cthia wrote:Spacekiwi wrote:watch you dont get this thread locked down as well.
I am offended by that. If in fact you are implying that it is
I who got that thread closed.
Indeed, the difference this time would be that
I would NOT be appalled, shocked or surprised.
Daryl wrote:Sorry if this offends you, but my impression was that your total refusal to consider alternative view points was one of the principal reasons the thread became deadlocked and thus was closed.
A possibly safe discussion point would be "Is the USA a secular nation"?
From what you say it seems to be a theocracy. To be a true American do you have to hold a certain version of Christian values? We have had an atheist PM in Australia, and it wasn't an issue.
I'd support Imaginos in that I also have no problem with christians holding strong beliefs, but I have a problem with them trying to impose those views on me, or rudely implying that all others are wrong. Incidentally America is not the "one place" that has religious freedom and freedom of expression. To say that is rude and illinformed. All developed free democracies have this, and the USA wasn't the first. I'm actually puzzled as to why you raised the nationality of posters anyway.
You were completely mistaken, about my not considering alternative viewpoints. Not only did I and do I, it is part of what that thread was created for. As I have already stated, I gained much food for thought that has me involved in additional research. I wanted to be exposed to others' thinking if only to test my own beliefs.
For instance, I am aware that I may be wrong within the Christian faith as to which "religion," if you will, that would be more Godly in nature. I indicated that throughout my life, I have changed Church affiliation several times. It has gone from Baptist, to Methodist, to Seventh Day Adventist, back to Methodist and now non-Denominational.
The Catholic faith is
completely different from anything I've been taught, and I've heard those within the Christian faith poke holes in the Catholic faith regarding what we call very critical issues, which I've stated within that thread. But I want to make that determination for myself. That is why I invited a Catholic and a Jew, Howard, to exchanges. I understand, accept and respect that he passed on it. Can't say that I blame him either.
At any rate, I wanted to learn directly from a Catholic and a Jew. Both of whom
I personally respect greatly. My point is, who can know what may have come out of that thread and who knows if I, or any other believer, would not have ended up questioning whether there is a God? Or vice versa. But,
if after all of the discussion, I still remain true to my beliefs, then that is okay, isn't it?
The thing is that I enjoyed being on the debate team in High School. And there you had to learn to argue Pro and Con on all issues, regardless of in which camp you actually stood. It had the effect of either strengthening your own stance or allowing you to see its "total" error.
One thing I'd like to make clear if I may.
Daryl wrote:I'd support Imaginos in that I also have no problem with christians holding strong beliefs, but I have a problem with them trying to impose those views on me, or rudely implying that all others are wrong.
I have never tried to impose my views on anyone. If it seemed that way then I accept full responsibility for not making it clear, as the burden of communication is on the one trying to make a point. It is wrong for
any Christian to try and force-feed religion or his views.
Believe me, that type of holier-than-thou attitude irks me as much as it does you. It probably irks me more, since I am confronted with it daily - choosing to participate and socialize with all sorts of Christians and believers. It is NOT the proper Christian way. NOT
all of
any group of people (mostly) are inherently bad, just that human nature
is what it is and worms will always creep into some apples.
But I deplore browbeating people with religion or even preaching hell and brimstone. It is wrong in my opinion and rude. IMO. I did attempt to
explain - for lack of a better word not too closely akin to
make excuses for "some" Christians' confusion as to where their Christian duties begin and end as to "sharing" the gospel and their moral duty to spread God's word - to be fishers of men, spiritually - because it is what God asked us to do.
I don't like that some religions that go door to door are a bit too aggressive and intrusive and sometimes, oftentimes, are downright rude.
Quiteso. I do understand their reasoning. And I will accept that
some may be acting out of pure love and compassion and truly care about the lives of others. The disrespectful manner in which they attempt to accomplish that task, however, is wrong. Again, IMO. And I agree that some Christians fail to see their disrespect, but not all of us.
There are some very truly compassionate Christians out there. Soaked in pure love. The recent murder in South Carolina that I spoke of earlier is a proud example. That was a senseless act of violence. The gunman stated that the people were nice to him. He still carried out that senseless act, yet they were so nice to him that he found it necessary to state their kindness "for the record." Not so much because "he" wanted it known, but because the power of Christian kindness begat it. IMO and many other Christians'.
Many families and friends were forever changed in that senseless hate crime. Yet not a single family member had any negative feelings or things to say about the gunman other than love. They
all stated that they
forgive him. The Bible says that we must forgive. And we all may think we can or will in those situations, but it has to be very difficult for
anyone to do so. To not want stone-cold revenge, to not want the gunman to be put to death with no chance of forgiveness, especially in lieu of the gunman's stated fact that they were nice to him, has to be difficult for
anyone. Let alone a Christian.
Yet
all, ALL of these Christians forgave him and had nothing but kind words of love and regret and an empty feeling of loss. Yes, a few family members and church members stated that they love the gunman.
Please forgive me everyone, my tears rain down. Forgive my pointing to this as the true Christian way.
Daryl wrote:Incidentally America is not the "one place" that has religious freedom and freedom of expression. To say that is rude and illinformed. All developed free democracies have this, and the USA wasn't the first. I'm actually puzzled as to why you raised the nationality of posters anyway.
No America isn't. And I truly did not mean it in that fashion. I meant that America is the one place one would expect to have religious freedom
and where people will fight to the death of every last man to protect that freedom. Soldiers will fight to protect that freedom even if they are non-believers themselves. I've even heard soldiers say they went into battle non-believers but their belief was fired in the kiln of hell.
Sure there are other countries where freedom of religion is practiced and protected. But as an American, it is part of our Constitution. In our hearts and minds. You can bank on it. Count on it. And rely on it NOT being lip service. And other countries have come to rely on being able to request American intervention. I am proud of that. Even if sometimes the US gets it wrong, I am still proud of the intent.
American patriotism, by definition, and that which is associated with it is exclusive to Americans. I expect a certain state-of-mind from Americans. I can expect more from Americans out of pride. That is just the definition of patriotism. And I hold Americans to a certain standard.
It is one of the reasons I grew up proud to be an American. And that is why I brought it up. It's an inherent, innate proud
American thing. I cannot speak for other countries. I can speak for what America strives to be. Or did.
Daryl,
I would never tread on your rights.
