"Ground Zero mosque leader says gay people were abused as children"

fancydude

I didn't know (and doubt) that Ted Kaczynski or the guy the bombed the Federal building in Kansas city were religious. I don't think they were. They happened to be Christian only by birth - because that is how their parents baptized them. I don't think they went to Church. Nor were they acting on orders from a Priest in the way some (and I stress SOME) Muslims respond to their Imams and Ayatollahs. It is well documented as in the case of your religious schools that some Mosques are headquarters for cells. Yeah, Falwell (long dead now) and Robertson spew hate - but I again, didn't know any of the homegrown US terrorists justified their actions by religion except abortion clinic bombers) Actually the Pope did condemn violence done in the name of God 11/11/2010. I think it is unreasonable to expect him to condemn everything since abortion clinic bombers and lots of others are not acting in the name of the Catholic Church. Many crazy people do things "in the name of God" or voices in their head but I don't think even Pat Robertson said go bomb an abortion clinic. (and yes he is hateful and pretty nutty too) Further I do not recall any mass demonstrations (by Christians) in the USA calling Iran, Iraq or the middle east the great satan or devils. Abortion clinic bombers seem to be isolated nutcases and claim they are doing God's will - again, they are not acting on behalf of a larger religious organization. If I'm wrong, let me know.

If you've ever read about partial birth abortions, it is a gruesome procedure, as are abortions in general. While I would never ever ever ever condone harming a doctor or bombing a clinic, I think killing innocent babies is absolutely disgusting too and it is easy to see why feelings run high on such a topic. Just so you know that I'm not a religious nut, I did take a lot of pre-med classes in college and very early in pregnancy, the fetus has a heart beat, brain waves and at just 10 weeks, the feet and toes are fully formed. Further, in vitro surgeries etc. are happening earlier and earlier so it is extremely difficult for me to understand how the law defines "baby" as only being outside the womb.

I can't think of the polls right now, but I get several major magazines (US News, The Week) but it is crazy stuff like 60% of Iraqis think the world trade center bombings were done by Americans!

raphjd

Ted Kaczynski and Timothy McVeigh weren't religious as far as I know.

However, the Army of God bombed abortion clinics and murdered abortion doctors. Eric Rudolph is a believer that bombed the Olympics, among other terrorist crimes.

How many years did it take for the Pope to condemn the violence in the name of religion?! Violence due to religion has gone on since the beginning of time. They didn't condemn the bombing of the gay bar in London or the one in Atlanta.

Why are you so desperate to separate the hate mongering words of christian leaders and the actions of some of their followers, but condemn all muslims based on the words of some of their leaders? It's the hate spewing christian preachers that make it still acceptable to kill gays, abortion doctors and for juries to acquit the murderers. As a christian/catholic, you are less likely to see the connections other christians/catholics have to terrorism, then you are to see those of muslims. It's common nature.

A lot of Americans and Europeans believe that the US government had a hand in 9/11. Go back and look at some of the evidence that they put forward. The idea to create a terrorist attack/disaster on American soil is well known. Kennedy considered doing it against Cuba to justify an all out invasion and ever since Pearl Harbor, people have claimed the FDR allowed it to happen so he'd have an excuse to join the war. PNAC is a conservative think tank who said that we needed some sort of terrorist event so we could go into the middle east and take over a country and get their oil fields for the US. They wrote that during Clinton's Presidency. Most of PNAC were part of the Reagan and papa Bush administrations and then ended up in the GWB administration. They get back in power and suddenly what they wanted to happen becomes a reality, yea for them. We know for a fact that GWB was told starting in January 2001 that a plane attack was a likely even in the very near future and he did nothing. People get sentenced to death in the US based on far less circumstantial evidence.

Noughty

I don't know much facts, stats on the topic. But I once saw a tv episode and was shocked by the hatred. Young gay man was killed and in his funeral came a Christian priest and some of the Christians with very hateful and just distasteful posters. They had a demonstration how he will be going to hell, how all gay men should die etc. They did this in front of a grieving family.

