Ads target campus 'anti-Christian bigotry'

[The Laughing Man]

Ads target campus 'anti-Christian bigotry' (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32060)


The ads assert that students may have been treated unfairly if their school does one of the following:

* Dictates leadership standards, including requiring that leadership positions be open to students who don't believe in your group's mission;

* Restricts where or when your group can meet or engage in expressive activities, but places no such limitations on other groups that, for instance, advocate radical feminism or abortion;

* Enforces a speech code that limits you or your group's right to speak disapprovingly of extramarital sexual, homosexual, or other behaviors;

* Restricts how or where your group can advertise, or censors the ads' content but places no such requirements on other student groups' ads;

* Mandates "diversity training" that attempts to force you to affirm behavior or viewpoints that violate your faith or conscience;

* Has one set of rules for Christian groups applying for access to the student fee funding pool and other rules for secular student organizations.

[Pilgrim]

IN a country of free speech it seems that the only speech that ain't free is your local univerities Christian fellowhip's speech.

[lordsnooty]

The world's worst censors cry foul when they're censored. Irony of ironies.

Paul

[The Laughing Man]

Today @ 10:03 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69413#post69413)
lordsnooty:

The world's worst censors cry foul when they're censored. Irony of ironies.

"World's worst censors?" You are either ignorant or a liar. I honestly don't know how you can make such an accusation with any credibility. Tell you what, why don't you go live in China, North Korea, Iran or some a few near- or far-east countries for a while and come to realize how good things here are. You have no idea what censorship truly is.

[Pilgrim]

hear hear

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 04:23 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69446#post69446)
Jinx72:
Tell you what, why don't you go live in China, North Korea, Iran or some a few near- or far-east countries for a while and come to realize how good things here are.

Things here are fine. But that's because fundamentalist Christians are a minority group.

If fundamentalists were in control, then the western world would would be a living hell. North Korea would have it's work cut out to keep up.

Paul

[Pilgrim]

Oh, I understand, as long as the group is a minority it's ok to silence them. Now I understand how it works.

[lordsnooty]

I didn't say anything of the kind. I simply meant that if fundamentalists were in the majority, anything even remotely liberal would be supressed.

Paul

[Rubia Warren]

:idea: Now there's an idea.....

[The Laughing Man]

Today @ 10:35 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69468#post69468)
lordsnooty:

Things here are fine. But that's because fundamentalist Christians are a minority group.

So? They are a "minority group" in those other countries as well because people with attitudes like your's are either the majority or they wield all the power.


If fundamentalists were in control, then the western world would would be a living hell.

:rofl:


North Korea would have it's work cut out to keep up.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Do you honestly believe that making absurd, unprovable, bigotted assertions like this helps your credibility?

[The Laughing Man]

Today @ 11:35 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69544#post69544)
lordsnooty:

I didn't say anything of the kind. I simply meant that if fundamentalists were in the majority, anything even remotely liberal would be supressed.

Considering what liberalism has brought us in the past few years (kids who can't read, write or know what "is" means but know how to fist their sexual partners, the AIDS epidemic, rampant drug use, hate and bigotry of "fundy" Christians, etc.), would that be such a bad thing?

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 05:56 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69582#post69582)
Jinx72:
...in those other countries as well because people with attitudes like your's are either the majority or they wield all the power.

I see, so I'm a fascist now?


Do you honestly believe that making absurd, unprovable, bigotted assertions like this helps your credibility?

Let's see how absurd and unprovable my 'assertions' are, shall we?

If fundamentalists were in control, education would undoubtedly suffer. Religion would be taught as science. American science students would be unemployable anywhere else in the world. American industry would suffer.

Sex-ed would go down the pan. If you think that teenagers are having too much sex now, I dread to think what your reaction would be if fundamentalists wrote the rules.

Abortion would doubtless be banned, leading to bungled back-street abortions and poverty. Single mothers would probably not get any extra help from the extremist government.

Censorship of ideas that you don't like would obviously be widespread. This has been proven time and time again by history.

You've indicated that you would not allow gays to speak out in case they infected children (or others) with their dreaded gayness, so they'd be a repressed group.

Once the power had gotten to the heads of the government, it'd turn out just like any other theocracy in world history. Dogma would be enforced by law.

