In Defense of Stereotypes

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2063 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep saying these things, but that does not make them true. As I've said before that you can't get through your head, not all atheists are the same. Religion can be anything one finds interesting and devotes his/her life to and spirituality is not defined by something being sacred. An atheist can find something to be sacred that does not include god or gods.
We're at an impasse, Helen.
Take it up with Merriam-Webster.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spi...

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#2064 Oct 3, 2013
RU_Kiddingme wrote:
<quoted text>
Columbus. Old people like it!
Hey, Columbus is a great city to live in. It's very liberal, has an emphasis on local community and economy, has a great recycling program and people behind it to try and make it bigger, has lots of things to do for everyone - especially younger people - and is a very integrated community. Unless something has changed, Columbus has the second-largest gay community in the country. I've lived here for half of my life and I couldn't imagine being happier anywhere else in Ohio.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2065 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sigh. It was considered moral THEN. It certainly wasn't IMMORAL, was it? Because it had people who spoke out against the practice doesn't mean the culture at the time didn't consider it acceptable behavior.
Call it what you like, but taking a man or a woman's life is murder. You just attach another couple of words to it to make it sound more tolerable. But when you strip it down, that's what it is. And for the bible to call people to be stoned to death for blasphemy...I'm sure you can see the lunacy in that. But then again, as I've stated, the bible contradicts itself quite often.
An absolute truth is just that -- absolute.
The practice of slavery is not, and has never been, moral.

That an individual considers a practice acceptable does not make it moral.
After all, both Jerry Sandusky and Kermit Gosnell believe they have committed no wrong.
However, their personal beliefs do not render their behaviors acceptable.

Murder is the intentional killing of an innocent citizen by another citizen.
Capital punishment is the intentional killing of a citizen found guilty of a capital crime by the state.
The two are not the same.

Diamond Eugene

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#2066 Oct 3, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You gotta love the Christian definition of morality: "Look at all of this evil shit we eventually stopped doing."
Gotta love the inanities you pull out of your ass when you can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#2067 Oct 3, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Gotta love the inanities you pull out of your ass when you can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong.
Wrong? The proposition was "Slavery ended because of Christianity." But slavery existed in the face of Christianity and was supported by Christians. The mere fact that the majority of people who eventually voted to end slavery were Christian does not prove the assertion that Christianity ended slavery. If that is true, than Christianity caused the income tax. For a guy who constantly crows about his self-perceived intellectual superiority you have a real deficiency in logical thought.

Diamond Eugene

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#2068 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Columbus has the second-largest gay community in the country.
Not even close:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_demographic...

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2069 Oct 3, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
What religion were the folks who seceded from the Union and went to war to protect slavery? You seem to be forgetting that part. If Christianity was a guarantee of morality, as your thesis seems to suggest, then slavery never would have existed in so called Christian societies.
History documents that the worldwide imperialistic and economic foundations of slavery predate these United States of America by several thousand years. As Caribbean historian Eric Williams stated, "...a racial twist has...been given to what is basically an economic phenomenon. Slavery was not born of racism: rather, racism was the consequence of slavery."

While I do not intend to initiate a discussion of the Civil War here, it is a fact that slavery was born of economics and that the War was driven by economics...and not by slavery.

Nevertheless, your continual assertion that all white Westerners are Christian and, therefore, all Western societies are driven by Christian motives is asinine. Worse, is your ridiculous inference that Christianity is a "guarantee of morality."

All human beings are imperfect.
Even you.

That you ignore the hypocrisy of atheists...but allow the hypocrisy of some Christians to define your views is revealing.

Sister Mary Frances' ruler must've left scars on those knuckles.
So...believe what you will, but I agree with Michael Gerson:

"The failure of human beings to meet their own ideals does not disprove or discredit those ideals. The fact that some are cowards does not make courage a myth. The fact that some are faithless does not make fidelity a joke. All moral standards create the possibility of hypocrisy. But I would rather live among those who recognize standards and fail to meet them than among those who mock all standards as lies. In the end, hypocrisy is preferable to decadence."

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2070 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Does Christianity prevent any of yours or any of your friends on here? Nope. Some of them exhibit behavior that is much worse than any atheist I've ever spoken to.
That was rhetorical, dear.
A dose of Che's own overused, ineffective medicine.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2071 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Geez, I wasn't aware of that.
Umm...it was the basis of our discussion.
You were provided links and it was copied for you.

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T76DKCJ0S...

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2072 Oct 3, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that is not what I asserted. I asserted that I know right and wrong because of my brain. I never said that each individual determines right and wrong for himself. All the rest of your post is stuff that you imagine.
So...only your brain knows right and wrong?
Amazing stuff.

Diamond Eugene

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#2073 Oct 3, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong? The proposition was "Slavery ended because of Christianity." But slavery existed in the face of Christianity and was supported by Christians. The mere fact that the majority of people who eventually voted to end slavery were Christian does not prove the assertion that Christianity ended slavery. If that is true, than Christianity caused the income tax. For a guy who constantly crows about his self-perceived intellectual superiority you have a real deficiency in logical thought.
"Voted" to end it? Who were the people who campaigned and were the driving force behind educating the population and raising the consciousness of Western society?
Are you really as dense as you appear at times?

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#2074 Oct 3, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
An absolute truth is just that -- absolute.
The practice of slavery is not, and has never been, moral.
That an individual considers a practice acceptable does not make it moral.
After all, both Jerry Sandusky and Kermit Gosnell believe they have committed no wrong.
However, their personal beliefs do not render their behaviors acceptable.
Murder is the intentional killing of an innocent citizen by another citizen.
Capital punishment is the intentional killing of a citizen found guilty of a capital crime by the state.
The two are not the same.
So you agree the founding fathers who participated in slavery were immoral. Thank you for finally agreeing to that.