I don't understand how any religion can be so cruel in such a situation. I don't even attempt to understand actual killings of anyone because of a religion.

Christianity has its own share of crimes (inquisition for example, just because it happened long time ago doesn't mean it doesn't count!)

I am a Cristian by birth, but I think I am more atheist. Anyone knows any normal religions? Normal means no discrimination, no hate etc. Religion is supposed to help people, it shouldn't cause pain to anyone.

fancydude

Raphjd - I said some Muslims and then in parentheses said (I Stress some) go back, it is not edited for today and yet you come back and say I said ALL Muslims.

It is not official Catholic, Lutheran or any mainstream Christian church policy to bomb people or sanction terrorism. I specifically said several times that I exempted abortion clinic bombers and went further to say they are the lunatic fringe. Find ONE Catholic school that preaches hatred for everything non Catholic, or one western democracy where the official policy is the annihiliation of a country such as Israel and I'll eat my words. This removal of Israel from the map is however, the official policy or was until very recently of many Middle Eastern countries WITH the support of the vast majority of the populace and virtually all their religious leaders. Nothing in the west comes close to this. Actually though, I dont' have to eat my words, because I've asked for information and correction.

Why am I "desperate.."? I'm not. Instead of so many examples, I should just say plainly that I don't think Christianity compares to Islam. Does this mean I think the USA is blameless? No, I've read The Shock Doctrine and Confession of an Economic Hitman. By all means lay the blame where it belongs. Still I think most people would prefer to live in a western style democracy than a Muslim theocracy given a choice. Although I could be wrong. Many Russians supposedly long for the days of the communist state where they didn't have to think or plan or decide. The Pope doesn't need to apologize for anything that wasn't done in the name of the Catholic church and I said so plainly. Frankly, I'm not sure apologizing for things that happened 500 years ago does a lot of good but it may be a "nice" thing to do if sincere. My ancestors didn't own slaves, for example but if they did, should I apologize? Economically, I make less than half of what many Blacks (and southern Whites) make working in auto plants and many many of them came up from the south. This is not to say slavery has no legacy, but it sure didn't impact everyone equally. All Whites are not rich simply by virtue of being White and all Blacks are not poor even with slave background.

Whatever Bush or Clinton or FDR did, they did as political acts which have little or nothing to do with religion. Certainly they were not acting on behalf of any specific Church and that is my main point. There are a million think tanks and opinions in a modern free society as large as the USA and if one wants to dig around AFTER the fact, one can always find a group that said this or that. Most scientists said in the 50's that nuclear power would produce electricity so cheaply it wouldn't even be metered. Oh if that had only come to pass. I don't know anything about the PNAC - if it is some sinister force that had a great impact on our government then I've got something to research. On the other hand, people have discussions all the time of what it would take to change this or that in society. That hardly means they are planning it. Some of the very best scenarios that seem oh so logical turn out to be complete bunk, no matter how good they sound on paper. (and yet despite spending untold hundreds of billions, we haven't taken over Iraq, have we?) This does not mean that I'm naive or unaware that the media is in cahoots with politicians or he who pays the piper calls the tune. But if we're going to argue or discuss, please at least use what I actually wrote.

raphjd

While you may not have said ALL, that is the impression you seem to be giving off.

Speaking of Israel, you will find that most of Europe sides with the Palestinians because they view Israel's actions as being heavy handed and extremely hypocritical. Israel has no more right to exist than any other country, yet Americans due to their over reliance on religion think it's sacred and must exist for eternity. So NO, you won't find any mainstream anti Israel church.

You already admitted that there are plenty of christian preachers that spew hate. Spewing hate is just as bad because crack heads are going to and do think that means they are doing good when they do evil things. Slavery was justified using the bible. The holocaust was justified using the bible. The catholic church is extremely homophobic. While they may not directly tell people to kill us, they certainly make sure everyone knows we're evil and they also tell their flocks to fight evil. Put 2 and 2 together.

I'm disappointed that you can not or will not see that the constant hate "preaching" toward groups does lead to increased violence against those groups.

