Anyone who has received their Census form

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

Ultimately you are searching your heart and mind and coming to various conclusions on what you think is right and wrong and giving reasoning and justifications for these feelings. People on the other side of the arguments come to different points of view giving different justification for their feelings.

Not rationally they don't. Huge difference. You cannot, and they cannot give a rational justification as to why it is wrong to be gay. You act as if it is middle ground just because there are people that disagree with reason. Logic is not a popularity contest. Sometimes one side is right and the other is flat out wrong. Demonstrably so.

 

Its interesting how you don't feel that you force your opinion and feelings onto other people in just the same way that certain religious minded people force their views onto people with little sway or moveability. You feel you are ultimately in the right, I guess largely down to your view being in-line with political view of the age.

This is nonsense. I can point to several political views of our age that I disagree with.

 

But you should recognise that you are no more "liberal" or "accepting" as people holding entrenched opposite view points. You are actually being quite fascist and controlling.

How is someone being controlling or fascist by deciding who a child (that has been entrusted to the care of society) should spend their formative years in the care of? Seriously?? You act as if it's everyone's goddamn right to foster a child. Just how much discretion do you think the government should be allowed in deciding such an important matter for an innocent life?

 

Its quite on thing fighting for equal opportunity and rights and quite another demanding certain people are deemed inappropriate to care for children based on a moral opinion alone.

This is no mere moral opinion. It can be rationally argued why it is a bad idea to put a child in the care of homophobic parents. And it has been. Several times on this thread alone.

 

At one time gay people where viewed this way. Thankfully no more and now its gone full circle!

By contrast it cannot be rationally argued why gay parents shouldn't adopt.

 

I personally think there is nothing wrong with being gay for many reasons including quotes from the bible. I am not arrogant enough to think I might be wrong though and I am not fascist enough to force my belief on other people. I can't prove its not immoral, against nature, or just plane wrong, I just feel it isn't.

A ) Noone is forcing any beliefs on people in your example, despite your protestations to the contrary

 

B ) There are those of us who reach their beliefs through Logic and Reason and not sentiments such as "I just feel it isn't". I am proud to be one of those people.

 

This is why I talk about this disguised Liberalism... It isn't liberal to impose your will on other people.

Yet you have yet to give an example of anyone doing that. I'm not saying it hasn't happened. But you seem awfully convinced by this one very poor example of government discretion when it comes to choosing who is or isn't suitable to be foster parents.

Edited March 7, 2011 by PhilStarbucksSilkySkills

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

Just added a random unrelated poll

Edited March 7, 2011 by PhilStarbucksSilkySkills

[oafc0000]

hmmm... your misrepresenting some of the stuff I am saying... either on purpose or by accident...

 

Lets just agree to disagree...

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

hmmm... your misrepresenting some of the stuff I am saying... either on purpose or by accident...

 

Lets just agree to disagree...

You've been quite clear on the stuff you've been saying as far as I can tell. Or was I quoting someone else?

[oafc0000]

You've been quite clear on the stuff you've been saying as far as I can tell. Or was I quoting someone else?

 

The tone of your thread is also getting more and more aggressive...

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

We need Mvoto back - but I'd be tempted to play the big man up front the way things are going.

 

Any chance of including the various Christian denominations? Church of England ain't the same as Roman Catholic y'know. And how about including a box for like "I worship once a week / month / year" etc?

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

The tone of your thread is also getting more and more aggressive...

Must be that aggressive liberalism you were on about.

 

Sorry that you feel I am being aggressive with mere statements and questions. Perhaps we should leave it there

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

The following question will likely demonstrate a degree of ignorance on my part, however I'm enthralled with that.

 

 

How is it that people can have faith in something invented 500 years ago by a randy king?

 

It's a minefield. That's why I'm a Roman Catholic - invented and reinvented by various untraceable punters for the last 2,000 years. That's a proper religion. Preserve the mystery and all that.

 

I'm sure there's an explanation for the existence of Church of England worshippers - you'd have to ask them.

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

We need Mvoto back - but I'd be tempted to play the big man up front the way things are going.

 

Any chance of including the various Christian denominations? Church of England ain't the same as Roman Catholic y'know. And how about including a box for like "I worship once a week / month / year" etc?

 

The poll is a replication of the leading question on the Census form. I wasn't going for more than that with it.

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

It's a minefield. That's why I'm a Roman Catholic - invented and reinvented by various untraceable punters for the last 2,000 years. That's a proper religion. Preserve the mystery and all that.

 

I'm sure there's an explanation for the existence of Church of England worshippers - you'd have to ask them.

Oh dear.

 

Looks like uber-intellectual Christian Theologians have taken over

 

Just kidding.

 

I find all Christian beliefs to be equally and unfathomably strange

Edited March 7, 2011 by PhilStarbucksSilkySkills

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

Finding something unfathomable? Just remember: the fact that you don't get it doesn't mean it's wrong.

Edited March 8, 2011 by 24hoursfromtulsehill

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

Finding something unfathomable? Just remember: the fact that you don't get it doesn't mean it's wrong.

Sure. But until you can show me how it is right, it will remain unfathomable to me.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

Sure. But until you can show me how it is right, it will remain unfathomable to me.

 

Ah bless.

[jimsleftfoot]

I find you really strange (and that's a compliment, normal is boring).

 

I'm looking for clarity: You consider yourself a Christian and thus I assume you believe in Yahweh, the Christian flavour of God? The foundation of this God is the Bible and the people over thousands of years who have manipulated those books define how God is perceived, no?