Fundamentalists are amongst the most intolerant of all people on earth, with the possible exception of some Muslim groups. If saying this means I'm being intolerant of you, so be it. I don't need to tolerate ignorance or prejudice.

And incidentally, if you stopped acting like such a mean-spirited ass, you'd find that people would act a little more politely towards you.

Paul

[The Laughing Man]

Today @ 12:10 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69605#post69605)
lordsnooty:

I see, so I'm a fascist now?

:ahem: Did I say that? Nope. You must be "paraphrasing" again. :rofl: What I did say was that both you and those who rule oppressive countries have a similar attitude. What attitude is that? In the context I was using, I meant the hateful attitude you blatantly display towards Christians - particularly "fundies."


Let's see how absurd and unprovable my 'assertions' are, shall we?

None of the fits of fantasy that followed proved your assertions or made them any less absurd.

[Epoetker]

It would help if Monsignor Snoot would describe which particular fundies he's talking about. George W. Bush owes his election to strong support from evangelical Christians (when y'all gonna thank us for some of the benefits of that farsighted decision, huh?) but quite a few of the lunatic fringe, like Fred Phelps, are as big on hating America as hating gays. Don't believe me?

www.godhatesamerica.com

As is Pat Buchanan, etc. George W. Bush has been comparatively one of the most conservative fundies we've ever had in office, and in a choice among the religious hard-liners today, it's quite likely that he would STILL win against those like Buchanan, or even Pat Robertson.

And let's note that the independent, religious, censorious Pilgrims and Puritans of Massachusetts Bay had far better economies and far better relations with their neighboring Indians than the government-supported, mostly secularized, free-wheeling Cavaliers in the Virginia Jamestown colony, which had a death rate at around %90 from sickness, Indian attacks they provoked themselves, and general despair brought on by the fact that they had little sense of purpose when they found out that there was no gold to dig.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Moderator Note - Okay guys. It is understood and well documented that Snooty thinks certain Christians are hateful bigotted evil religionists and likewise that certain Christians here feel that Snooty is hateful and bigotted and paranoid etc...... I am not even going to get into the various justifications that either point of view may have. The labels, irrespective of truth or support have ceased to be useful, have become disruptive, and are merely driving other posters away from this thread.... The respective positions are known... please tone down the labels and the derrogatory insinuative comparisons. Notice, I am not saying that they are never appropriate, just that this thread was turning ugly quickly. Thank you.


Epoetker, I am not referring to your post which crossed mine in the ether. Your challenge to Snooty was fine. I also was not referring to anyone's post in toto, just some selected turns of phrase....

[Epoetker]

Thanks DD. Did I ever get a warning for my tone vis a vis Vorkosigan? ( Say those last four words five times fast.)

[Dee Dee Warren]

Hey Ep, not that that I remember... :smile:

[Dee Dee Warren]

Now Snooty, personally, your accusations and rhetoric I believe have more than earned you many of the designations flung about, I just believe they have ceased to be useful for discourse. Your diatribe against Christians I found to be disgusting.


Censorship of ideas that you don't like would obviously be widespread. This has been proven time and time again by history.


Like you would advocate of our views? I see.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 07:03 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69686#post69686)
Dee Dee Warren:

Now Snooty, personally, your accusations and rhetoric I believe have more than earned you many of the designations flung about

That's OK. I know you're about as far-removed from being an impartial witness as it is possible to be.

I didn't expect you to moderate impartially, and you haven't let me down.


Your diatribe against Christians I found to be disgusting.

I find many of your views to be a disgrace to all of humanity, but I usually try not to be that blunt about it.

Interesting how you all resort to abuse (veiled or not) instead of actually attempting to counter a single thing I've said. Interesting, but not surprising.

Paul ('the bigot')

[Pilgrim]

Not to be rude, but when you actually say something substantive rather than soap box rhetoric, someone will counter it. What's the point of countering baseless rhetoric? It serves no purpose and what you get is insults flying back and forth with no real conversation or dialogue.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 07:20 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69738#post69738)
Pilgrim:
Not to be rude, but when you actually say something substantive rather than soap box rhetoric, someone will counter it. What's the point of countering baseless rhetoric? It serves no purpose and what you get is insults flying back and forth with no real conversation or dialogue.

