Bono's Comments this morning...

[verte76]

someone else should get in there and pick up where I left off

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1570266/posts?q=1&&page=139#139

Well, it's not like it's going to change anyone's mind. I mean, if some of them are asking if he used to be married to Cher, they don't know who the hell he is, let alone what he's trying to do.

 

[AliEnvy]

Of the many things repeated in Scripture, helping the poor is certainly one of them.

So which is the bigger sin from God's perspective do you think, making excuses for ignoring the plight of the poor or allowing gay people to marry in a secular service?

 

[hiphop]

Well, to be honest...I believe that the ownership of any forum has the right to do with it as they please.

Let´s flush the free speech ideals then, shall we?

 

[Dreadsox]

Start a thread, let's discuss it....I am disappointed that in this forum, in a speech that deserves decent discussion, we have people turning it into this.

 

[cjboog]

If I owned this forum...I would split the thread because it is not anywhere neat the initial posting.

The people on freerepublic.com were talking about Bono's comments this morning (yesterday morning now) and we were talking about their response to his comments this morning. So we aren't talking directly about his comments, we are talking about people's response to them. It's all about the same subject.

 

[AliEnvy]

Start a thread, let's discuss it....I am disappointed that in this forum, in a speech that deserves decent discussion, we have people turning it into this.

By all means, feel free to get this thread back on track to decent discussion.

What are your thoughts on Bono's speech?

 

[hiphop]

Start a thread, let's discuss it....I am disappointed that in this forum, in a speech that deserves decent discussion, we have people turning it into this.

And I´m disappointed that cjboog is getting censored by some conservative scumbags who have nothing better to do than tout their horn when it comes do defend the free speech of tele-evangelists like Robertson.

Is there anything to be discussed about Bono´s speech? We´ve heard it before, its a good speech, most of us agree, and still it´s more words, words, words, without enough action.

 

[financeguy]

Freerepublic is not the only political discussion site to have a policy of that type.

It's left wing counterpart 'democraticunderground' has a similar policy, censoring or banning those who don't subscribe to broadly progressive views.

I browse both sites on occasion, though I am not registered on either.

Neither site claims to be a free for all discussion site - they are clearly aimed at people who already have their minds made up, although naturally there are different strands of opinion on both sites.

But if you registered on DU and consistently made posts agreeing with Bush's policies - you would get banned.

 

[Dreadsox]

By all means, feel free to get this thread back on track to decent discussion.

What are your thoughts on Bono's speech?

Well, it will be the opening for the class I am teaching on Monday night at my church.

I felt proud that he was touching on all three faiths. Other than the tour, I do not believe I have seen him speak about the three faiths publically, and in particular in front of the President.

Many have not heard his words before. We are in discussions right now about doing something with the middle school children in our church around U2's music, and starting them on a ministry for Africa.

His words re energized me to action.

 

[hiphop]

Freerepublic is not the only political discussion site to have a policy of that type.

But if you registered on DU and consistently made posts agreeing with Bush's policies - you would get banned.

Then same goes for DU. Thats not democratic at all. I understand there are other rules in the internet, but I don´t see why both of these sites have to censor.

A conservative pro-Schwarzenegger site recently published one of my comments re: not granting clemency. Why can´t they all be the same free-speech loving (except when it comes to Nazis, of course)?

xcuse the derail. just another point.

 

[AliEnvy]

Originally posted by Dreadsox Well, it will be the opening for the class I am teaching on Monday night at my church.

I felt proud that he was touching on all three faiths. Other than the tour, I do not believe I have seen him speak about the three faiths publically, and in particular in front of the President.

Many have not heard his words before. We are in discussions right now about doing something with the middle school children in our church around U2's music, and starting them on a ministry for Africa.

His words re energized me to action.

Get the kids writing letters to Congress too

I have a feeling it touched more people in more ways than they know how to articulate...it must be still sinking in for some, others choose not to listen...but I have this feeling, maybe it's just optimistic afterglow, but it feels like a turning point.

It would be very cool to know how many sermons address it this coming Sunday. It would be nice to know it will reach well beyond the U2 community.

 

[doubleU]

I found his words to be completely moving, I'm still not sold that this is the best way to tackle the problem, but it made me think.

 

[fly so high!]

It's like Nazi Germany! You don't agree you are finished!

I just checked it out, i can't believe it.
Look at all your deleted posts,you did a great job, but it was falling on deaf ears,what absolute morons,goes to show there are really stupid people in this world, their comments on everything is worth a pinch of piss, someone should invent a virus and shut the bastards down!

 

[fly so high!]

But, getting back on track!
Yes, I loved the way Bono spoke, it was beautifully put!
And if the speech did not move anyone into action,well......you can't put brains in statues!

 

[U2Man]

I just checked it out, i can't believe it.
Look at all your deleted posts,you did a great job, but it was falling on deaf ears,what absolute morons,goes to show there are really stupid people in this world, their comments on everything is worth a pinch of piss, someone should invent a virus and shut the bastards down!

Well, considering your views here, it seems like you could fit in well among them.

 

[fly so high!]

Please explain!

 

[U2Man]

Well, it's just that your comments in that post were just as polemic, aggressive and hateful as what you see on that other site.

 

[fly so high!]

Yeah i know.....I'm just PMS'n at the moment, i'm going to avoid political and religious threads until i'm sane again!!!

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I posted the Free Republic links so I'll explain myself:

Those links are directly related to the discussion of the speech as it's that demographic that Bono has to win over, and that demographic that Bush will never ever upset. That site is huge and powerful among conservatives. If you ever see a change in opinions of Bono and his cause swing across there, you'll know he's getting close. To me, it's kind of the last wall he has to smash to. It's very much "Crumbs From Your Table" to me, in there.

Free Republic is a site I swing through regularly, just because it is actually an excellent source for news generally. 30 seconds after something happens, just search for it there and you'll get a variety of articles from around the world. There are other places that provide that service formally, but that site is generally very quick to it and the layout gives you no B.S like many news sites.

But then, of course, below every article are the posts, and they are more often than not absolutely sickening, no matter the subject. I'd love to have a dollar for every time someone on there suggests that the US should just nuke a country, or someone just happily slanders an entire country, race or religion with a naive opinion straight out of 1931. Scary place.

They do also have a right to play tough on varying opinions, as do the DU. You see how heated and off track it gets just in FYM here. If both those sites opened things up for all out debate right across all opinions, the discussions would never get anywhere. Each thread would just become one long running battle, and I guess both conservatives and progressives should have their own 'home' for discussion without spending their whole time fighting the opposition.

Bono's speech was actually awesome, and from what I gathered in those Free Republic threads, no-one has actually posted a link to the whole speech yet? Perhaps some of those posters simply need to read it. There's not a lot you can argue with when it comes to the idea or the spirit of the idea. I understand the questioning over asking for money, and where that money is headed, but to write the whole thing off, and Bono, without reading the speech is ludicrous.

 

[nbcrusader]

So which is the bigger sin from God's perspective do you think, making excuses for ignoring the plight of the poor or allowing gay people to marry in a secular service?

You've mixed a number of issues together in your statement.

First, I don't believe in a rank of sin. It is not supported by Scripture. I understand it is popular, however (even my Catholic high school teacher had sexual sins broken down by "light," "medium," "heavy," and "mortal" sins).

Second, we are called to help the poor. I'm not sure I could please God by simply writing a letter to my Congressional representative. Personal action is what Christ speaks to. I look at Dreadsox's actions and see direct, meaningful impact on the situation. To maky ono's comments personal, I wonder how many of us would be willing to set aside 1% of gross income for the world's poor.

Finally, gay people marrying in a secular service is not a sin. It is not even a theological question. But our secular society still prohibits it (with plenty of support from non-religious people).

 

[hiphop]

Second, we are called to help the poor. I'm not sure I could please God by simply writing a letter to my Congressional representative. Personal action is what Christ speaks to.

 

[Sherry Darling]

Legistlative advocay IS personal action, Doug.

 

[AliEnvy]

Legistlative advocay IS personal action, Doug.

You took the words right out of my mouth lol.

But you were right, nb, it would be better not to frame the issue around what is wrong (sin) but rather what is right (how to please God).

Jesus never speaks of homosexuality but goes on and on and on about how serving Him is about doing right by the poor. So why is it that the most vocal, organized and political religious conservatives focus their political might and influence (in part through letter campaigns...) on oppression of perceived sexual impropriety and not on the poor (at home as well as abroad)?

How is that serving and pleasing God?

 

[hiphop]

So why is it that the most vocal, organized and political religious conservatives focus their political might and influence (in part through letter campaigns...) on oppression of perceived sexual impropriety and not on the poor (at home as well as abroad)?

How is that serving and pleasing God?

I share your critique, but what about the democrats then?

Are you sure that the most vocal, organized and political democrats focus their political might and influence on the poor?

 

[AliEnvy]

Of course they don't. Since I'm not (yet) talking about democrats I haven't said anything to suggest they do.

But since it's generally religious conservatives who explain their actions as serving God, I am genuinely wondering how they decide their priorities.

 

[hiphop]

Of course they don't. Since I'm not (yet) talking about democrats I haven't said anything to suggest they do.

But since it's generally religious conservatives who explain their actions as serving God, I am genuinely wondering how they decide their priorities.

#

Of course they don´t?

Well, to me that´s the only thing that matters.

I don´t care who explains whose actions are God serving. The conservatives piss me off when they tout about with their aggressive righteousness, but frankly, I don´t want to waste my time with critisizing how they pat each others backs.

I care more about dealing with poverty, and I hope you do too. So the question that makes sense at this point is: what have the Democrats done to fight poverty in the last two decades? Can the Dems or any other American party afford to make poverty reduction the main goal?

You don´t seriously think Washington and Wall Street agree, do you? This is not an issue depending on which party you´re in. Poverty reduction means changing society.

 

[AliEnvy]

I don´t care who explains whose actions are God serving. The conservatives piss me off when they tout about with their aggressive righteousness, but frankly, I don´t want to waste my time with critisizing how they pat each others backs.

Well frankly, their aggressive righteousness has not only huge legislative impact but enough power to enact real social change, so I DO CARE where their priorities lie...and since they say their priorities are to serve God, how is challenging the modus operandi a waste of time exactly?

So the question that makes sense at this point is: what have the Democrats done to fight poverty in the last two decades?

Huh? With all due respect, I think what makes sense is looking for a way forward on addressing these problems FROM BOTH SIDES. They are both part of the problem, always have been, and should both be addressing the solutions.

This is not an issue depending on which party you´re in.

That's for sure. Who said it was?

 

[hiphop]

how is challenging the modus operandi a waste of time exactly?

I don´t think the modus operandi is challenged at all. I applaud your efforts, and the questions you have asked - why the conservatives focus i.e. on the gay issue instead of fighting poverty - may be important to convince one or the other conservative that the Bush agenda is everything but not motivated by Christian values.

However, this does not change the overall picture. Some powerful conservatives will continue to misuse the Bible for their own political agenda, and while that might be critisized, it will not help one poor person on the street. That´s the point I want to make - be aware that it is important to work on this level, whatever party you favor - convincing people, discussing, writing letters to Congressmen etc. - but the overall picture will not change if society does not move beyond the system.

Huh? With all due respect, I think what makes sense is looking for a way forward on addressing these problems FROM BOTH SIDES. They are both part of the problem, always have been, and should both be addressing the solutions.

We agree on that. But will they address the solutions? If you think they will, why didn´t they already? Probably because they have no interest in doing so?

And if "should be" is too theoretical, if they just don´t address the problem of home-made and global poverty, what can American citizens, the American public, the American society legally do to force them?

 

[Carek1230]

"Religion often gets in the way of God."

Bono.

Indeed!

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Freerepublic is not the only political discussion site to have a policy of that type.

It's left wing counterpart 'democraticunderground' has a similar policy, censoring or banning those who don't subscribe to broadly progressive views.

I browse both sites on occasion, though I am not registered on either.

Neither site claims to be a free for all discussion site - they are clearly aimed at people who already have their minds made up, although naturally there are different strands of opinion on both sites.

But if you registered on DU and consistently made posts agreeing with Bush's policies - you would get banned.

How do you plan to have a "discussion" forum without disagreements?