 

Like I say every time we go down this road you're open about your Christianity and so I'm talking to you about it. I'm happy to answer any counter-questions you have about my beliefs and also equally feel free to say "I don't want to answer that" at any time.

 

Cheers,

 

 

As someone who was brought up a Catholic, finds religion interesting, without being particularly religious, I don’t consider Yahweh to be particularly a Christian God but a Hebrew one. My take on it is that the New Testament is the Christians holy book and the Old Testament is largely a history book of how it got up to that point. This is something which many ‘Christians’ seem to struggle with.

 

I have been preached to by many RE teacher/Church goers that the Ten Commandments were the word of God and how Abraham was great and sung about Yahweh at School, then in the next breath about how Jesus saved us from all this which apparently was so great.

 

Apparently the crux of what Jesus said was that you should treat your neighbour as you should treat yourself i.e be nice, not follow the ten commandments or kill gays,heathens or prostitutes!!! Common sense whether your religious or not.

[HarryBosch]

i've only read some of page one but, what were the "certain policies" in the thread title??

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

i've only read some of page one but, what were the "certain policies" in the thread title??

Read the Guardian article in the link

[Ackey]

As someone who was brought up a Catholic, finds religion interesting, without being particularly religious, I don't consider Yahweh to be particularly a Christian God but a Hebrew one. My take on it is that the New Testament is the Christians holy book and the Old Testament is largely a history book of how it got up to that point. This is something which many 'Christians' seem to struggle with.

 

I have been preached to by many RE teacher/Church goers that the Ten Commandments were the word of God and how Abraham was great and sung about Yahweh at School, then in the next breath about how Jesus saved us from all this which apparently was so great.

 

Apparently the crux of what Jesus said was that you should treat your neighbour as you should treat yourself i.e be nice, not follow the ten commandments or kill gays,heathens or prostitutes!!! Common sense whether your religious or not.

I admit my reading of the Bible is not sufficient to debate the New/Old difference well enough.

 

However the difference, to me, simply highlights the biggest flaw of religiousness - it's subjective. "I don't like the idea of hating Gays, I'll be a different religion."

 

The New Testament follows the Old. It's a reinterpretation to suit the modern needs. Much as British Royals created the CoE to suit their needs.

 

It's, to me, ridiculous to listen to these 'teachings' in any factual context given this "change to suit our needs" mentality. Couple this with my above example of Alien abductions making the "eye witness" accounts meaningless (another example is the Evangelical preachers of America where group delirium has been shown to account for the "miracles" they perform).

 

Given that, I remove the teachings of religion from the equation and look at the evidence for supernatural beings. For which there is none.

 

Thus my conclusion is that religion has no foundation and there is noone in the sky watching me jerk off - weather they think it's immoral or not is thus immaterial - as are they! ZING!

[HarryBosch]

so, they're not telling us either?

 

"Major public policy developments have occurred and resources allocated on the back of these erroneous numbers."

 

ok, what were they?

 

yet more, lazy, leftist journalism lapped up by the unquestioning converted.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

Yup. One of the biggest whooshes ever - even for the Grauniad. You want an example to go with a claim like that. Otherwise it's just bull:censored:.

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

so, they're not telling us either?

 

"Major public policy developments have occurred and resources allocated on the back of these erroneous numbers."

 

ok, what were they?

 

yet more, lazy, leftist journalism lapped up by the unquestioning converted.

Do you have reading trouble Harry? Or are you unquestionably converted to your Dail Mail inspired "leftist" bashing? And why do you find an issue like this to be leftist? What has socialism got to do with it? This is more to do with secularism and social liberalism.

 

It says:

 

They will constitute a basis for policymaking over the coming years. Over the past decade the census data has been repeatedly misused. Its figures have been cited in parliament as evidence that faith is on the increase; that greater public resources should be granted to religious organisations; that the state should fund yet more faith schools. Major public policy developments have occurred and resources allocated on the back of these erroneous numbers.

 

There is also a link in in the Guardian article with further information

[Ackey]

There's more detailed information here: http://www.humanism.org.uk/campaigns/census-2011

 

It's not without flaws and clearly carries bias as it's an opinionated subject.

 

You mock the lack of research without making an effort to do your own?

[HarryBosch]

There's more detailed information here: http://www.humanism.org.uk/campaigns/census-2011

 

It's not without flaws and clearly carries bias as it's an opinionated subject.

 

You mock the lack of research without making an effort to do your own?

 

oh, not that old chestnut.

 

using your logic, should I make the effort to play up front for Latics tonight as I've been mocking their lack of goals?

[PhilStarbucksSilkySkills]

oh, not that old chestnut.

 

using your logic, should I make the effort to play up front for Latics tonight as I've been mocking their lack of goals?

Using your bizarre interpretation of Ackey's logic, the possibilities are limitless.

[Ackey]

oh, not that old chestnut.

 

using your logic, should I make the effort to play up front for Latics tonight as I've been mocking their lack of goals?

That's not comparable and you know it.

[HarryBosch]

Do you have reading trouble Harry? Or are you unquestionably converted to your Dail Mail inspired "leftist" bashing? And why do you find an issue like this to be leftist? What has socialism got to do with it? This is more to do with secularism and social liberalism.

 

It says:

 

 

 

There is also a link in in the Guardian article with further information

 

it still doesn't say anything! 2 "should"s and a "have" but no specifics

 

you're happy with it and, therefore, contriving to see whatever it is you want to see and that's your prerogative

 

as for your Daily Mail dig - grow up & stop pigeon holing.

questioning a lazy, left leaning piece of journalism doesn't automatically make someone a reader of lazy, right leaning journalism

Edited March 8, 2011 by HarryBosch