal will be to decrease Mitt Romney's tax burden.

Mitt Romney will get richer if he's elected, but not for the usual reasons that presidents get richer (increased speaker fees and such.) Mitt Romney will get richer because as President, Mitt Romney's number one goal will be the repeal or limitation of regulations that currently prevent Mitt Romney from embezzling even more money out of the financial markets.

how do i get in on this?