It's not baseless rhetoric, it is rather obvious fact. I'm surprised more of you don't just admit it. You'd like to see religion taught as science (creation or 'Intelligent Design'), you'd like to ban abortion, you'd like to see liberals and gays shut up.

Many fundamentalists say these exact same things in other threads. But when I point them out here, it's suddenly offensive.

We've seen what Christian theocracies are like, and it's not pretty. But of course, it wouldn't be like that now...

Paul

[Dee Dee Warren]

Today @ 02:15 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69724#post69724)
lordsnooty:



That's OK. I know you're about as far-removed from being an impartial witness as it is possible to be.

I didn't expect you to moderate impartially, and you haven't let me down.

I told both of you to cool it. I believe that is fair. And I told Jinx to cool it despite my agreement with him on his point of view. I believe that is more than fair... However... since you object to me, I will remove myself from moderating this thread. I remind you that complaints about moderating decisions are to be dealt with in a specific manner of which you are aware, and did not follow.



I find many of your views to be a disgrace to all of humanity, but I usually try not to be that blunt about it.

I am aware of your feelings, and I think you need to reread more of your posts.


Interesting how you all resort to abuse (veiled or not) instead of actually attempting to counter a single thing I've said. Interesting, but not surprising.

Oh yeah, I abused you. :bawl: Do you have an issue with taking what you so routinely dish out? :whip:


Paul ('the bigot')

Dee Dee the Bigot.... now we are even.

[GrayPilgrim]

Oi vey!

[Pilgrim]

You made an assertion based on your opinoin Snooty. It's hard to counter an opinion that does not present evidence.

Just to clarify. Not many of us here are actually "fundamentalists."

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 07:24 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69750#post69750)
Dee Dee Warren:
Oh yeah, I abused you. :bawl: Do you have an issue with taking what you so routinely dish out?

If I was one-tenth as rude as Jinx is, I would put a bullet in my head for the good of society.

Paul

[Dee Dee Warren]

Yeah, and that comment was the epitome of politeness. Can anyone say "passive aggressive"? Mr. Pot meet Mr. Kettle.

And I was speaking of me and my alleged 'abuse' of you... nice bait and switch though...

[The Laughing Man]

You'd like to see religion taught as science (creation or 'Intelligent Design'),

No, we'd like science taught as science without any bias against supposedly "anti-science" Christians. (Science never would have gotten to the point we are at today without the vast contributions of supposedly "anti-science" Christians.)


you'd like to ban abortion,

Nothing wrong with that. Not to take this thread off-topic, but abortion is built upon a heap of misconceptions, half-truths and lies.


you'd like to see liberals and gays shut up.

They can say whatever they want - I won't deny their rights and will fight for them, but they can do it on their own time using their own money. They have no right to come into a school and indoctrinate my kids about their personal beliefs and lifestyles against my rights as a parent.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 07:35 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69762#post69762)
Dee Dee Warren:
And I was speaking of me and my alleged 'abuse' of you... nice bait and switch though...

You stated that I had earned all of the abuse directed at me, so it's all much of a muchness.

Paul

[Dee Dee Warren]

Yeah, Snooty, you are the victim here. :bawl: I am sorry us big ole meanie Christians won't let you trash our beliefs and lay down and say "please sir can I have another one?"

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 08:36 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69899#post69899)
Dee Dee Warren:

Yeah, Snooty, you are the victim here. :bawl: I am sorry us big ole meanie Christians won't let you trash our beliefs and lay down and say "please sir can I have another one?"

If a belief is bigoted or ignorant, it deserves to be trashed.

At least I don't trash the individuals, only their bigoted views on minorities. Which is more than we can say for some of the fringe elements on this board, who prefer 'righteous spite' to debate.

Paul

[Pilgrim]

At least I don't trash the individuals, only their bigoted views on minorities.

really? then why this...

If I was one-tenth as rude as Jinx is, I would put a bullet in my head for the good of society.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Today @ 03:59 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69926#post69926)
lordsnooty:



If a belief is bigoted or ignorant, it deserves to be trashed.

You just don't take too well when yours is the one on the spit.


At least I don't trash the individuals, only their bigoted views on minorities.

You are a big fan of yourself. Scoll up and see if you want to qualify your statement... a bullet to the head comment is coming to mind.



Which is more than we can say for some of the fringe elements on this board, who prefer 'righteous spite' to debate.

