Don’t bother, when Jesus Christ came to earth all of that was removed.
Not really, you just do what every other hate filled atheists does, you take things out of contxt and expect everyone to agree with you.
Did you know that you can do that with any great work?
Naw…I guess you didn’t know that huh?
[quote]Black people, gun owners, people who lift weights are not all bad.
All religions are probably not bad either.[/quote]
You should leave it at that. But knowing your history of Christian bashing as I do I have a feeling that you won’t.
[quote]But as long as there are those incredibly violent ideologies from 3000 BC around, prepare to see some sick shit like child-molesting coming around more often.
-Schwarzfahrer[/quote]
One has NOTHING to do with the other. But then again that was YOUR lesson from the beginning.
[quote]Phatshady912 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Phatshady912 wrote:
Damn I forgot the exact quotes but here is the gist of it. I think what Schwarzfahrer is trying to say is a combination of these two quotes, either that or I am a retard.
“Without religion good men would do good deeds and bad men would do bad deeds, but it takes religion to get a good man to commit a bad deed.”
and
"Evil men will be the first to hide behind their flags and books (Bible, Torah, Quran)
The actual quotes were better…
BULL!
I’ll give two examples, though they most certainly don’t prove the quotes true they are food for thought.
Suicide Bomber Quote #1
George Bush Quote #2
I doubt either of these need an explaination but if they do, let me know and I’ll be glad to explain.[/quote]
[quote]vroom wrote:
If that is not a tie between religion and terrorism, then you simply refuse to see it… unless you will claim that fundamentalists within a religious sect are not actually religious.[/quote]
TO say religion is directly tied to terrorism is just not true.
I am not going to waste my time with an argument over semantics.
It is true with the islamo-nazis, but there are many terroist groups out there right now that has nothing to do with religion.
Name another religious terroist group that thinks they have a direct calling from God to destroy, and terrorize.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
vroom wrote:
If that is not a tie between religion and terrorism, then you simply refuse to see it… unless you will claim that fundamentalists within a religious sect are not actually religious.
TO say religion is directly tied to terrorism is just not true.
I am not going to waste my time with an argument over semantics.
It is true with the islamo-nazis, but there are many terroist groups out there right now that has nothing to do with religion.
[/quote]
Why is this so hard to understand?
Can’t you, for one moment, abandon your black & white pattern of thinking?
Religions are not automatically bad or always busy creating terrorists.
But religions produce socio-cultural material that can potentially lead to all kinds of wacky acts, terrorism and child abuse included.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Name another religious terroist group that thinks they have a direct calling from God to destroy, and terrorize.
[/quote]
Please tell me you don’t really mean this? Practically every frikkin religion has had and has violent splinter groups.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Please tell me you don’t really mean this? Practically every frikkin religion has had and has violent splinter groups.[/quote]
Then name one that gets their call to violence straight from God. It shouldn’t be too hard if there are as many as you say.
I can name at least two current terrorist groups that have absolutely no tie to religion.
Violence is not the same as terrorist - but nice try at trying to expand the topic so that you can fit your hatred in. You tend to do that a lot.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Phatshady912, thanks for contributing something substantial to the thread.
Do you know the source from the actual quotes?
[/quote]
Do you wake up everyday and throw darts at pictures of Biblical figures?
No really…you seem to be far more zealous in your BELIEFS than any Christian that I’ve ever met.
No seriously, think about it. You turned a thread on pedophiles into an “I hate Christians” thread.
What if the shoe were on the other foot?
What if someone popped in and claimed that most pedophiles are atheists and atheism should be eliminated. YOU would immediately cry FUNDAMENTALIST WACKO!
[quote]rainjack wrote:
TO say religion is directly tied to terrorism is just not true.
I am not going to waste my time with an argument over semantics.
It is true with the islamo-nazis, but there are many terroist groups out there right now that has nothing to do with religion.