Institutions, nations, etc, etc should apologize for their actions, no matter how long ago it was. Your church has plenty to apologize for and maybe that's why you don't like the idea, because they'd be apologizing for eternity for their past sins. You love Israel and the jews so much, yet look at the role your church played during and after WW2.

I'm not sure why you brought slavery and Affirmative Action/quotas into this conversation. There's a difference between apologizing and AA/quotas.

Why do I say that you are desperate? Let's go back and look at what's been said here. You said that 60% of muslims think that Americans had a hand it 9/11. I reply to that showing why people all over the world think the same way and you say our Presidents that I mentioned didn't do anything out of religion. While I never ever implied they did, GWB repeatedly and constantly wore his religion on his sleeve, as did Tony Blair. GWB even called this whole mess his crusades. So you tried to turn this into a muslim thing, when in fact it's a global thing.

Go look up PNAC and check out the names of the members, then google them. You will find that they were notorious christians, like Rumsfeld who forced prayer on the people that worked for him, despite separation of church and state. I can't remember which of th etop of my head, but either Rumsfeld or Ashcroft ordered that all male nude statues on federal property have their man bits covered up because it violated his beliefs. You may remember that one of your popes took a chisel and hacked off a lot of statue cocks for the same reason. PNAC was basically far right wing conservative christians and jews.

Papa Bush famously said that atheists are not citizens or patriots.

You should also check out the writings of your various early church leaders.

I believe it was St Augustine of Hippo that said; "You get a better sort of christian through the sword, than if they come to the faith willingly".

Or how about this; "Clearly the person who accepts the Church as an infallible guide will believe whatever the Church teaches." by Thomas Aquinas

Here's what Jesus has to say for himself in Matt 10:34-39; "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man's enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."

raphjd

But if we're going to argue or discuss, please at least use what I actually wrote.

I did use exactly what you wrote.

I can't think of the polls right now, but I get several major magazines (US News, The Week) but it is crazy stuff like 60% of Iraqis think the world trade center bombings were done by Americans!

I showed why gloabally, not just muslims, think the US had a hand in 9/11.

Just because you don't like my answer, it doesn't mean I didn't use what you wrote.

BTW, we may not have fully taken over Iraq, but we did get control of the oil and other contracts.

fancydude

You mention slavery was justified by the Bible. Yes it was, but tell the whole story. Slavery was practiced all over the world for most of the world's existence. And in many parts of the world it still is, albeit sometimes illegally. That doesn't make it right, but people are a product of their times. And as I mentioned on another thread with you I think - people couldn't choose between being a slave and getting a job at the corner Walmart! That option wasn't there. People evolved. Being a serf in medieval Europe was essentially being a slave. Working for script and not cash in 18th century America was essentially being a slave. African countries (ie African people) were the slave sellers, the Hutus murdered the Tustsi by the hundreds etc. etc. etc. and yet when anything ever comes up about the African continent it is only White Europeans who are the villains. ONLY them.

Perhaps the US did have a hand in 9/11, obviously we'll never know for sure. But for you to completely ignore what I said - anything other than proof is conjecture - makes discussion meaningless. There are people who said the USA didn't really land on the moon. And on it goes. I also clearly said I didn't recall what the polls said, that was a made up example - and you bring it into the discussion as if it were fact.

But I must say this - we have a huge divorce rate and unwed birth rate. I would say based on that plenty of people in the USA ignore religion completely or it is a social activity only, not a guide to living one's life. If GWB wore religion on his sleeve, it was to get elected. To appeal to enough of that segment of people who VOTE. Reagan promised a lot of things to the religious crowd too and delivered zero.

I do see that preachers that spew hate influence crimes, but oddly things are slowly getting better. We have SSM in several states and civil unions in others. (Just 20 years ago, that it would occur was positively fantasy land/unthinkable and yet we have it) Social change is like that. No one is ever on board 100%.

