FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Secular Community Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Reload this Page The Christian Forums Outcast Thread
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 02:40 PM
Search

 
Page 68 of 181 « First 18586667 68 697078118168 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-08-2003, 08:14 PM   #671
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Let Buzz Stay!!
Posts: 5,567
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Badfish
Two gay babies is a nice avatar for a Christian site.
Two little pink diapered girl babies holding hands is hardly what I would call threatening.

She's had that avatar since the beginning. Why make an issue of it now?
Annabel Lee is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:22 PM   #672
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Death Valley, CA
Posts: 1,738
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by pz
So...I take it the good Reverend Fred Phelps would be considered a "true Christian?"? And that homophobia, bigotry, and some modicum of hatred are required to qualify as a "true Christian?"?

You guys make me so glad to be an atheist.
The path to heaven is narrow.

Your perceptions are way off, you cannot stereotype people on the basis of a few who call themselves a certain title.
Badfish is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:24 PM   #673
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: some parellel unviverse
Posts: 303
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Badfish
The path to heaven is narrow.

Your perceptions are way off, you cannot stereotype people on the basis of a few who call themselves a certain title.
Stereotyping?

Pot: Hey Kettle

Kettle: Yea?

Pot: You're Black
Lasher is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:27 PM   #674
pz
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Morris, MN
Posts: 3,341
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Annabel Lee
Two little pink diapered girl babies holding hands is hardly what I would call threatening.

She's had that avatar since the beginning. Why make an issue of it now?
OK, now I'm curious...can someone post this heinous eidolon of depraved evil here? I'd kind of like to see what kind of picture would make a True Christian throw a hissy fit.
pz is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:30 PM   #675
pz
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Morris, MN
Posts: 3,341
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Badfish
The path to heaven is narrow.

Your perceptions are way off, you cannot stereotype people on the basis of a few who call themselves a certain title.
You didn't answer the questions. Is Phelps a True Christian, do you think? Is hatred or fear of homosexuality a prerequisite to being a True Christian?
pz is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:35 PM   #676
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: some parellel unviverse
Posts: 303
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by pz
OK, now I'm curious...can someone post this heinous eidolon of depraved evil here? I'd kind of like to see what kind of picture would make a True Christian throw a hissy fit.

Lasher is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:38 PM   #677
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: FL USA
Posts: 213
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Badfish
Now while this is up for debate if you want to bring in Hebrew and other sources and challenge the bibles professed infallibility, well then as you know these subjects are permitted to flourish in apologetics.
If that is REALLY true, then why was my message listing the contradictions, absurdities and error in science and math censored? If I am NOT allowed to prove my case, then there IS NO DISCUSSION.

Quote:
Now, the rules are the rules, and you guys and gals know that some of you push the rules to their boundries, but signing up at a Christian Forums with the rules written in plain english that is the choice you made and agreed to, and as such are subject to adhering to those rules and subject to the decisions of the mods.

I mean what is so hard about that?
The rules are designed such that non-believers are certain to run afoul of them. They can be used at any time to ham-string our arguments. For instance take the 'no blasphemy" rule. Just asserting that one has no belief in God can be construed as "blasphemy". Any criticism of the Bible or God can also be construed as "blasphemy". The only reason "blasphemy" was invented was to have an excuse to silence the opposition.

Your God is a very "small" one if He (or you for that matter) frets over my opinion of His alleged handiwork or Himself (I don't think that "He" existed to create them in the first place). Mark Twain said it very well with "Blasphemy? No, it is not blasphemy. If God is as vast as that, He is above blasphemy; if He is as little as that, He is beneath it". IMO a god(s?) capable of creating this universe that would get his/her/its/their "feelings hurt" of be threatened by what one naked primate said on a small planet circling an average star, sequestered in a remote area of an unremarkable galaxy in the backwater of the universe is not worth considering.