Name another religious terroist group that thinks they have a direct calling from God to destroy, and terrorize.
[/quote]
No, the point being discussed is more that religion is tied to an inflexible mindset that is organized along the rules of the religion in question.
I don’t think many religions support the actions that fundamental Islam appears to support.
However, Christianity was compatible with crusades and witch burnings and other travesties in the past. It appears that most Christians have a more moderate viewpoint then some did in the past.
Now, I’m not trying to attack Christianity, but it is a fact that if you fervently believe in a higher power and associated rules, then at times one can feel excused from certain rules of behavior.
Luckily, most governments don’t give a damn about religion per se, but impose rules on their citizens whether or not someone wants to obey them.
However, in Islam, it seems that this is not necessarily the case.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Name another religious terroist group that thinks they have a direct calling from God to destroy, and terrorize.
Please tell me you don’t really mean this? Practically every frikkin religion has had and has violent splinter groups.[/quote]
Do you think that a religion should be judged by a violent extremist sub-group? When dealing with discussions like this I can get too defensive and take everything as an attack on religion (Christianity in particular). I don?t deny that there are groups out there that hide behind constitutional amendments to do bad things. I don?t deny that some religions are founded with violent ideals or become corrupted as time passes. I do disagree with any statement that implies that religion itself is bad for the western world.
[quote]Solomon Grundy wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Name another religious terroist group that thinks they have a direct calling from God to destroy, and terrorize.
Please tell me you don’t really mean this? Practically every frikkin religion has had and has violent splinter groups.[/quote]
Do you think that a religion should be judged by a violent extremist sub-group? When dealing with discussions like this I can get too defensive and take everything as an attack on religion (Christianity in particular). I don?t deny that there are groups out there that hide behind constitutional amendments to do bad things. I don?t deny that some religions are founded with violent ideals or become corrupted as time passes. I do disagree with any statement that implies that religion itself is bad for the western world.
[i] A suburban Cleveland man accused of sexually assaulting nine disabled boys told a judge Wednesday that his apartment was a religious sanctuary where smoking marijuana and having sex with children are sacred rituals protected by civil rights laws…
[Phillip] Distasio, a self-professed pagan friar, is representing himself .... He said he's the leader of a church called Arcadian Fields Ministries, and that some of his congregants are among the victims in his case....
Cuyahoga County Bill Mason said Distasio was arrested after he wanted to write a blog for the Lakewood Library. Officials noticed something was wrong and notified Rocky River police.
Distasio was arrested on charges he molested two disabled boys he was tutoring at his home. He's also accused of raping seven other autistic children at a Cleveland school for special-needs students, The Plain Dealer reported. All but one of the boys was under 13, which carries a mandatory life-in-prison sentence if he is convicted, the paper reported.... [/i]
This is a good illustration of two principles related to religious exemptions:
Though the Court has read the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause as not requiring the government to provide religious exemptions from generally applicable laws (i.e., laws that apply to conduct without regard to its religiosity), about half of U.S. jurisdictions do presumptively require such exemptions either under the state constitution’s religious freedom clause or under the jurisdiction’s religious freedom statute. The Ohio courts, for instance, have interpreted the Ohio Constitution this way.
But this is only a presumption, and generally not a strong presumption. (The cases and statutes tend to use the language of “strict scrutiny,” requiring that denial of the exemption be “narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest,” but while this test has been applied in a very demanding way as to content-based speech restrictions and as to most racial classifications, it has been applied in a much more pro-government way in religious freedom cases.) If there’s a strong enough reason – in the court’s judgment – for applying the law uniformly even to religious objectors, the law can be applied.
I’m positive that Ohio courts will find such a strong reason in the state’s statutory rape laws (the Ohio age of consent, I believe, is 16). Some courts have suggested that such religious freedom regimes do mandate an exemption from bans on marijuana, but that’s a minority view, and in any case wouldn’t apply if any of the charges involved distribution of marijuana to minors.