Actually, I have gone to church my whole life and I never heard anything about homosexuality in the Catholic church on Sunday! There is an encyclical by one of the Popes in the last 20 years that says, believe it or not, homosexuals are persons of sacred worth. Yes, it continues on by saying we must be celibate and it is morally disordered. But the words 'we are evil" aren't there. When I was much younger and went to confession about it I was treated with great compassion. (now I laugh about it and would NEVER go to confession about my sexuality) Yes, that is only my story, but it is the truth.

If you want to keep going tit for tat, we can - I delivered typewriters to this fundy church and they had a big sign about "outreach". I asked one of the women working there - the church was right next to Dearborn. She said many Muslim women came there because their husbands would beat them when pregnant to lose the baby if the ultrasound showed it was a girl. They wanted boy babies. How often do you think this happens with Christian marriages?

raphjd

You mention slavery was justified by the Bible. Yes it was, but tell the whole story. Slavery was practiced all over the world for most of the world's existence. And in many parts of the world it still is, albeit sometimes illegally. That doesn't make it right, but people are a product of their times. And as I mentioned on another thread with you I think - people couldn't choose between being a slave and getting a job at the corner Walmart! That option wasn't there. People evolved. Being a serf in medieval Europe was essentially being a slave. Working for script and not cash in 18th century America was essentially being a slave. African countries (ie African people) were the slave sellers, the Hutus murdered the Tustsi by the hundreds etc. etc. etc. and yet when anything ever comes up about the African continent it is only White Europeans who are the villains. ONLY them.

Have I ever denied that Africans were involved in the slave trade? NO, I haven't and there are many threads scattered around the internet by me that clearly state that they profited as much as anyone else from it.

An indentured servant in medieval Europe is not the same as a slave in the 18th century US/Europe. One had a choice to sell themselves into it, while the other was forced kicking and screaming into it.

Using the "people evolve" argument, then what exactly are you believing in? Is the bible god's word or is it man's word for their version of "god"? Isn't it convenient that god evolves with the whims of man? That says to me that god is a creation of man and not worthy of worship.

Perhaps the US did have a hand in 9/11, obviously we'll never know for sure. But for you to completely ignore what I said - anything other than proof is conjecture - makes discussion meaningless. There are people who said the USA didn't really land on the moon. And on it goes. I also clearly said I didn't recall what the polls said, that was a made up example - and you bring it into the discussion as if it were fact.

You brought it up in an attempt to show how crazy you thought muslims were. That's why you said "it's crazy stuff like" to describe what they believe. That is why I went into detail about PNAC and the fact that many Americans and Europeans believe the same thing and some of the reasons why.

You made this part of the discussion meaningless by bring up a subject, then getting angry when I respond.

But I must say this - we have a huge divorce rate and unwed birth rate. I would say based on that plenty of people in the USA ignore religion completely or it is a social activity only, not a guide to living one's life. If GWB wore religion on his sleeve, it was to get elected. To appeal to enough of that segment of people who VOTE. Reagan promised a lot of things to the religious crowd too and delivered zero.

If GWB was only using religion for votes, then explain why he kept it up when he became a lame duck and still keeps it up to this very day.

An atheist has zero chance of getting elected in the US for the foreseeable several billion millennia.

I do see that preachers that spew hate influence crimes, but oddly things are slowly getting better. We have SSM in several states and civil unions in others. (Just 20 years ago, that it would occur was positively fantasy land/unthinkable and yet we have it) Social change is like that. No one is ever on board 100%.

Things are getting better for gays and others in spite of religion. Thankfully, people are seeing through the veil of religion and seeing that god was created in the image of man, not the other way around.

Christian churches are still funding hate filled campaigns to deny us equality.

Actually, I have gone to church my whole life and I never heard anything about homosexuality in the Catholic church on Sunday! There is an encyclical by one of the Popes in the last 20 years that says, believe it or not, homosexuals are persons of sacred worth. Yes, it continues on by saying we must be celibate and it is morally disordered. But the words 'we are evil" aren't there. When I was much younger and went to confession about it I was treated with great compassion. (now I laugh about it and would NEVER go to confession about my sexuality) Yes, that is only my story, but it is the truth.

I guess you don't read the news. Catholics (christians in general) aren't always the most gay friendly people on earth.

Your church teaches that if you aren't celibate, you are going to burn in hell for eternity. Yeah, that's pleasant enough.

The bible and the koran both clearly teach that gays are supposed to be killed. So who's worse in that regard?! I know you will say muslims.

If you want to keep going tit for tat, we can - I delivered typewriters to this fundy church and they had a big sign about "outreach". I asked one of the women working there - the church was right next to Dearborn. She said many Muslim women came there because their husbands would beat them when pregnant to lose the baby if the ultrasound showed it was a girl. They wanted boy babies. How often do you think this happens with Christian marriages?

Ever hear of far east Asia, especially China? So don't claim it's just muslims.

If you want to talk about evil, how many boys have your priests molested?

fancydude

I haven't said anything that shows I'm angry. Because I'm not. We disagree and I'm trying to explain my ideas. I'm not sure if you''re angry or not - seems like you might be. One last attempt:

1. A serf is not an indentured servant. Being essentially owned by a company that pays you in script is not a choice. Contracts, however unfair, are enforceable by police, courts and jails. If there are no other options I wonder how freely the indentured servant's choice was. Not only that, who do you think came up with the indentured servant idea? The poor person or the rich person with power? Hmmm.

2. You said flatly "the Bible sanctioned slavery" as if that made everything in it invalid. I responded by saying tell the whole story, It will be difficult indeed to discuss anything if I have to know by heart everything you've ever posted. For me to say 'people evolved' is not endorsing or showing my beliefs in any way. Most people in the world have some sort of rights and are no longer property of the king. I use of the words "people evolved" to convey that idea. Would "societies evolved" be better? However, to the heart of the matter - I don't pretend to have all the answers about God. Perhaps an analogy will serve - children are born into this world, otherwise obviously people would die off. Growing up is essentially the same for all, birth, growth, learning and pain; sorrows and happiness, illness and death. Why must there be pain to learn? Why must everyone experience sadness? But that is the way it is, the best parent cannot prevent any of those things. I think that is how it is with the world development. For centuries most people couldn't read. Vaccines were only invented 70 years ago. None of this proves God doesn't exist. It means we are the two year old child who is yet to understand and yet even as adults (religious or atheist alike) there are still many things beyond our understanding.

3. I said as plainly as I know how more than once there are hundreds of think tanks and opinion pieces written every day. You can find someone who said almost anything you want AFTER the fact. I've also said that I do not remember the opinion polls but they were from US News, not Rush Limbaugh. I said I will research PNAC. what do you want?

I have no idea why GWB does what he does, I'm sure you never ever ever heard me defend him, since I can't stand him either.

I also say I do understand about preachers spewing hate (which you did not put in quotes!) but I mention same sex marriage and the other stats about divorce etc. not to dispute you but to agree religion's role is diminishing. You don't see that, you mention only GWB.

Your last point about Asia, where did I say it was "just Muslims?" I thought this post was about the Mosque at Ground zero which means Muslims…..

raphjd

I give up.

You have a way of disconnecting my responses to what you wrote, so there is no point continuing further.

Spintendo

@fancydude:

as I mentioned on another thread with you I think - people couldn't choose between being a slave and getting a job at the corner Walmart! That option wasn't there. People evolved.

I remember this, and it didnt quite make sense there at first. But I understand its reason for being put forth. This inductive (allowing for) view of religion — slavery as a corollary to the times — contrasts with my and raphjd's deductive (not allowing for) view of religion for one particular reason — as an example of parts of the Bible that had to be there, because of the times, and therefore that edict and many others should be acceptable — as a way of bringing in the back door (slavery justified=Bible OK) what won't fit in through the front (slavery is abhorrent=Bible not OK). I can see no other reason why this was brought up, other than to imply justification for it being there in the first place.

