Proposition 8 discussion continued - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-08-2008, 06:07 PM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i've made the comparison that white protestant evangelicals really aren't in a position to mock the Mormons since may of us think their religion is pretty much bullshit as well. i think much of Mormonism is kind of wack-a-doodle, but i really don't care.
Funny thing is, so have I. When there were discussions here about whether Mormonism is Christianity, I spoke up about how pathetic it was for us to be evaluating each others' religiosity.

Honestly, I think the LDS Church is a racket, much like Hitchens thinks so. But I don't really care. People want to believe in what I consider to be utter nonsense - go right ahead. I don't hold a high opinion of the Church I was raised in either.

The thing is though, whereas before, I didn't care at all, now I think the LDS Church isn't just a racket, but a bigoted organization with a bigoted agenda which has hurt people I know and love. And I don't think their motivations are pure either; the fact it is a highly political and self-serving bigotry is even more pathetic. So, good job LDS Church, you've now alienated people who never cared enough about you to hold you in judgment. And the bullies that you are trying to impress still think that you are bloody lunatics who are not Christian, and who insult their Christ every day with your lying quasi-Bible and heretic non-prophet thief. They don't think any better of you today than they did a year ago, but now you have the added bonus of having everyone on the left fed up with you.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 06:14 PM   #17
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:25 AM
^ Mittens 2012!

what is true is that, while i'll never hold individual Mormons accountable, i absolutely now view their church as a threat to my existence.

that will not be forgotten.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 06:26 PM   #18
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
You've been relegated to irrelevance along with Canada and Connecticut.

Ouch!
__________________
Dreadsox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 06:34 PM   #19
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:25 PM
I think this is a decent approach, competition in the marketplace

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 06:50 PM   #20
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 06:25 AM
I've always been ambivalent to the LDS, kinda barking loons but pretty harmless really. Now they're down there with Falwell/Religious right, Radical Islam and Scientology, dangerous and to be wary of. I've stopped my youngest hanging out with the kid across the street which was tough, he's 11 years old but was encouraging my son not to go hang out with their neighbors because they weren't supporting yes on 8. These people are raised on bigotry in their church family.
__________________
toscano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 06:54 PM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:25 PM
Child abuse aside the issue of tax exemption should be dealt with, as groups with agendas churches should be allowed to run political campaigns, only they can't do it while enjoying perks from the state.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 07:19 PM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
This is the classic dividing 'special interest' politics of the left.
Gay marriage is NOT a special interest. To call the issue of gay marriage a special interest is to completely miss the point and minimize the issue. This is about 'equality for all'. That is not a special interest, it is one of THE interests that this country was founded on. Were those who founded the country on that principle then hypocrites for specifying that african-americans were only 3/5 a person in the constitution? Absolutely. Do we look back on that as heinous? Yes, we do. We view it as a total contradiction of that principle of equality that this country was supposedly founded on. This principle should never be contradicted, but adhered to and strived for always. To think otherwise is to allow the erosion of one of the core tenets our founding fathers built this nation on.

Preserving that tenet, sir, is not a special interest. Preserving that tenet - the tenet of equality - is by definition, everybody's interest.
__________________
namkcuR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 07:29 PM   #23
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 07:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
Preserving that tenet, sir,
You watch a lot of Keith Olbermann, I can tell.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 08:06 PM   #24
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
But this cuts both ways.

Understandably this has been an immensely disappointing vote for the gay community and I repeat that I very much regret the result of this vote, but a few weeks ago claims that the 'n word' was used at a Palin rally was in various blogs and forums cited as evidence that Republican conservatives are racists.

To me, that is a double standard.
I think the point was that gays shouldn't have to be responsible for the radical actions of a very small portion of their community.

And many people believe, as was noted, that Palin was serving up statements that would encourage racist comments she knew would be coming.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 08:59 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
Gay marriage is NOT a special interest. To call the issue of gay marriage a special interest is to completely miss the point and minimize the issue. This is about 'equality for all'.
But it is a special interest if it means that straight white people didn't come up with it first.

Now when it comes to straight white people telling minorities what to do, well that's God's will.
__________________
melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2008, 09:37 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
Child abuse aside the issue of tax exemption should be dealt with, as groups with agendas churches should be allowed to run political campaigns, only they can't do it while enjoying perks from the state.
I agree with you 100% but what they have done is armed themselves with lawyers and every single move they've made has been carefully scrutinized and approved to come as close as possible to crossing the line without actually crossing it. They are not so stupid as to lose their tax exempt status.

There can of course be a fair discussion of whether granting religious institutions tax exempt status is good policy at all.
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2008, 01:51 AM   #27
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 55,049
Local Time: 12:25 AM
I'm assuming Prop 8 is denying same-sex marriage? Only in California or all America? Is it legal or not at the moment?

I'd have no idea where I stand on this issue; for one I suppose the very essence of marriage is the love between a man and a woman, and a lot of dictionaries state it thus, and I think the traditionalists would want it kept that way. But in the end, really, it's just a couple of signatures, is it not? And I mean what would change majorly? If you're in a committed relationship, a marriage is really just a few signatures recognising the relationship. It's just an extra step. To deny gays that right, when you look at it simply, does seem a bit preposterous to me.

__________________
cobl04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2008, 03:07 AM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 11:25 PM
could there not be some way to rewrite the code, so to speak - to tax-exempt certain activities, but not whole institutions, or types of institution, on principle?
__________________
Kieran McConville is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2008, 03:19 AM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,952
Local Time: 11:25 PM
Mind you, I've always felt that the man and a woman thing is an essence that only exists because our ancestors were horrid scumbags who got a sad kick out of asserting their authority by punishing minorities and the physically inferior (blacks, jews, homos, women, children, commies). Our society is based upon this intolerance. We're constantly unravelling the damage done by our ancestors. Prop 8 is a re-ravelling.

The movers and shakers of times past, without a shread of human decency, usually white Christian men in western societies like Oz, England and the US. They're the pricks who made the rules, and it was just common practice to deny gays and be all elitist and deny them anything and abuse the crap out of them. It would've been back when they decided the essence of a union between man and a woman. Marriage was probably designed to force women to bear children, cook for their hubby, clean around the house, while the man went out working and getting drunk and indecent with his workmates at the end of the week, while his wife worked and worked and worked for no pay at home, and was probably physically abused when the drunk bastard got home. Thankfully, marriage has evolved to mean greater things like love and companionship and desire.....rather than just being the social convenience it once was. Anyway, at the same time, the invention of marriage was probably another means of being mean to gays.

Just my reckoning....
__________________
intedomine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2008, 04:09 AM   #30
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
I agree with you 100% but what they have done is armed themselves with lawyers and every single move they've made has been carefully scrutinized and approved to come as close as possible to crossing the line without actually crossing it. They are not so stupid as to lose their tax exempt status.

There can of course be a fair discussion of whether granting religious institutions tax exempt status is good policy at all.
Given that the religious so often insist that atheism is a religion perhaps I should put myself forward for some tax exemption.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com