1. Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
    You are viewing our forum as a guest. Join our free community to post topics and start private conversations. Please contact us if you need help with registration or your account login.

  2. "Muppet Guys Talking" Debuts On-line
    Watch the inspiring documentary "Muppet Guys Talking", read fan reactions and let us know your thoughts on the Muppet release of the year.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. Sesame Street Season 48
    Sesame Street's 48th season officially began Saturday November 18 on HBO. After you see the new episodes, post here and let us know your thoughts.

    Dismiss Notice

The Bible and Love and Christians

Discussion in 'Friends and Family' started by TheMonsterAteMe, Nov 25, 2010.

  1. beaker

    beaker Well-Known Member

    I agree. The US's proxy war not only created everything we now know about modern radical militant Islam, but it lead to Russia murdering over a million Afghan civilians. Had Russia simply ruled from afar, things wouldnt have been so bad. But the US wanted one last chance to bleed Russia dry. And now its America being bled dry through wars, bailouts, falling dollar, etc
  2. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Tolerant of people's right to free speech. That doesn't mean we should be tolerant of an inherently racist and destructive ideology.
    frogboy4 likes this.
  3. beaker

    beaker Well-Known Member

    That's what I meant:) It's like holocaust denial stuff...that stuff makes me sick, but I also dont like how Europe throws holocaust deniers in jail.
  4. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Yeah I know :), it's a real delicate balance that I think we lose sight of at times.
  5. BornToWemble

    BornToWemble Active Member

    I disagree, if you want tolerance you need to be tolerant. I honestly cannot believe I'm getting 'opposition' for being accepting of people and not lumping them all into one box. When I think of the spirit of Jim Henson I think of someone who wanted people to all be excepting of each other no matter what.
  6. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    Your statement is 100% ludicrous. I don't know where to start, so I'm going to leave crazy town for one of the other forum members to respond. :skeptical:

    Nonetheless, I still stand by my statement that not tolerating intolerance is not intolerance. :)
  7. BornToWemble

    BornToWemble Active Member

    People who stick to that view and seem to refuse to believe a person could be anything else tend to not know much about the ideology other than what was in propaganda. I don't know why you're bringing up holocaust denial because I don't know anyone who denies it nor did i bring it up? I just don't think combating bigotry with bigotry is kind of silly and hypocritical.

    Also I haven't really defended any ideology in my eyes, but rather treating people like people. Because a lot of people's first reaction to some is just plain wrong. A person isn't just their ideology

    I don't believe that for a second. I think Russia would have done that no matter what happened. It happened to family of mine last time someone just let Russia have something.
  8. BornToWemble

    BornToWemble Active Member

    And I stand by my statement that it is. It's hypocritical to want tolerance yet not be able to tolerate others. Especially since you're assuming an entire group is intolerant because of what little knowledge you have about them.
  9. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    I usually support clever contrarians, but not when they behave as you have since arriving here. I have no tolerance for the intellectual dishonesty you continue to express by mis-characterizing the words of everyone in this thread. You haven't really been listening to anybody since arriving at this forum. You seem intent on picking fights with this community by loading-up bizarre arguments, stuffing misleading words in the mouths of others and criticizing a group that you’ve only just joined. Maybe you should consider taking some of your own advice, or at least settle in first before becoming so abrasive.

    I wonder how long it will be before a moderator steps in. I just hope they don't take down this thread. It's been heated at times, but it's also been a healthy discussion to this point.
  10. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    Back to the topic...

    I'm SOOO glad the Log Cabin Republicans are actually GROWING a pear against their party nominees. Herman Cain wants to repeal the repeal of DADT (for the same pandering to the religious right they always have to pull), and supposedly gave the "it's a choice" myth and asked if someone can disprove him with science.

    To which the Log Cabins decried that there IS a lot of scientific proof. Seriously. First the fact that their party was withholding the repeal of DADT, now calling out one of the party front runners.

    I mean, I'll never like that party, but once they drop the "we're not bigots, and to prove it, let's do something bigoted to appeal to bigots." act I might respect them again.

  11. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    I know this isn't very scientific of me to say, but I really think if homosexuality was purely a choice, and people could just switch back and forth, a lot more people would have done it by now. I don't feel like my attraction to men is something I'm choosing to feel, anymore than I'm choosing to feel hungry, you know?
  12. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    Exactly. If it was a choice, people wouldn't purposely choose to do something so vilified, and they could switch back and fourth whenever they pleased.

    But the main thing is, even amongst conservatives, they're starting to get sick of these wedge issues that do nothing but scare votes into people. I remember hearing a lot of people voted for Bush, not because they liked the wars or his policies, but the fact that they were afraid a Democrat would stand up for gay rights.

    Again, THIS is the separation between Church and State I want to see. People voting for the good of the country and not people voting for fears of something that's highly debated amongst religious scholars anyway.

    Still, you have these dumb wars that are costing us billions, bankrupting us, making us look like school yard bullies in the world order, killing civilians, killing our own men... same ol' same ol, yadda yadda... but the ONE thing they refuse is to let gays fight so rich upperclass twits who benefit financially due to stock ownership don't have to.
  13. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Weeelll I disagree that people wouldn't purposely choose to do a vilified thing. People do that all the time in fact, hehe.
  14. Bannanasketch

    Bannanasketch Well-Known Member

    Excuse me, I'm jumping in. I noticed a conversation started about Herman Cain's view on homosexuality. I know you're getting this information from his appearance on The View, but if you look at the whole interview, he goes on to say he would base his decisions on the constitution. Not on his personal beliefs. That's the President's job. I support Herman Cain.
  15. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    That's not the point.

    I'm saying these religious based wedge issues are counter productive to the country, and finally the gay Repbulican community is growing a pair and telling them to avoid that sort of garbage and get back to the real issues.

    Repealing the repeal of DADT will do nothing but say, "HEY! Vote for me because I don't like gays." That doesn't put food on anyone's plate, that doesn't solve anything, that's just another pointless wedge.

    Personally, I hate all of them on all sides and there's no one that will appeal to me at all, mainstream or indie... though Herman's one of the ones I am the least horrified by.
  16. beaker

    beaker Well-Known Member

    I like him over Obama. Obama is too waffly(and I usually love waffles)
    And I do like pizza...even if Cain was behind a failed pizza chain.

    Anyways, I want to say we've missed you here in this thread. Things got a bit too...uh, fascistic as of late.
  17. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    I don't like his Neo-Con yesman attitude towards the Wall Street protesters. That's my only real beef.

    Sure, I find their message muddled, and sure, they need to better organize themselves (sadly, I think they could learn their organization from the Tea Party), but at least they're saying what most Americans are thinking... that capitalism has been destroyed, not by socialism, but by those who rigged the game so they'd win. I'm really starting to agree with the hands off Big Business attitude towards government... they do NOT deserve higher subsidies and loopholes and tax bailouts if they refuse to hire anybody.
  18. beaker

    beaker Well-Known Member

    Oh I love the Occupy Wallstreet folks. I'm like it's about time the left grew a pair!
  19. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    Herman Cain is a noted bigot who asks us to prove a negative. He has already admitted that his religious views on this matter and others would sway public policy. Before he does that, could he prove to me the 100% science that God exists? See, it works both ways. I just don't see why we all can't get along without having to qualify ourselves to others. Herman Cain has about as much right to tinker in my life as I do in his.
  20. beaker

    beaker Well-Known Member

    Yeah as much as I criticize Obama, he definitely seems to not budge on support gay rights, whereas before he became President his positions were coy at best. It is very troubling to think of potential candidates that would seek or allow an undoing of all that.
    frogboy4 likes this.

Share This Page