But notice how other timeless provisions in the Good Book are not directly mentioned by him: Children out of line? beat them with a rod {Proverbs 13:24,20:30, and 23:13-14}; Children talking back to parents? kill them {Exodus 21:15, Leviticus 20:9, Deuteronomy 21:18-21, Mark 7:9-13, and Matthew 15:4-7} in addition to provisions that we stone people to death for heresy, adultery, homosexuality, working on the Sabbath, worshipping graven images, and practicing sorcery. These are not mentioned, and for good reason — it is only by ignoring such barbarisms that the Bible can be reconciled with life in the modern world.

His argument shows that religion has nothing underwriting it other than the unacknowledged neglect of the letter of the divine law.

fancydude

Raphjd - you can quit discussing if you like but I'll say this - you are cherry picking! Or you completely change the focus! So what if GWB wears religion on his sleeve. Prove or even postulate he is acting in concert or at the behest of an organized religious group.

If he acts on his own religious beliefs, or belief system if not religious, don't we all do that?

I think I've tried to respond to almost everything you've put forth.

I did find a poll - a commenter posted a link to Investor's Daily on Huffington Post - 84% of Egyptians want a theocracy. 73% want adulterers stoned etc. **** STuff like that - I may have the numbers a bit off. But when you criticize Christianity, you have to go back centuries to St. Augustine! If you say the Pope doesn't condemn violence and I say he did, you say not soon enough. This is not rational discussion.

Spintendo - Slavery and the Bible was brought up in post #12 by Raphjd. I didn't mention all those other things because I'm not trying to reconcile the Bible with modern life. I said that because the Bible sanctioned slavery at a time when there were not other job options, does not make the entire book invalid without telling the other side.

The fact that slavery, servitude and the divine right of kings existed at one time is a fact of history, is it not? A fact is not me trying to "allow" for religion as you say or disallow/disapprove of the practice, it is simply stating a fact.

**** I later read the comments - one alleged this link (which said it was Pew research) was bogus -so I went to to the actual Pew website which said Egyptians are about equally divided on the question "does religion play a large or small role in government" but then a very large number (I don't recall exactly, it was well over 80%) felt Islam's influence in politics was positive. So the answers to the first question don't seem to convey the Egyptians true feelings. I can also say that whenever Farahkan is mentioned in the Detroit newspapers, they always tiptoe around what he says and so I called the editorial desk. They told me if they printed what he actually said (the really controversial stuff) they would get thousands of telephone calls. So there you are - the media censoring out actual statements by their own admission.

# this link appears legit: http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/#prc-jump

85% of Nigerian Muslims and 58% of Egyptian Muslims favor the death penalty for those who leave the faith
54% of Egyptians favor gender segregation in the workplace

If only the above is true, that doesn't sound bizarre to you? What in Christianity compares to this?

raphjd

You can not slag off muslims and expect your religion to be exempt from the same scrutiny, otherwise you are being hypocritical.

You have blinders on that will not let you see that christianity isn't all flowers and puppies. That is why no one can talk to you about topics like this.

fancydude

I think anyone reading this with a neutral eye can see that I have not exempted Christianity from scrutiny. I've invited you to compare very specific situations with pointed questions and you've ignored most of them. I'm well aware that Christianity isn't just flowers and puppies.

I've specifically said lay the blame where it should be. I acknowledged the US had their own terrorists before you mentioned it. I know capitalism has some terrible excesses, I cited the books I"ve read thinking that would be enough, but apparently not. So here's an example: I know that the USA meddles in the affairs of other countries and our corporations do some terrible things like sell poor countries seeds that don't reproduce so they have to buy again from these corporations. But none of that is religiously motivated, it is just plain human greed. I've even agreed with you about the diminishing role of religion and I get accused of anger where there is none.

It is clear that in Christian societies people have much more freedom, especially women. This alone cannot be highlighted enough. The governments do not act on behalf of a Church or specifically for religious leaders. That is probably why the founders of the USA tried to separate Church & state. Most people would prefer to live in a western style democracy. You asked me to say which is better for Gays, Christianity or Islam? Well, if I remember correctly, a Muslim theocracy executed two young men by hanging last year for homosexual relations. Name a primarily Christian country where the government did the same.

