40 years ago today

All the shit that doesn't fit!
If it doesn't go into the other forums, stick it in here.
A general free for all
User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20706
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Guinevere wrote:
Mon Feb 08, 2021 4:18 am
So being gay is akin to being a thief, or a liar, or a dishonest gossip? No, that’s not true, that’s not God, and that’s not science. That’s simply judgment wrapped up in a cross. And it’s flat out wrong.
I did not choose moral categories - so why did you? I chose human categories, all of which exist.

Do you likewise claim that my statement asserts that a person with one leg is akin to a thief, a liar or a gossip - other than in the fact that none of us is perfect? I was not aware that lacking a leg was a moral impediment (though it does make auditioning for Tarzan somewhat iffy).

Why didn't you berate me for suggesting that being gay is akin to being bald or having auburn hair? Or that being me is akin to those things too? Is that a terrible judgement that you judge is unacceptable?

My point (you finger waggers) is that all these things are a natural result of birth. Or perhaps nurture, choice, and mental confusion contribute in some areas (such as supporting Arsenal), whether named or not named.

Big RR (pace Andy) is arguing that God created people that way (or not, depending on whether there is God or god or gods and we can't be sure of any of that). I'm arguing that he didn't - Adam (who he) and Eve (who she) did.

I agree Big RR that the Roman church does try to get around the difficulty you raise by asserting that somehow Mary was born without sin (the Immaculate Conception), an utterly unbiblical idea. Even I would join the snorts of derision over that one. I disagree that there is any inherent unfairness in refusing to be best pals with people who are so clearly deficient unless something changes. And we are all clearly deficient when the standard is God. If the standard is lib, many of us are not doing so badly. :nana

PS and then there's the facile childish response that I shan't bother with :fu
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by Gob »

MajGenl.Meade wrote:
Mon Feb 08, 2021 4:47 pm
I'm arguing that he didn't - Adam (who he) and Eve (who she) did.
So the old testament is truth?
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

Big RR
Posts: 14050
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by Big RR »

Please Meade, point out the "facile childish response" and point out why it deserves the emoji you gave it.

And FWIW, I am not arguing god created people that way (nor did I at any time argue that god does not exist); indeed, quite the opposite I am saying god gave us a choice and did not saddle us with damnation because of Adam (or whatever) But I guess it is hard to arge against that, so you misquote me and then have the argument you would rather have.

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5419
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

MajGenl.Meade wrote:
Mon Feb 08, 2021 4:47 pm

Do you likewise claim that my statement asserts that a person with one leg is akin to a thief, a liar or a gossip - other than in the fact that none of us is perfect? I was not aware that lacking a leg was a moral impediment (though it does make auditioning for Tarzan somewhat iffy).
And just in case there is anyone on the planet who does not know what the good major general is talking about, I offer this:


User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20706
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Big RR wrote:
Mon Feb 08, 2021 6:30 pm
Please Meade, point out the "facile childish response" and point out why it deserves the emoji you gave it.
Nailed it. It's bigotry, prejudice, and "ooh I don't like sex like that, it's icky what them people do" given the seal of approval by an invisible pink unicorn.
:ok
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20706
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Big RR wrote:
Mon Feb 08, 2021 6:30 pm
And FWIW, I am not arguing god created people that way (nor did I at any time argue that god does not exist); indeed, quite the opposite I am saying god gave us a choice and did not saddle us with damnation because of Adam (or whatever) But I guess it is hard to argue against that, so you misquote me and then have the argument you would rather have.
I think your misapprehension about "facile and childish" informed your response above. I did not "misquote" you - there is no quote of any kind, right or wrong. Quotes look like
this
You argued
the very essence of original sin is that we are created sinful (or inherited it from Adam, which is pretty much the same)
That supports what Andy wrote. I disagree that you accurately describe "original sin". To the contrary, God created humankind as "good" with natural freedom to love their creator without compulsion. The real or figurative Adam and Eve chose to reject God instead. The result is that their children and all mankind inherit a nature that is not "good" but is "sinful".

As to "(or not, depending on whether there is God or god or gods and we can't be sure of any of that)" that was not a quote from anyone but me. It was something I though you'd recognize as (a) allowing the possibility that God did not create humans sinful and (b) acknowledging that many people including you have various positions on the activity or indeed existence of the Biblical deity. And I also had a smile, remembering your years-gone denial that God had any attributes (or perhaps you meant that we could not usefully identify them or his character- not sure).

Other than this, I acknowledged the problem you raised and responded. It is not "unfair" that God refuses to dwell with sin. It is not "unfair" that we inherit our nature from our parents and are warped by it. It is fair that he provides the escape from the effects of the fall, freely to all. Some Christians believe we can choose to accept or deny it - others believe it's all predestined. None of us truly understand it.

Thanks Andy - knew one of two people would get it. Gob: the Old Testament is a mixture of myth, poetry, songs, historical essays, prophetic statements, speculation and goodness knows what else. If you agree that there's a world of difference between fact and truth, then yes, it is truth about a people and their interaction with the Creator.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by Gob »

I didn't think my reply was facile or childish, it was humorous, but apt.

I do believe that any "Christian" dislike of gays, and gay sex, is not "god given" but based on PERSONAL prejudice, bigotry, dislike of the mechanics of gay sex, and that the god, and his alleged "bible" which they proclaim to follow, is being used as justification for their condemnation.

Christians show extreme hang ups and prejudice around sex and sexual matters.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20706
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

OK Gob, but "dislike" of anyone was not what the discussion was about. The remark was, however, consistent with the obsession of some to drag in morality, dislike and sex where no prior context existed, then to imply or even state that someone else did it first.

Bible means "book" (an incorrect singular derived from the Greek "biblia" meaning books) so I guess that papery thing with pages and covers is perhaps more than allegedly a book. You probably meant allegedly holy bible (biblia sacra). But I don't like to assume things. (See above)

And I agree that dislike of people solely based on a perceived common characteristic is neither Christian nor Biblical, whether that is applied to all homosexuals, all Japanese, all women, all men or all Christians, etc. You are probably right about many people's attitudes, regardless of their faith in Christ or lack of it. I understand many non-Christians have issues with sexual perversion (so-called) while many Christians do not. Please note the "so-called".
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8545
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by Sue U »

GAH!

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by Gob »

Thanks Meade.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

Burning Petard
Posts: 4050
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Gay Pride Month 2021

Post by Burning Petard »

I just came from an 'images' site on google. The search was for 'gay pride.' Most of the stuff I saw was not surprising

But -- A Kazoo? what is their connection? Am I secretly gay because the kazoo is the only musical instrument I can play?

snailgate

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 13927
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Gay Pride Month 2021

Post by Joe Guy »

Burning Petard wrote:
Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:50 pm
.....But -- A Kazoo? what is their connection? Am I secretly gay because the kazoo is the only musical instrument I can play?
I suspect that gay men can play a kazoo with their butts. If I'm correct, you might be exempt from being secretly gay.

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16540
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: 40 years ago today

Post by Scooter »

Gay Pride Kazoo
Image
Don't just show your colors, play them too... A 3-D printed homemade kazoo decorated with paint markers for Gay Pride. The Kazoo membrane is made from recycled plastic bags. For every kazoo, $3 will be donated to the Trevor Project.
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

Post Reply