Blasphemy was invented as an excuse to censor criticism and to murder dissenters (death proscribed for "blasphemy" in the Bible). By making it a "crime" to "take the Lord's name in vain", one can also cover up the fact that nothing happens when the name of the "divine" is invoked. I mean, does the "blasphemer/profaner" get "zapped" (some inexplicable calamity befalls the "criminal") or does some "voice" boom from on high to "SHUT THE HELL UP"!? NO!! The only thing that such a "criminal" has to fear is harm that comes at the hands of believers who seem to think that the Creator needs "help" in defending His "good name".

In short, there should be no such rule, IF you really want to have any kind of discussion because the term "blasphemy" can be invoked at any time if the discussion goes against your POV. From what I have observed on CF, that is exactly how this rule is used, as a weapon to silence the opposition when the argument goes against you. Just claim "Christian-bashing blasphemy"-instant end of discussion....

Quote:
Before the Apolgetics forum was introduced there I don't remember but I think atheists were not allowed there (I am not sure that was a long time ago), so opening up several forums for open discussion between atheists and Christians and everything in between, was a pretty good gesture for CF,
It looks to me like the staff there is doing their best to so muzzle the opposition by banning and/or censoring the oppositions posts as to return it back to the "Christians only" days. I am totally convinced that that is the objective of the majority of the mods. Either that or keep the supposedly "Open Discussion" one in name only (allow non-believers, but shut them up fast when they prove inconvenient)

Quote:
I am not defending any actions taken against any of you at CF, because that is not my job, and I really never see this stuff, but if it's happening then there is probably a decent reason and it is up to a human mod to decide whether it is acceptable or not.
As long as people are allowed to engage in such wholesale censorship there is no such thing as an "Open Discussion". I find the fact that censorhship and intimidation are used so blatantly by the mods show just what a hypocrisy calling such discussions "open" is. They are anything BUT!

Quote:
Christianity and CF attracts a lot of young kids, many of them Christian, and it should be a prime concern for CF (considering their quite obvious mission statement) to ensure that these kids are not being subjected to anything that is seen as too blasphemous or too derrogatory to God or flaming and false teaching to people.
Translation of the above CF Newspeak doublespeak===>shut down any arguments that might cause them to question their "faith". What if they "deconvert!!?? What is worse, what if they PUBLICALLY deconvert in our Christian Forum!!! (Zounds!)

Quote:
The format is simple it is to unite Christians, and as a good will gesture and in the interest of pleasing All people an open section was added to accomodate the non Christians who like to interact and question Christianity, I think that is fairly liberal considering other Fundamental based Christian boards I have seen out there.
Question Christianity??? Now that is a laugh. If that were really true, one wouldn't see all the high-handed censorship. As for the board's "Open" policy, I expect that to change, not to far in the distant future.

Quote:
If you find contradictions in the bible and need to discuss them, then bring it to the appropriate forum, and it will be discussed in depth, as you are well aware of.
WHERE??? I though the Apologetics Forum only '"tolerated" that (excuse me while I sweep up the pieces of my shattered irony meter here!). If we are allowed to do so, then WHY was my post censored that simply gave websites listing said contradictions? Can you answer me that?
mfaber is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:40 PM   #678
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: FL USA
Posts: 213
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Lasher
Good Grief!!! And that got you BANNED???!!!

Hey BadFish™! What's so "wrong" with this avatar?
mfaber is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:41 PM   #679
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Wa
Posts: 127
Default
Kristie is offline  
Old 04-08-2003, 08:42 PM   #680
pz
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Morris, MN
Posts: 3,341
Default
Quote:
Originally posted by Lasher
AAAAAAAAAAHHH!! MY EYES! THEY BURN!

Yeah, I can see why someone would find that so offensive and horrible that they would ban someone over it. True Christians must have very sensitive constitutions.
pz is offline  
 
Page 68 of 181 « First 18586667 68 697078118168 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:51 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.