I doubt if we'll discuss anything in the future so I could be nasty here or pious and wish you peace and I can't really do either one. It is just kind of sad and unfortunate that I've typed so much for you to ignore or twist and then try to lay all the blame at my feet.

raphjd

I think anyone reading this with a neutral eye can see that I have not exempted Christianity from scrutiny. I've invited you to compare very specific situations with pointed questions and you've ignored most of them. I'm well aware that Christianity isn't just flowers and puppies.

YES, you have exempted christianity from scrutiny. You say that all/vast majority of muslims do evil things only because of their religion, then say that christians do evil things even though they happen to be christians.

You want to control the discusion so it suits your wants/needs. That's why you got upset because I refused to maintain your dictated topics.

I've specifically said lay the blame where it should be. I acknowledged the US had their own terrorists before you mentioned it. I know capitalism has some terrible excesses, I cited the books I"ve read thinking that would be enough, but apparently not. So here's an example: I know that the USA meddles in the affairs of other countries and our corporations do some terrible things like sell poor countries seeds that don't reproduce so they have to buy again from these corporations. But none of that is religiously motivated, it is just plain human greed. I've even agreed with you about the diminishing role of religion and I get accused of anger where there is none.

YES, you refuse to admit that GWB, Gods Army, Christian Identity and countless others have done evil things because of their religion. How about the IRA in the UK?! I wouldn't doubt if there are still white preachers still teaching that the mark of cain is talking about black people.

Capitalism can't use religion, however the people that are part of the capitalist system can and do use religion to justify their actions.

Christians, including the mormons, are funding hate against people they don't like, especially gays.

It is clear that in Christian societies people have much more freedom, especially women. This alone cannot be highlighted enough. The governments do not act on behalf of a Church or specifically for religious leaders. That is probably why the founders of the USA tried to separate Church & state. Most people would prefer to live in a western style democracy. You asked me to say which is better for Gays, Christianity or Islam? Well, if I remember correctly, a Muslim theocracy executed two young men by hanging last year for homosexual relations. Name a primarily Christian country where the government did the same.

Ever hear of the Southern Baptists?! They believe women should be bare foot, pregnant and in the kitchen, while being totally subservient to the men in her family. Sound a lot like the muslims you are complaining about.

Let's talk about gays. People, not just gays, are still being murdered simply because some asshole thinks they might be gay. Then when they go to trial, they get to use the "gay panic" defense {aka "Guardsman" or "Portsmouth" defence in the UK} and the jury either totally lets them off, despite there being no evidence to justify the "gay panic" defense or they get a light slap on the wrist. About 4 years ago, there was a case in Michigan where a guy murdered a gay man and used the "gay panic" defense. After the trial, and double jeopardy was applied, a couple of the jurors came forward and admitted that they let the guy off even though they didn't believe him, simply because the victim was gay. They both said because of their christian beliefs, they could never convict a person that killed a homosexual because they were doing what god wanted.

If we talk about black centric nations that wear their religion on their sleeves, it's much, much worse for gays. You seriously need to investigate christian black centric countries to truly understand how bad they are for gays. They use the bible to justify their evil treatment of gays. Jamaica is well known as being the world's most homphobic nation. Last year, a man paid some thugs to beat his ASSUMED gay son to death while he went to the local church and prayed the god wouldn't hate him for producing a gay son. The police did nothing about the murder, in fact, they condoned what the father did.

As I previously said, both the bible and the koran demand that gays be executed. Oddly, most scholars {believers and non believers} say the current bible is full of mistranslation, the vast majority of christians refuse to accept this and demand that everyone still hate gays.

No matter where you live, you can not turn on a TV without hearing several preachers spewing hate against gays, telling everyone how god hates us and that we must be destroyed. According to your own church doctrine, you are going to burn in hell for eternity.

I doubt if we'll discuss anything in the future so I could be nasty here or pious and wish you peace and I can't really do either one. It is just kind of sad and unfortunate that I've typed so much for you to ignore or twist and then try to lay all the blame at my feet.

If I "ignored" something, it was because you wouldn't properly respond to what I said, so I was trying to keep you on track.

raphjd

Let's not forget that it was the christians that committed genocide against the muslims in Bosnia.