Ah the irony. You don't critiicize people like those other [insert one of various insults] people do. :rofl:

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 09:04 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69931#post69931)
Pilgrim:
really? then why this...


Hardly the ultimate in offensive language is it?

Paul

[Pilgrim]

To tell someone that you would kill yourself if you were like them is not mean?

Besides that's not the point...you said that you never attack the person, only the position. Clearly you were not being quite honest with yourself of or us with that statement... as the quote shows.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 09:12 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69943#post69943)
Pilgrim:

To tell someone that you would kill yourself if you were like them is not mean?

That's twisting what I said.


Besides that's not the point...you said that you never attack the person, only the position. Clearly you were not being quite honest with yourself of or us with that statement... as the quote shows.

It hardly compares with the abuse he sent in my direction.

Not that any of this matters, since you've already decided what sort of a gobby heathen I am.

Paul

[Pilgrim]

You are still missing the point. You say in one breath that you do not attack the person, only the position. In the same breath you tell him that if you were him you would kill yourself.

What your dishonest representation of your character has to do with his meaness is beyond me. You are responsible for your own behavior, and claiming "well he started it" is about the mentality one would expect from a Jr. Higher. I have seen enough of your posts to know that's not who you are. At least I don't think you are. Are you?

I am not validating anyone elses posts or behavior, in fact I think in large these threads have sunk to horrible levels on both sides of the aisle. I hope that we can have good conversations with out all the bickering in the future.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Today @ 04:09 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69939#post69939)
lordsnooty:



Hardly the ultimate in offensive language is it?

Paul

Oh, okay, saying that if you were a certain person that you would kill yourself so that the rest of society would be better off is not offensive?

What is that sound I hear? ........


Oh, just your credibility flying out the window.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 09:32 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69958#post69958)
Pilgrim:
You are still missing the point. You say in one breath that you do not attack the person, only the position. In the same breath you tell him that if you were him you would kill yourself.

I think you're focusing too much on that. I was exaggerating to make a point, I didn't literally want Jinx to put a gun to his head. It's a fairly common way of expressing things over here, and it's not meant to be that offensive.

I was just pointing out that he can be remarkably rude for very little provokation.


You are responsible for your own behavior, and claiming "well he started it" is about the mentality one would expect from a Jr. Higher. I have seen enough of your posts to know that's not who you are. At least I don't think you are. Are you?

No, I'm not. But the old 'he started it' argument often has more validity than it's given credit for!

I freely admit to a childlike inability to converse properly with someone that is needlessly rude, and it's not a question of maturity. It's a question of my inability to suffer fools gladly (in other words, I'm a grumpy, arrogant swine). I'm getting better, though.


I hope that we can have good conversations with out all the bickering in the future.

As do I.

Paul

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 09:39 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=69961#post69961)
Dee Dee Warren:
Oh, okay, saying that if you were a certain person that you would kill yourself so that the rest of society would be better off is not offensive?

Not when said in a tongue-in-cheek fashion, no.


Oh, just your credibility flying out the window.

I'm just reeling from the fact that anyone thought I had any in the first place.

Paul

[Dee Dee Warren]

I'm just reeling from the fact that anyone thought I had any in the first place.



:rofl:

Touche!

[Ryokan]

I think it is really beside the point whether jinx is bigoted or lordsnooty is, well, snooty:tongue: The question is about the extent to which sex and tolerance education should be in schools, which seems to get ignored for rhetoric and old fights five seconds into any discussion.

[Pilgrim]

When you cut school budgests so that Arts are gone then it is time to reconsider the funding of sex ed programs.

[Ryokan]

We need more school funding across the board. But, that would require people to be willing to pay for their children's education

[Vorkosigan]

Today @ 03:38 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=70880#post70880)
Ryokan:

We need more school funding across the board. But, that would require people to be willing to pay for their children's education


...or re-allocating funds from our $400 billion a year war machine. Or any of a hundred other programs I can think of. Really, the funds are there, they are just not getting spent on the right things.

Vorkosigan

[Pilgrim]

I agree Vork.

[Ryokan]

I also agree. However, it may make sense to wait until the Iraqi occupation is over, and till we encourage Europe to field a real military. Also, there is alot of waste in most gov. programs that could be streamlined.