REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

When Christians become a hated minority

POSTED BY: NEWOLDBROWNCOAT
UPDATED: Monday, May 6, 2013 05:32
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 920
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, May 5, 2013 4:59 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


E-T-A: the CNN headline has quotes around the words hated minority. Tried to fix that in the header, and can't. It does make a difference to the meaning.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/05/when-christians-become-a-hate
d-minority/?hpt=hp_c1



They're afraid to publicly support their own beliefs...

Not ALL Christians, mind you, just the evangelical anti-gay ones.

It seems that their evangelizing on the subject, pushing their noses publicly into something that is a private, personal matter, has caused a backlash.

Maybe if they abandoned their concern for this issue, and went back to publicly sticking their noses into everybody else's private affairs about other issues, people would leave the annoying bastards alone?

I'm personally very tired of bozos on street corners bothering ME about MY personal relationship with God. I certainly do not choose to publicly argue about it with complete strangers who act like rejects from Deliverance.

Meanwhile, sounds to me like they're just whingeing because somebody had the nerve to stand up to their bullying.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 5:14 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Damn, meant to put this in the first post.

Whatever happened to the Beatitudes?

"Blessed are you when men hate you, and revile you, and persecute you, for My sake."

Aren't they just living up to their literal Christian fate? Shouldn't they just accept it, embrace it, take it as a step toward their destiny?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 5:36 AM

AGENTROUKA


Adorable that a guy can say this...

Quote:

"They are incapable of comprehending that someone may have a view different than theirs," Johnson says. "For them anyone who dares to question the dogma of the tribe can only be doing so out of hatred."


... and not even attempt to reverse it toward himself.

If they question your dogma, it MUST be persecution.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 6:09 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Quote:

Originally posted by AgentRouka:
Adorable that a guy can say this...

Quote:

"They are incapable of comprehending that someone may have a view different than theirs," Johnson says. "For them anyone who dares to question the dogma of the tribe can only be doing so out of hatred."


... and not even attempt to reverse it toward himself.

If they question your dogma, it MUST be persecution.



Isn't that a corollary of the Golden Rule: "As you do unto others, expect them to do unto you" ?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 7:12 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I'll read the article, I promise, but Rouka, was he saying that in reference to people who don't like anti-homosexual "Christians"? I thought it was someone saying it ABOUT anti-homosexual "Christians" when I first read it...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 7:41 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Okay, I read it. Good gawd, that's amazing.... How MANY decades/centuries have people who are gay feared FOR THEIR LIVES to admit they're gay? How many HAVE actually died?? So now these hateful homophobes are whinging because people don't openly agree with them?? AUGGGGHHH!!
Quote:

changing attitudes toward homosexuality have created a new victim: closeted Christians who believe the Bible condemns homosexuality but will not say so publicly for fear of being labeled a hateful bigot.

Bullshit. There's nothing wrong with saying your religion doesn't condone homosexuality, but that's not what they DO; how often does one of those type of "Christian"s say "the Bible doesn't condone homosexuality"--they say a lot worse things, a lot more visceral things, and they CONDEMN people--to hell, remember--not just disagree.
Quote:

Some Christians fear that opposing homosexuality could cause them to lose their jobs and “haunt them forever,” Carter says.

Sorry, no dice. That is a piece of shit argument, in my humble opinion. "Christians" who condemn homosexuality do so in very distinct terms, very nasty ones, and homosexuals HAVE and still DO lose their jobs, receive death threats, get persecuted, get bullied, beat up, KILLED, and on and on, all over this country to this day. These "Christians" (I use the word advisedly) have a long, LONG ways to go to consider themselves in any way abused.
Quote:

There was a time when a person could publicly say homosexuality was wrong and people could consider the statement without anger, he says. Today, people have reverted to an intellectual tribalism where they are only willing to consider the perspective of their own tribe.

Ah, I see what preceded that quote. I say again "bullshit"; saying murder is wrong, saying pedophilia is wrong, that's one thing, there are many things we KNOW are wrong--BECAUSE THEY HARM OTHERS. But to me, judging someone else as "wrong" because they love someone of the same sex is a whole different matter. What business is it of anyone's except the people involved? Why is it so important to these people that they should have the right to condemn others openly (and I go back to the fact that few, if any, ever say merely that they "believe homosexuality is wrong because that's what the Bible says")?

He says
Quote:

Sprigg, from the Family Research Council, says his condemnation of homosexual conduct does not spring from intolerance but a desire to protect gays from harmful conduct, he says.

Sprigg, a senior fellow for policy studies at the council, wrote in a council pamphlet that homosexual men are more likely to engage in child sexual abuse than are straight men. He also wrote that gay men are also afflicted with a higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases and mental illness as well.

Sprigg says he does not believe homosexuality is a choice and that “personal testimonies" and "clinical experience” show that some people “can and do change from gay to straight.”

“Maybe we need to do a better job of showing that we are motivated by Christian love,” Sprigg says. “Love is wanting the best for someone, and acting to bring that about.”

Liar. Check out his articles at the link and see how much "love" is expressed there. The cutest is "Christian compassion requires the truth about harms of homosexuality. "Compassion" my ass.
Quote:

it should be difficult for any Christian to unequivocally declare that the Bible opposes homosexuality because the Bible doesn’t take a single position on the topic. It's an assertion that many scholars and mainline Protestant pastors would agree with.

Bingo. Using the Bible as reason isn't logical (especially as those kinds of "Christians" are quick to dismiss the Old Testament when it comes to the other horrific things in it) and Christians the world over HAVE changed their views from what the Bible expressly prohibits over time anyway, like slavery and divorce, and many much more awful things the Bible SPECIFICALLY tells people.

He talks about it taking "more courage" to preach against homosexuality than to declare oneself homosexual. Blows my mind. How many death threats does he think public figures get IMMEDIATELY upon admitting they're homosexual? Sure, there are no doubt extremists who lash out at those who preach against homosexuality, but there's no comparison in the backlash they receive, in volume OR verbiage. Hell, they should try coming out against GUNS and see what happens!

Pure bullshit, all of it. These are people who have no concept whatsoever of what being a real Christian IS, they're just bullies and cowards.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 8:27 AM

AGENTROUKA


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
I'll read the article, I promise, but Rouka, was he saying that in reference to people who don't like anti-homosexual "Christians"? I thought it was someone saying it ABOUT anti-homosexual "Christians" when I first read it...




That wasn't my impression. Here's the whole thing pertaining to Johnson. Especially the middle paragraph seems to indicate he's not referring to the Christians themselves.

Quote:


Edward Johnson, a communication professor at Campbell University in North Carolina, says we are now living in a "postmodern" era where everything is relative and there is no universally accepted truth. It's an environment in which anyone who says "this is right" and "that is wrong" is labeled intolerant, he says.

There was a time when a person could publicly say homosexuality was wrong and people could consider the statement without anger, he says. Today, people have reverted to an intellectual tribalism where they are only willing to consider the perspective of their own tribe.

“They are incapable of comprehending that someone may have a view different than theirs,” Johnson says. “For them anyone who dares to question the dogma of the tribe can only be doing so out of hatred.”



That's what makes it so hilarious.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 8:30 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Yeah, when I read it I saw the context and that WAS what he was saying.

amazing...

But I'm afraid I don't find it hilarious. I find it sickening.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 9:22 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Awwww, the poor persecuted christians in this country. If only there could ever be a time in this country when a christian man could be elected president, that would mean christianity had really made some headway.

But alas, I'm not sure it could ever happen, especially not 44 times in a row.


Jon Stewart summed it up nicely: "You're mistaking 'persecution' for 'not always getting your way'."



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 5, 2013 11:52 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


'Christians' become a hated minority because they joined The Dark Side.

This week i took a photo of a local 'church' named 'The GROVE' that has devil horns in its logo. Other giant local churches use Wiccan 666 as their official logo (Celtic knot).



99% of 'christians' belong to government owned and operated 501c3 'churches' ('non' profit corporations) that are banned from quoting the bible, banned from quoting the jooish babylonian talmud, banned from quoting the luciferian masonic books of their pastors and deacons, benned from discussing bohemian grove, banned from opposing abortion Molechcide, and take all their orders from the joos at the private foreign 'federal' reserve bank owned by trillionaire Rabbi David Rockefeller.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 6, 2013 5:13 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Amen, Mike. And of course, Newt can be counted on to step up to defend this "persecuted minority", even if he has to lie (repeatedly) to do so:
Quote:

Newt Gingrich Slams ‘One-Sidedness’ Of Gay Rights, Citing Services From Which Catholics Are ‘Outlawed’

In light of NBA player Jason Collins coming out as gay, David Gregory invited a Meet the Press panel to discuss the gay rights movement. Newt Gingrich was among the panelists — and chose to highlight the “one-sidedness” of the gay rights debate, pointing to the way Catholics are “outlawed” from having adoption services.

GINGRICH: "What I'm struck with is the one-sidedness of the desire for rights. There are no rights for Catholics to have adoption services in Massachusetts. They're outlawed. There are no rights in DC for Catholics to have adoption service. They're outlawed. This passing reference to religion, we sort of respect religion, sure, as long as you don't practice it. I mean I think it would be good to have a debate over, you know, beyond this question of, 'Are you able to be gay in America?' what does it mean? Does it mean that you have to actually affirmatively eliminate any institution which does not automatically accept that, and therefore, you're now going to have a secular state say to a wide range of religious groups, Catholics, Protestants, orthodox Jews, Mormons, frankly, Muslims, 'You cannot practice your religion the way you believe it, and we will outlaw your institutions.' ... Let's just start with adoption services. It's impossible for the Catholic Church to have an adoption service in Massachusetts that follows Catholic doctrine.

JOY-ANN REID: But didn't the Catholic Church, particularly Catholic Charities in Boston, they affirmatively decided to withdraw adoption services. No one said they are not allowed to provide adoption services.

GINGRICH: No, they withdrew them because they were told, "You could not follow Catholic doctrine," which is for marriage between a man and a woman.

REID: I think the point is, is that you don't have the state attempting to tell religions what to believe. People, if they oppose the idea of gay marriage within their religion, have the absolute right to do so. The question is whether or not religious institutions can make public policy, whether they can enter the public policy. http://www.towleroad.com/2013/05/mtpgingrich.html#ixzz2SWbeyANX


Please note: The agencies in question chose to drop out of adopting because they could not continue to take taxpayers' money while discriminating against gay and lesbian couples. Nor did anyone ask him how he had become such an expert on RC policies since he only recently converted to Roman Catholicism so he could marry his third wife, a Roman Catholic woman with whom he was having adulterous sex, in an RC wedding.

Newt is completely leaving out the inconvenient (for him) fact that the Catholic adoption agencies were receiving public money. Catholic agencies can do as they please when they are using private money. If not enough contributors exist to fund Catholic adoption agencies why is this the fault of the gay community? Memo to Newt: it isn't.

From comments to the article:
Quote:

Furthermore, when the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage by overturning Proposition 22 (the predecessor to Proposition 8), the court decision specifically stated that religious institutions would not be required to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, citing a precedent. Bending over backwards to not interfere with the practice of religion is not good enough for these people - they want a theocracy, with only one sect in charge.
Quote:

Newtie's colossal blind spots aside, we've all seen clinical homophobes concoct a vast array of justifications for their bitter neuroses and sad delusions. Crying "Victim!!" is one of their favorites. Personal and institutional beliefs are not relevant here, fair and equal treatment of people is the one and only requirement. If an agency cannot or will not fulfill it, they cannot engage in business.
Quote:

Newt also lied because the laws requiring equal adoption rights for LGBT human beings were passed at least a decade BEFORE marriage equality in MA and Catholic Charities in Boston placed a baker's dozen children with same-sex couples in the 10 years before marriage equality. When the new head of the Church, Sean O'Malley, found out the allegedly secular charity was treating gays and lesbians as human beings, he insisted that they stop. In response to this unprecedented interference, 20% of the charity's BOD quit in protest.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 6, 2013 5:32 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!




Quote:

Track Officials Disqualify High School Runner for Thanking God in Sign Language Gesture

Critics say official ruling impedes free exercise of religion

A Texas high school track team was prevented from advancing to the state finals after the student who landed first place in the boys 4×100-meter relay pointed towards the sky in a gesture of faith, prompting the team’s disqualification.

In a perverted interpretation of a rule governing high school sports, which prohibits any excessive celebration, relay anchor Derrick Hayes’ act of lifting his finger by his ear and pointing to the heavens was deemed to be a gaudy celebratory motion, on par with dancing or spiking a football in the end zone.

Last week’s controversial judgment has members of the community and critics alike asking if the rule is a violation of the First Amendment, which prohibits the making of laws impeding the free exercise of religion.

“I don’t see what the big deal is. When people are thanking God, I mean, he’s the reason we live,” Columbus resident Laporchia Miller told WFAA-TV.

Columbus independent school district superintendent Robert O’Connor told WFAA his hands were tied: “I don’t think that the situation was technically a terrible scenario as far as his action, but the action did violate the context of the rule.”

According to O’Connor, Hayes beat the second place runner by seven yards, making it their fastest race of the year.

Parents have complained to the state, but as the rule stands almost all hand gestures are strictly prohibited.

“It was a reaction,” the boy’s father KC Hayes said. “I mean you’re brought up your whole life that God gives you good things, you’re blessed.”

The student’s hand gesture disqualification is just the latest example illustrating a disturbing trend of religious demonization seemingly occurring nationwide.

In April, Fox News discovered that a U.S. Army training instructor was leading a class presentation that listed Evangelical Christianity and Catholicism as examples of “religious extremism,” casting them alongside such groups as Al Qaeda, Hamas, and the Ku Klux Klan.

Earlier this month, Breitbart also reported that the Pentagon released a statement confirming they would court martial soldiers for religious proselytization, specifically targeting soldiers promoting the Christian faith. An excerpt from the article follows:

This regulation would severely limit expressions of faith in the military, even on a one-to-one basis between close friends. It could also effectively abolish the position of chaplain in the military, as it would not allow chaplains (or any service members, for that matter), to say anything about their faith that others say led them to think they were being encouraged to make faith part of their life. It’s difficult to imagine how a member of the clergy could give spiritual counseling without saying anything that might be perceived in that fashion.

Having a “strapping, young Muslim Socialist” as president, perhaps we should not be so surprised, after all, it was German sociologist Karl Marx, the Father of Communism, who rejected religion, calling it the “opiate of the masses.”

http://www.wfaa.com/news/205794321.html

http://www.infowars.com/track-officials-disqualify-high-school-runner-
for-thanking-god
/



The pedophile sodomite Babylonian joos are in charge you stoopid slave goy 'christians'.






In Firefly the Alliance merged the US flag with the flag of Communist China
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_(Firefly)


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, March 27, 2024 22:19 - 2069 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:45 - 5 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL