Bono's Comments this morning... - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-04-2006, 09:25 PM   #76
Refugee
 
fly so high!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Andrews NSW Australia
Posts: 1,835
Local Time: 07:39 AM
Please explain!
__________________

__________________
fly so high! is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 05:34 AM   #77
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: at pavel's
Posts: 11,603
Local Time: 10:39 PM
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.
__________________

__________________
U2Man is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 06:11 AM   #78
Refugee
 
fly so high!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Andrews NSW Australia
Posts: 1,835
Local Time: 07:39 AM
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!!!
__________________
fly so high! is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 09:05 AM   #79
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 10:39 PM
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.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 10:33 AM   #80
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy


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).
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 10:48 AM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
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.

__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 01:34 PM   #82
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Legistlative advocay IS personal action, Doug.
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 04:02 PM   #83
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 09:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling
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?
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 04:26 PM   #84
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy
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?
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 04:34 PM   #85
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 09:39 PM
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.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 04:56 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 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.
#

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.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 05:39 PM   #87
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 09:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
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?

Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
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.

Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
This is not an issue depending on which party you´re in.
That's for sure. Who said it was?
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 07:15 PM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy
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.

Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy
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?
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 09:25 PM   #89
Blue Crack Overdose
Get me off the internetz!
 
Carek1230's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: wishing I was somewhere else....
Posts: 114,587
Local Time: 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy
"Religion often gets in the way of God."

Bono.
Indeed!
__________________
Carek1230 is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 10:31 PM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BrownEyedBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Posts: 3,510
Local Time: 03:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 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.
How do you plan to have a "discussion" forum without disagreements?
__________________

__________________
BrownEyedBoy is offline  
 

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 04:39 PM.


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