Substantially = write a book after looking and reading and thinking through the threads and everything? In other words, you still want me to write a lot?
toldailytopic: Judge not! Some say Christians shouldn't judge, what say you?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
People who roll into TOL and other places and launch numerous threads without answering people who engage them and their topic substantively quickly find few takers or a the sort of attention that is frequently not at all what they had in mind...unless the point is to live under a bridge, so to speak.
You don't strike me as stupid, so your comment above aren't a credible reading of AMR and I think you know that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv
I was worried about you rTb; with the attack on Prince Charles the other night by Brit hooligans,
I would have used the word "anarchist's" instead of "vigilante's". Vigilante's avenge a criminal act. Anarchy, which starts off with a chaotic act of disorder which lacks organization, eventually leads to a totalitarian state (people will demand that order be restored, at any price).
From what I've read, the riots were over the government wanting to TRIPLE college tuition so that lost revenues could be restored.
I guess "free" healthcare isn't so "free" after all rTb.
Quote:
I thought that you had been detained by those unarmed London Bobbies and made to sit at a chalkboard writing "I have been a very bad boy" over and over.
I'm surprised by that comment rTb. Based on the posts that I've read of yours, I didn't think that you had any.
Now that we've gotten past the "foreplay", let's get to the heart of the matter:
Quote:
So tell us what it is about Christian doctrine that you looooooooathe so much?
Point noted, homosexuality is your "thing". I know others whose "thing" is pornography, abortion, prostitution, and recreational drug use; you know, things that are a sign of "the times".
So tell me rTb, if we allow everyone to do their own "thing" (such as the rioters in London did the other night), what kind of world would we live in? Chaotic?
Your non-judgmental, tolerant opinion is duly noted.
Are all standards of personal behavior equal? According to your opinion they are. Come on, at least give me the "consensual agreement" line, where all conduct is equal as long as the act between two parties is agreed upon.
Let me check the current laws regarding abortion, homosexuality, pornography and (in some states) recreational drug use. When you legislate your Godless beliefs, they "change" the Christian belief system that our country (the US) was founded upon.
Thank you (again) for being "non-judgmental".
You mean love thy neighbor, as long as they agree with your agenda, right?
Quote:
Let me guess: not being able to do your own "thing" without condemnation?
Yet you've spent the entire post condemning me and my fellow conservative Christians.
Quote:
You do realize that atheists and Christians have a different definition of "freedom" don't you?
So doing your own "thing" should be the standard for a society?
Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv
I was worried about you rTb; with the attack on Prince Charles the other night by Brit hooligans,
I would have used the word "anarchist's" instead of "vigilante's". Vigilante's avenge a criminal act. Anarchy, which starts off with a chaotic act of disorder which lacks organization, eventually leads to a totalitarian state (people will demand that order be restored, at any price).
From what I've read, the riots were over the government wanting to TRIPLE college tuition so that lost revenues could be restored.
I guess "free" healthcare isn't so "free" after all rTb.
Quote:
I thought that you had been detained by those unarmed London Bobbies and made to sit at a chalkboard writing "I have been a very bad boy" over and over.
I'm surprised by that comment rTb. Based on the posts that I've read of yours, I didn't think that you had any.
Now that we've gotten past the "foreplay", let's get to the heart of the matter:
Quote:
So tell us what it is about Christian doctrine that you looooooooathe so much?
Point noted, homosexuality is your "thing". I know others whose "thing" is pornography, abortion, prostitution, and recreational drug use; you know, things that are a sign of "the times".
So tell me rTb, if we allow everyone to do their own "thing" (such as the rioters in London did the other night), what kind of world would we live in? Chaotic?
Your non-judgmental, tolerant opinion is duly noted.
Are all standards of personal behavior equal? According to your opinion they are. Come on, at least give me the "consensual agreement" line, where all conduct is equal as long as the act between two parties is agreed upon.
Let me check the current laws regarding abortion, homosexuality, pornography and (in some states) recreational drug use. When you legislate your Godless beliefs, they "change" the Christian belief system that our country (the US) was founded upon.
Thank you (again) for being "non-judgmental".
You mean love thy neighbor, as long as they agree with your agenda, right?
Quote:
Let me guess: not being able to do your own "thing" without condemnation?
Yet you've spent the entire post condemning me and my fellow conservative Christians.
Quote:
You do realize that atheists and Christians have a different definition of "freedom" don't you?
So doing your own "thing" should be the standard for a society?
Last edited:
Who's not stupid?
You aren't. But doing this sort of thing will marginalize you to the point where it hardly matters.
That should fairly exhaust my obligation as a relatively genial optimist. :e4e:
We are at least alike because we are both optimistic, at least.
ragTagblues
New member
No I will stick with vigilantes on this one, a couple of thousand students protesting does not represent anarchy and neither would protesting as a whole.
But either way the behaviour is dislikeable.
Yes in essence the tuition fees are being tripled; but if you read a little more into it you'll find it has very little to do with raising money. Under this new system it would actually mean that most students would never even pay back a third of that amount as either they won't break the wage threshold or that the repayments are so low that after 30 years they are written off.
As I said it does not effect me, so I'm hardly concerned.
It was never free to begin with, we all pay our National Insurance so that we have a health care system that provides for all regardless of wealth and background etc.
What are you 14 years old? I don't know about you but those kind of insults are for kids at school!
I tell you I would be happy to debate each of those points with you in one on one debate, supervised by our peers on ToL, no stupid jokes and meaningless links, the facts as you see them. I will refute each one as I see fit. I'm making the offer zoo22 made, a one on one on this issue . . . I'll PM Knight if you agree and get the ball rolling?
Of course there would be; but that situation is not the case and never will be. Since when has it been about wanting to do our own thing? Jeez man Christianity or your God doesn't stop us from doing our own thing anyway. The laws generally do not stop us from doing our own thing . . you know going to work, coming back having a few beers with the lads, cook dinner with the Mrs and fall asleep watching X Factor. . .
As I'm writing this at my office you will have to excuse me for it's brevity, although my colleague keeps peering over my shoulder and laughs . . . . . . I think she likes you!
Never said I was non-judgemental, as for tolerant? I given you a damn sight more time then you deserve.
Since these are all things I and everybody else on here know to be facts I do not see it as being judgemental, just stating the obvious. On the obvious I will judge you and I judge you to be a worthless little man.
I damn well hope they are, treating people with respect and dignity is a beat we can all dance to. First harm no one then do as you please.
It's part of being an adult, the ability to consent to an action; but since your parents are clearly still making decisions for you you wouldn't know. Just because something is consensual does not make it a standard for good behaviour or good morales. However if you consent to an action and you are not pleased with the results then that is your own fault.
I am against abortion, I understand why some people may consider it an option; but I think better can be found. I would not condemn someone for doing it; but neither would I praise them.
The reason it is not illegal is that it allows people to practice a lifestyle they are born to, a life style that is no more destructive then a heterosexual lifestyle. Freedom of speech and human rights etc . . .
Very often porn stars are adept business people who simply are doing what they have a talent for in order to provide for their family . . I wouldn't do it myself; but hey no harm is directly caused by pornography. Those who allow it to themselves or there family harm of course should be shot.
As for recreational drug use? You cannot stop drug use, you never will be able to, I say make it legal and tax the hell out of it. I know many recreational drug users and that certainly isn't the first thing I notice about them. How about the 54 year old bloke waking at 5am every morning to run his thriving construction firm, just trying to provide himself and his family a good life, he is a heroin addict and a valued friend.
Well at least you guys are catching up with the times! Good riddance I say.
Hey you aren't being sarcastic are you?
No not really, I would never go an cause intentional harm to anyone simply because they were different in beliefs . . . but can we say the same for you? I have many friends who have completely different beliefs to me; but I respect them because of their attitude and they communicate their beliefs. In fact there are a few on this forum, you'd do well to pay attention to them.
That is me personally condemning you, my point was why I do not believe in your God, it is not a matter of heaven and hell; but a matter of the three points I listed out.
Yes I condemn you and others like you.
When did I say this?
ASC you have the freedom to think whatever the hell you like because no one can stop you; but you do not have the freedom to force you beliefs on other people no one does.
First harm no one, then do as you please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv
I would have used the word "anarchist's" instead of "vigilante's". Vigilante's avenge a criminal act. Anarchy, which starts off with a chaotic act of disorder which lacks organization, eventually leads to a totalitarian state (people will demand that order be restored, at any price).
Then you are misusing the word. The students weren't avenging a criminal act. Regarding protests: there is a difference between peaceful demonstration and rioting, the latter qualifies as anarchy due to the violence used by a disorganized group.
Quote:
From what I've read, the riots were over the government wanting to TRIPLE college tuition so that lost revenues could be restored.
I keep forgetting, like most atheists, it's all about you.
Quote:
I guess "free" healthcare isn't so "free" after all rTb.
So someone has to pay for things that others don't, or pay more, based on what the government thinks they should pay. I guess the students will be finding out that there is a cost for everything.
Quote:
I'm surprised by that comment rTb. Based on the posts that I've read of yours, I didn't think that you had any.
When are you atheists going to learn that insulting is a two way street?
Quote:
Point noted, homosexuality is your "thing". I know others whose "thing" is pornography, abortion, prostitution, and recreational drug use; you know, things that are a sign of "the times".
Zoo22, a worthless excuse for a human being if there ever was one, changed the topic from whether or not the President of the United States is eligible to hold that office (he isn't, daddy was a Kenyan citizen and the SCOTUS will be reviewing that soon), to my pastor.
I'll glady debate you on any topic, but if you start libelling family, men of God, or anything else that you can dig up on me or people I associate with, I'll do the same to you as I did with zoophilia: I won't give the topic credibility by answering it.
Quote:
So tell me rTb, if we allow everyone to do their own "thing" (such as the rioters in London did the other night), what kind of world would we live in? Chaotic?
If only all atheists were like you, you know, marrying women, having a few beers instead of hardcore drugs, fall asleep and let us Christians rule instead of atheists.
In other words: Need I post the atheist agenda again and show the amount of harm that they've done to western civilization?
What's not to like?
Quote:
Your non-judgmental, tolerant opinion is duly noted.
So atheists judge too (and who says you don't learn something new everyday?). How about being tolerant and letting us Christians legislate Christian morality once again?
At least give me credit for my height, I'm 6'3".
Quote:
Are all standards of personal behavior equal? According to your opinion they are. Come on, at least give me the "consensual agreement" line, where all conduct is equal as long as the act between two parties is agreed upon.
So your standard of morality is whether or not harm is done to someone? Would that harm be only to another party, or to oneself?
So now adults come into the scenario. Consensual, no harm, and adults. Am I getting your standard of morality correct?
Quote:
Let me check the current laws regarding abortion
That's right, as long as it doesn't affect YOU.
Quote:
Homosexuality, pornography and recreational drug use.
I won't reply to your response, as it appears that these topics will be discussed in the near future?
Quote:
When you legislate your Godless beliefs, they "change" the Christian belief system that our country (the US) was founded upon.
That's the problem with atheists, they just want to say "Good riddance to decency."
Quote:
Thank you (again) for being "non-judgmental".
If you claim that there is a homosexual gene, the least I can claim is that there is a sarcastic gene as well.
Quote:
So doing your own "thing" should be the standard for a society?
Yet you defend Hate Crime laws, which amount to nothing more than "thought crimes". Isn't that a tad bit hypocritical on your part rTb?
You forgot as long as consent and adults are involved.
I look forward to future debates.
Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv
I would have used the word "anarchist's" instead of "vigilante's". Vigilante's avenge a criminal act. Anarchy, which starts off with a chaotic act of disorder which lacks organization, eventually leads to a totalitarian state (people will demand that order be restored, at any price).
Then you are misusing the word. The students weren't avenging a criminal act. Regarding protests: there is a difference between peaceful demonstration and rioting, the latter qualifies as anarchy due to the violence used by a disorganized group.
Quote:
From what I've read, the riots were over the government wanting to TRIPLE college tuition so that lost revenues could be restored.
I keep forgetting, like most atheists, it's all about you.
Quote:
I guess "free" healthcare isn't so "free" after all rTb.
So someone has to pay for things that others don't, or pay more, based on what the government thinks they should pay. I guess the students will be finding out that there is a cost for everything.
Quote:
I'm surprised by that comment rTb. Based on the posts that I've read of yours, I didn't think that you had any.
When are you atheists going to learn that insulting is a two way street?
Quote:
Point noted, homosexuality is your "thing". I know others whose "thing" is pornography, abortion, prostitution, and recreational drug use; you know, things that are a sign of "the times".
Zoo22, a worthless excuse for a human being if there ever was one, changed the topic from whether or not the President of the United States is eligible to hold that office (he isn't, daddy was a Kenyan citizen and the SCOTUS will be reviewing that soon), to my pastor.
I'll glady debate you on any topic, but if you start libelling family, men of God, or anything else that you can dig up on me or people I associate with, I'll do the same to you as I did with zoophilia: I won't give the topic credibility by answering it.
Quote:
So tell me rTb, if we allow everyone to do their own "thing" (such as the rioters in London did the other night), what kind of world would we live in? Chaotic?
If only all atheists were like you, you know, marrying women, having a few beers instead of hardcore drugs, fall asleep and let us Christians rule instead of atheists.
In other words: Need I post the atheist agenda again and show the amount of harm that they've done to western civilization?
What's not to like?
Quote:
Your non-judgmental, tolerant opinion is duly noted.
So atheists judge too (and who says you don't learn something new everyday?). How about being tolerant and letting us Christians legislate Christian morality once again?
At least give me credit for my height, I'm 6'3".
Quote:
Are all standards of personal behavior equal? According to your opinion they are. Come on, at least give me the "consensual agreement" line, where all conduct is equal as long as the act between two parties is agreed upon.
So your standard of morality is whether or not harm is done to someone? Would that harm be only to another party, or to oneself?
So now adults come into the scenario. Consensual, no harm, and adults. Am I getting your standard of morality correct?
Quote:
Let me check the current laws regarding abortion
That's right, as long as it doesn't affect YOU.
Quote:
Homosexuality, pornography and recreational drug use.
I won't reply to your response, as it appears that these topics will be discussed in the near future?
Quote:
When you legislate your Godless beliefs, they "change" the Christian belief system that our country (the US) was founded upon.
That's the problem with atheists, they just want to say "Good riddance to decency."
Quote:
Thank you (again) for being "non-judgmental".
If you claim that there is a homosexual gene, the least I can claim is that there is a sarcastic gene as well.
Quote:
So doing your own "thing" should be the standard for a society?
Yet you defend Hate Crime laws, which amount to nothing more than "thought crimes". Isn't that a tad bit hypocritical on your part rTb?
You forgot as long as consent and adults are involved.
I look forward to future debates.
You're just completely untethered. It's remarkable. Any thread you arrive in should be designated a handicapped zone.
:rotfl: Said the king of defamatory and unsupportable character assassination.
Odd then, your reach and grasp I mean. I'd have thought about 2'2"...on a stool. Speaking of stools, any new arguments?
lain:
How do we teach our children about judging?
Not an agrument, just a question. Is that avatar of you or the "new" Robert Redford.
You're both a couple of libs, but I can understand why Redford would get a facelift, having that weathered look about him.
One more thing Bobby: kindly keep the airwaves clear, I'm waiting for a somewhat intelligent response from rTb, something you've never been able to achieve during our so-called "debates".
But kids don't know how to judge or not.
Me. I'm not nearly as craggy, being appreciably younger...we both have great hair thought.
Well, no. He is. I'm not, though I admire his work in promoting independent film
D). You wouldn't recognize it any more than my Collie could tell Beethoven's 9th from the Trail Blazer theme.
It's darn near endearing that you think of these posts as debates... I tend to refer to them as batting practice.
Me. I'm not nearly as craggy, being appreciably younger...we both have great hair thought.
Take care of the hair counselor, it's the only good thing you have going for you.
Well, no. He is. I'm not, though I admire his work in promoting independent film
I bet you do counselor:
Actor, director and producer Robert Redford invited the family of Ernesto "Che" Guevara to a private Sunday screening of his company's new movie about the revolutionary's early years: "The Motorcycle Diaries."
"I've come to present the movie I produced about Che," Redford said in brief comments to reporters outside a Havana theater. "I'm very happy to be here."
"The Motorcycle Diaries," directed by Brazilian Walter Salles, and featuring Mexican actor Gael Garcia Bernal in the lead role, tells of Guevara's travels across Latin America before joining the revolution of Cuban leader Fidel Castro.
Guevara's widow, Aleida March, and several of their children were seen at the screening of the movie.
Among others seen entering the theater for the screening were Ramiro Valdes, a former commander in Cuba's revolution more than 40 years ago; and Alfredo Guevara, who directs the annual New Latin American Cinema Festival.
Havana was a second stop for "The Motorcycle Diaries," which received much praise and a standing ovation Saturday, at the Sundance Film Festival that Redford hosts annually in Park City, Utah.
The portrait of the Argentine-born rebel as a young man is intended to provide insights in the early stirrings of his social conscience.
The film isn't the first time that Redford has immersed himself in the atmosphere and issues of Cuba during the revolution that put Fidel Castro in power in 1959.
In 1990, Redford starred in Sydney Pollack's "Havana" as a gambler who rolls into town in 1958 hoping to make a pot of money, falls in love, and is changed by the events he witnesses as the revolution explodes.
Redford also visited Cuba for real, in 1988, at which time - according to the New York Daily News - there were reports that he had gone scuba-diving with Castro.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/26/entertainment/main595713.shtml
ragTagblues
New member
No I think you are giving those students to much credit. A vigilante is someone who take the law into there own hands, my original point is that if we currently have violent protests, that I disapprove of then the next step is vigilante groups. Of course it would have to go quite some way before it ever got to that stage. No one should be able to take the law into their own hands.
Violent protesting is stupid as were those students.
Well I can speak for 60million other people if you wish; but I would be here a long time. The issue does not concern me, because yes you got it, it has no effect on my life whatsoever and what most haven't realized it doesn't have much of an effect on theirs either. Students will be no worse of now with a this new system then they were with the old, there still going to be poor and still going to have to work hard.
The amount of National Insurance you pay is related to what you earn, everybody who has a job has to pay it. It is a system I totally agree with and do not resent my NI payments in the slightest.
Everybody should have the right to access healthcare, if I have to pay a miserable £50 a month to see that it happens then I am happy to.
It wasn't the insult that bothered me, it was more to do with the calibre of your weapon . . . or if you don't get that the quality of your insult. Even for you ASC that was pretty lame.
Blah, blah, blah. I'm going to save myself the time and just say read what TH said.
Ok fine, a debate where we simply discuss the facts, now that's some good thinking you have done there and should give yourself a pat on the back. You started this kind of insult slinging debate ASC, I seem to remember my very first debate with you started with an insult from you, questioning my sexuality . . . Damn good of you that!
So yes I will agree to that we will debate only the subject matter and we will do it with civility (that means nicely ASC in case you were wondering).
Ha it's funny really I remember working with a man, my job at the time was supporting people with serious drug addictions to get back on their feet, and this one bloke was very intelligent. He had been injecting heroin for about 25 years and how he was still alive is shot of miraculous; but me and him used to have coffee 3times a week. He would walk into the cafe and put his coat on the back of his chair and take the bible out of his huge coat pocket and place it on the table. He would often speak about God and how he had been a God fearing man all his life, before he started taking drugs in fact. Many people I worked with there believed in a God or your God, many didn't care, many were atheists.
Most atheists I know of do not do hardcore drugs; but yeah I hear you can't get into the big Atheists Agenda meetings in less you bring a bag of Methadrone along.
Please do.
I suppose you can't account for taste; but then my colleague is a 'dirty practising homosexual' so maybe she saw your feminine side shining through.
Because your Christian morality is wrong on a few issues, it hasn't got with the times.
So your height unlike your IQ is slightly above average . . you must feel real special.
I think it is implied that you include yourself in that..
In fact self harming has been medically proven to be a way of managing stress levels and staving off such things as mental break downs and some levels of depression.
I'll wait for you to actually make a point on this one.
Pretty much. Don't get me wrong I have lots of issues with things that don't affect me, like you for instance.
That's your choice.
Yes, that's what we want to do.
Well at least that makes you two dimensional.
As I said ASC you are free to think as you wish. What I refer to is services being denied to homosexuals, the abuse that you your self claimed to have caused to homosexuals etc.
yes indeed, I shall PM Knight and we can set up a One on One, with a topic of his choosing. Maybe after the new year when I will actually have more free time to do so?
Morality isn't based on people's ill-view of them.
Nah, I've got dimples too.
I do.
Re: film.
Right. He also made Charlotte's Web, The Natural, and Jeremiah Johnson...:think: You think maybe there's a chance he's a cartoon animal? Or a professional baseball player? Or a mountain man?
Well, he made Downhill Racer and he does ski, so there's just no telling.
lain:In any event, I said I admire his work to promote independent film (see: Sundance). I didn't say we agree on everything politically...actually, I noted that we don't.
But then, what would your posts be without a complicated framework of delusional supposition?
Mostly articles and personal pronouns, I'm guessing.
Nah, I've got dimples too.
I'd bet mine are cuter <>
Re: film.
Right. He also made Charlotte's Web, The Natural, and Jeremiah Johnson...:think: You think maybe there's a chance he's a cartoon animal? Or a professional baseball player? Or a mountain man?
Well, he made Downhill Racer and he does ski, so there's just no telling.
And I'd venture to say that each and everyone of those movies are in comrade Fidel's personal video library.
The problem with you counselor is this: you overlook the EVIL that certain organizations and people have done by sugarcoating it with random acts of good.
Robert Redford's Sundance Film Festival wrapped up this past Saturday [February 2005] with an orgy of nihilism – otherwise known as its awards banquet. The winning films glorified the usual assortment of left wing, anti-American, sexually bizarre themes.
The Grand Jury Prize for American Documentary went to Eugene Jarecki's "Why We Fight," a film that claims U.S. foreign policy since World War II has been formed not by the need for self-defense, but by an out-of-control military-industrial complex's desire for profit. The content of this film is a far cry from the original "Why We Fight," which was an inspiring series of documentaries directed by Frank Capra during World War II. Capra, a Republican, made his films in order to boost the morale of American troops in the struggle against the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese.
The other Sundance awards went to such films as "Hustle & Flow," a drama about a pimp who wants to become a rapper (sold to Paramount for $16 million – the biggest deal of the festival), and "The Squid and the Whale," a "comedy" in which the "humorous" elements consist of a teacher propositioning sex from an underage student, while his obscenity-spouting young son smears various bodily fluids on the walls of his elementary school.
The pedophilia, rape, incest and underage sex featured in a number of the Sundance films has already elicited much media comment – but is anyone really surprised that the left glories in depicting such behavior? The only revelation now is that liberals still consider themselves oppressed – even as their R-rated propaganda freely travels around the globe.
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/redsford.htm
Yet like the ACLU, you will continue to defend Leatherface, being the good "Christian" that you are.
I suppose it's mathematically possible, but only just.
lain:Nothing ventured, nothing gained. And I'd say you hit on both parts, after a fashion.
The problem with you is that you aren't particularly rational. You just gave a pretty good illustration of that by suggesting that I "overlook" a thing but then attempt to hide it...
lain: One of these things doesn't work with the other. Another problem with you is that you confuse the support of speech with the support of the kind of speech being protected. That's why you have to attempt a marginalization the numerous advancements by the ACLU of positions and groups you'd favor. Your position, a thin and desperate attempt to cobble together an agenda at odds with the very institutions they can be shown to protect, isn't true and it isn't reasoned. Or, to put it more succinctly: it's you all over.
That's awfully anti-competitive of you...commie.
The ACLU defended Redford? :squint: From what? As for me, if you want to conflate my appreciation for his investment in the arts, especially independent film, with some sort of defensive posture...
What you don't know about that, as I've previously noted, would fill a Bible.
oly:Th defends the freedom of speech for all citizens. This, oh obtuse one, is quite different from espousing the words of any given citizen.
Surely, by reading his posts, you can see that he is a rational, educated, christian man with a good heart?
- Status