There are no absolutes outside of the laws of nature.

I don't think those two individuals truly believe they were not wrong. If they had believed it to be so, they wouldn't have gone to any lengths to conceal their behavior.

Going back to ordering someone to be stoned to death for blasphemy, we would now consider someone guilty of that "crime" to be an innocent, and back then there weren't as many judgments by the state but those mandated by god. In our culture today, we would see those actions as murder. Culture has changed and we no longer find it acceptable to stone people to death, much less for blasphemy. Back then, it was considered an absolute. It no longer is.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#2075 Oct 3, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
I don't know what your link says because I don't click on your links, but if you read what I wrote, I said unless something has changed. Take the time to read more closely before you jump on your over-eager horse.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#2076 Oct 3, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Umm...it was the basis of our discussion.
You were provided links and it was copied for you.
http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T76DKCJ0S...
That was sarcasm.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#2077 Oct 3, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that is not what I asserted. I asserted that I know right and wrong because of my brain. I never said that each individual determines right and wrong for himself. All the rest of your post is stuff that you imagine.
Thought you might like this:

"So shall we come to look at the world with new eyes. It shall answer the endless inquiry of the intellect, What is truth? and of the affections, What is good? by yielding itself passive to the educated Will....Build, therefore, your own world. As fast as you conform your life to the pure idea in your mind, that will unfold its great proportions. A correspondent revolution in things will attend the influx of the spirit." - Emerson

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2078 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you agree the founding fathers who participated in slavery were immoral. Thank you for finally agreeing to that.
There are no absolutes outside of the laws of nature.
I don't think those two individuals truly believe they were not wrong. If they had believed it to be so, they wouldn't have gone to any lengths to conceal their behavior.
Going back to ordering someone to be stoned to death for blasphemy, we would now consider someone guilty of that "crime" to be an innocent, and back then there weren't as many judgments by the state but those mandated by god. In our culture today, we would see those actions as murder. Culture has changed and we no longer find it acceptable to stone people to death, much less for blasphemy. Back then, it was considered an absolute. It no longer is.
Let me get this straight...you're just looking for a broad condemnation of our nation's founders as "immoral," while you continue to ignore facts referenced earlier that some founders agreed that the practice of slavery was immoral, and sought to lay the framework for ending it.

Typical leftist.

With respect to the Old Testament Laws, you are correct that they were mandated by God. Such specific laws and harsh judgments should remind each of us of the absolute holiness of God. Fortunately, those Laws were instituted to prove to mankind that he was incapable of meeting God's holy standards; hence, the need for God's loving Savior, Jesus Christ, who took our judgment upon Himself and ushered in the New Covenant -- replacing the stringent requirements of the Old Law with grace.

As Jesus said in Matthew 5:17, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Where we imperfect humans were unable, Jesus' perfect sacrifice met the righteous demands of the Law. And as the authority over the Law and its meaning, Jesus restated some of the Old Testament laws (19:1819); some He modified (5:3132); some He intensified (5:2122, 2728 ); and, others He changed significantly (5:3337, 3842, 4347). Some laws He abrogated entirely (Mark 7:1519). Jesus did not advocate continuation of Jewish adherence to the Law, nor did He advocate the Law be dismissed altogether. Instead, He explained that the Law must now be interpreted in light of the profound changes brought about by His coming into this world.

Diamond Eugene

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#2079 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know what your link says because I don't click on your links, but if you read what I wrote, I said unless something has changed. Take the time to read more closely before you jump on your over-eager horse.
You're scared of Wikipedia? You really have a screw loose.
And I saw what you wrote...the point being, you can't change what has NEVER BEEN. Columbus has never even cracked the Top 10 in gay population.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#2080 Oct 3, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thought you might like this:
"So shall we come to look at the world with new eyes. It shall answer the endless inquiry of the intellect, What is truth? and of the affections, What is good? by yielding itself passive to the educated Will....Build, therefore, your own world. As fast as you conform your life to the pure idea in your mind, that will unfold its great proportions. A correspondent revolution in things will attend the influx of the spirit." - Emerson
"spirit"?

How can you, a self-proclaimed atheist/skeptic, accept the existence of a supernatural entity?

Diamond Eugene

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#2084 Oct 3, 2013
RU_Kiddingme wrote:
<quoted text>
I said old people LIKE Columbus. Turn up your hearing aid, old man.
So, everyone moving here is "old," huh?
You and Che really act like butthurt little brats when you're proven wrong...it's the Demonrat way.
Enzyte Bob

Reynoldsburg, OH

#2085 Oct 3, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>So, everyone moving here is "old," huh?
You and Che really act like butthurt little brats when you're proven wrong...it's the Demonrat way.
The largest college campus in the nation is here, and it's the 16th best public university in the country. It's not Harvard, but 16th isn't too shabby, either. Especially for a football school. And Columbus is nice enough that lots of them stay here after they finish college.

Yes, we do have a slightly younger than average population here. It is also slightly more educated than average.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Columbus Biggest bold face Liar? 6 min CDN 6
Russia Investigation 18 min Male 18
Dems in disarray- Well, yeah! 24 min Male 233
Health Care/The Wall 1 hr Mojo Risen 104
A taste of their own 1 hr They cannot kill ... 263
Robert Mueller Investigating Donald Trump 4 hr Pale Rider 174
Erase ObamaCare, It Doesn't Work, Its Unaffordable 9 hr Axe ObamaCare 3
Ramadan, Does Anyone Understand It? 9 hr d pants 21

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages