Reply to: Thought for the Day

[d000hg]

remember, the Born Again(TM) have a monopoly on truth because even in the face of rational argument and overwhelming evidence, their interpretation of a bunch of old documents (and you can be damned sure it is a subjective interpretation even though they like to claim it's "literal") tells them that some magic sky pixie has decreed that they're completely right and you're all damned to hell anyway.

in any real argument a fundamentalist will use their faith as an intellectual "get out of jail free" card, and for this reason it's rarely worth arguing with them. (why do i do it? why?) so balls to 'em, i say. d000hg's beliefs are about as relevant as witch-ducking and phrenology.

Remember, the atheists who claim to follow logic and scientific thought are frequently the ones who start throwing derogatory, inflammatory accusations around. A bit like your post... much easier to insult people and laugh at beliefs they don't actually have - I note you say my beliefs are stupid without any idea what I actually believe.

[lambrini_socialist]

There's still a big following of getting women very wet before feeling their bumps.

superb

[Bob Dalek]

remember, the Born Again(TM) have a monopoly on truth because even in the face of rational argument and overwhelming evidence, their interpretation of a bunch of old documents (and you can be damned sure it is a subjective interpretation even though they like to claim it's "literal") tells them that some magic sky pixie has decreed that they're completely right and you're all damned to hell anyway.

in any real argument a fundamentalist will use their faith as an intellectual "get out of jail free" card, and for this reason it's rarely worth arguing with them. (why do i do it? why?) so balls to 'em, i say. d000hg's beliefs are about as relevant as witch-ducking and phrenology.

There's still a big following of getting women very wet before feeling their bumps.

[lambrini_socialist]

remember, the Born Again(TM) have a monopoly on truth because even in the face of rational argument and overwhelming evidence, their interpretation of a bunch of old documents (and you can be damned sure it is a subjective interpretation even though they like to claim it's "literal") tells them that some magic sky pixie has decreed that they're completely right and you're all damned to hell anyway.

in any real argument a fundamentalist will use their faith as an intellectual "get out of jail free" card, and for this reason it's rarely worth arguing with them. (why do i do it? why?) so balls to 'em, i say. d000hg's beliefs are about as relevant as witch-ducking and phrenology.

[Bob Dalek]

I don't agree, but it's a good quote

I do and yes it is.

[d000hg]

As Douglas Adams once so wittily and unusually wrote of the Bible, it is missing an original first page which reads: "Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental".

I don't agree, but it's a good quote

[Bob Dalek]

As Douglas Adams once so wittily and unusually wrote of the Bible, it is missing an original first page which reads: "Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental".

[d000hg]

Consciously?

Well, I should have said I could poke fun at the modern church and some people who claim to act in the name of it, rather than Christianity itself.

[lambrini_socialist]

CofE is notoriously wishy-washy, would rather be PC than offend anyone, regardless of the fact that Christianity does make strong statements on the subject of sexuality/marriage, which are going to be offensive to some - you can't hold a strong set of principles without upsetting somebody.

Just for the record, my understanding is that the bible basically says sex should only happen in a marriage, and marriage is only between a man and a woman... sex between 2 men is therefore categorised similarly to sex between an unmarried couple.

There's also a clear distinction between being gay, and having sex with another person of the same sex... Christianity doesn't say gays are evil, it just says it is wrong to have gay sex. This absolutely puts gay people in a predicament since if you are gay and agree with all this you are logically destined to try and live a life of chastity... but anyone who denounces gays in the name of the Church is just plain wrong...

i refer you to my previous comments about biblically-sanctioned eye-gouging, execution by stoning and incest. and all that claptrap about a six-day creation too.

you say "wishy washy", i say "incredulous".

[FSM with Cheddar]

Just for the record, my understanding is that the bible basically says sex should only happen in a marriage, and marriage is only between a man and a woman... sex between 2 men is therefore categorised similarly to sex between an unmarried couple.

There's also a clear distinction between being gay, and having sex with another person of the same sex... Christianity doesn't say gays are evil, it just says it is wrong to have gay sex. This absolutely puts gay people in a predicament since if you are gay and agree with all this you are logically destined to try and live a life of chastity... but anyone who denounces gays in the name of the Church is just plain wrong...

As we are now going down the theological route, it is probably a good idea to clarify a few points:
At the time the bible was written, there was no such concept as being gay, or living in a gay relationship. What there was, was the abuse of young men (usually children) by male adults. This is what the bible was targeting.

There was a saying during the Roman times that went something along the lines of
“A wife is to look after the children and to kiss. A young boy is for providing pleasure”.

Note: I am not an apologist. It also says in the Leviticus that all creatures of the sea that don’t have scales are an abomination and should be despised. So dim prawns are off the menu.

From a straight atheist

[d000hg]

oh dear god no.

FWIW, this is not representative of the C of E that i'm familiar with. i know quite a few priests (including gay ones) and none of them hold views anything like this. i guess this guy is the anglican equivalent of Abu Hamza. what an embarassment, i hope he's binned forthwith...

CofE is notoriously wishy-washy, would rather be PC than offend anyone, regardless of the fact that Christianity does make strong statements on the subject of sexuality/marriage, which are going to be offensive to some - you can't hold a strong set of principles without upsetting somebody.

Just for the record, my understanding is that the bible basically says sex should only happen in a marriage, and marriage is only between a man and a woman... sex between 2 men is therefore categorised similarly to sex between an unmarried couple.

There's also a clear distinction between being gay, and having sex with another person of the same sex... Christianity doesn't say gays are evil, it just says it is wrong to have gay sex. This absolutely puts gay people in a predicament since if you are gay and agree with all this you are logically destined to try and live a life of chastity... but anyone who denounces gays in the name of the Church is just plain wrong...

[FSM with Cheddar]

Perhaps we could extend the new system to a kind of sheep dip, that all members of the church must go through.

I think we are in danger of missing out all the people that actually listen to the tulip.

They need to be identified.

[TimberWolf]

Aren't most priest/vicars/nuns gay?

[lambrini_socialist]

Which book of the bible does this quote come from?

i think it's Barrymore 11:5

[BrilloPad]

Reverend Peter Mullen wrote: "Let us make it obligatory for homosexuals to have their backsides tattooed with the slogan: SODOMY CAN SERIOUSLY DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH and their chins with: FELLATIO KILLS."

CHURCH of England vicars are to have the phrase 'full of tulip' stamped on their foreheads, it was confirmed last night.
As vicars called for the labelling of gays, the Church agreed to a reciprocal arrangement which will see every Anglican priest branded with indelible ink.
A Church spokesman said: "We arrived at 'full of tulip' after an extensive public consultation.

Which book of the bible does this quote come from?