Spintendo

@fancydude:

one alleged this link (which said it was Pew research) was bogus -so I went to to the actual Pew website…...

Pew is actually a great think-tank, they do a lot of fascinating stuff there.

Fancydude you say that youre not biased towards Christianity and I believe that you believe that to be true. And while its pretty well known that people don't always 'speak their minds', it is suspected that people don't always 'know their minds'. Finding out about those possible divisions can be kinda fun and completely fascinating…. so I was wondering if you might be interested in taking this test, its called an implicit association test, from Project Implicit which is out at Harvard (so you can be sure it's not some silly online test).

hxxps://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

if your interested in seeing how it works, and taking the test online, go to that website and click on "demonstration." It will then present a long list, go ahead and choose the one marked "Religion IAT". It asks some questions to get a baseline and then consists of reacting to words that appear on the screen. Theres actually a lot of IATs that help to reveal biases in people, it can be pretty interesting, and understanding those divergences between what we think we know and what we really know is what these researchers out at Harvard are trying to do. The demonstration tests are just that- demonstrations, with no data collected, except for the "featured" tests, which change weekly I believe.

raphjd

hXXp://minnesotaindependent.com/58393/gop-linked-punk-rock-ministry-says-executing-gays-is-moral

Here's a US christian ministry that says executing gays is moral. Of course they are just saying what the bible {as currently written} says.

fancydude

Spin - I don't think I ever said I was unbiased towards Christianity - being raised that way, and more or less still practicing (as in the love your neighbor stuff ; not the: I've committed mortal sin if I miss Mass here and there - or Gay sex!) - I don't know if that is even possible. I try to be objective about other religions. I've already said and demonstrated in the previous exchanges that Christianity isn't without its flaws. If I argued that as a practical matter, it is more forgiving and more compatible with democracy than often unyielding theocracies - for that I will not apologize. Where would you like to live- the USA (or most of Europe?) or Iraq? Esp. as a Gay male?

I did try to take the test and it got stuck and wouldn't move when I was identifying the "good" and "bad" words. Obviously I didn't get to the "interpretation" part since I didn't complete the modules, but I would have had a lot more faith in it if had asked my age & religion, location etc. AFTER it interpreted the raw test data! I may try it again after rebooting my computer. I would like to know, if there is a general way to answer this without prejudicing my taking the test: What does it prove to ask if I'm warm or cold about a specific religion? I know very little of actual practice of Buddhism nor do I know any Buddhists personally. I think this would be true in reverse for many of them. I live in a primarily Christian area of the USA although we are getting more Muslims all the time, though the language and cultural barriers prevent much interaction. I have tried to interact: I have offered all my Muslim neighbors home canned fruits and things, speak to their children, give them books (which they politely accept and say thankyou, + return the washed jars) but I have received nothing in return. Nor do the adults who can speak english initiate any conversations. However, I only just thought of this now, so as to the test itself I was trying to answer how I felt about the religion in general, not about specific individuals. My French teacher in high school mentioned that people in other countries think the streets are paved with gold in America, refugees romanticize about their country of origin since it was often a forceable relocation; "forgetting about the horrors" of what they left behind….I take all this into consideration when thinking about specific people. Also my Muslim neighbors are from Bangladesh and Pakistan as were the students in my ESL classes at the library. I found them extremely eager to learn and courteous. They would stand up everytime the teacher (me) entered the room! Thanks for the interesting information.

As to the Pew research - if you go back to where I first linked, (that Poll that was supposedly legit from Pew research posted at Investor's Business Daily) it seemed to be bogus. I wasn't suggesting for a minute that Pew research as an organization is bogus, just that particular poll. A commenter suggested that it was presented as Pew but actually wasn't. But then when I got into what I presume is actual data of what Muslims think about government, etc. on Pew Globals' site ; gender separation at work etc. I guess it might be legit after all. Am I expressing myself clearly?

notquiteme

somehow i think the religious talks get a bit out of hand nowadays.