Disappointed in our bishop

[Sheldon]

Yes, this is yet another way to penetrate and destroy churches from within.

You're going to have to explain how equality and ending persecution and discrimination of a minority group like people who happen to be gay, is going to destroy anything, other than homophobic bigotry?

To be honest this kind of histrionics sounds like another slippery slope fallacy to me. If we allow x, then y is bound to follow. Rather then asking oneself whether x, or y for that matter, are in any way pernicious behaviours.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Why am I picturing crowds applauding parading Nazis at the Nuremberg rallies?

Because you rely on logical fallacies.

Which principle of logic does Godwin's law violate and why?

The comment I was responding to was about what Jesus supposedly did.

I know, hence my observation that no one knows what Jesus did or did not do, since all we have are the unsubstantiated hearsay claims in the bible.

Try me.

No point, it's a simple concept, if you haven't grasped it by now.

So?

It was a refutation of your claim it addressed, I quoted the claim for you. I can't really simplify it anymore.

Really?

Yes, of course, you didn't know this? Have you actually read the bible, because it certainly endorses slavery, and sex trafficking, and ethnic cleansing, and global genocidal floods. I have even seen theists on here state plainly these things were not immoral as nothing their version of the biblical deity does can be immoral, a pretty worrying claim at that. William Lane Craig is a vociferous public defender of biblical genocide, he sees nothing wrong with it.

They can come and worship in a Catholic Church - they just can't stick their flags there.

I am at a loss as to why they want to align themselves with a global paedophile ring anyway.

Ask them - they are the ones trying to plant their flags, a**less chaps, Astro glide and black squares everywhere.

Thank you for that very graphic image, it appears you have given it some though???

 

[Sheldon]

Those pilots who bombed Pearl Harbor - decent, moral young men, doing what they believed was right.

It's almost as if morality is subjective.

Fact is - 'moral' can be a lot of things. You can be 'moral' by being true to the 12 year old boy and his younger sister you just married.

You mean one could perceive this as moral, now i don't know about you, but I think a child can't give informed consent, and thus "marrying" them or coercing them into any sexual activity is deeply pernicious predatory sexual behaviour, and since my morality necessarily cares to avoid and where possible prevent unnecessary suffering, I would find this immoral.

You can be 'moral' by smoking but never inhaling, like Bill.

Why would it be immoral either way? Isn't it possible that smoking pot ought not to be illegal, if it is relatively harmless?

And you can be 'moral' to your country and its values by gassing Jews.

Well there you go, maybe blindly following moral diktat is not a good way to be moral after all? These were Christians who did this after all, and the Holocaust was a religious persecution that stemmed from centuries of virulent European antisemitism. The SS ran the death camps, you know you had to be a theist to join right? In Germany at that time most other theistic beliefs were not faring very well under the Nazis. Just maybe our morals would be better served considering the consequences of our actions, and physical and emotional well being of other humans, just a thought.

We need to be careful - we don't have absolute values anymore.

The Nazis did, and the Japanese fascists, maybe absolutes are not a good way to evaluate what is moral.

 

[Sheldon]

There are good and decent students shouting down those parents who don't want their own daughters sharing sports events, toilets and dressing rooms with boys. These students are challenging traditional notions of gender and parent's rights. They mean well. They are inclusive - no boy should be denied the right to be a girl and visa versa.
They can also be wrong.
Without religion you are god, and you make your own rules.

The trans debate is a new one, and mistakes will be made, but you seem to want to pretend that one extreme view is right, personally I am inclined to avoid both extremes, as they are unlikely to provide solutions.

Try to think this through, and I am sure you can imagine a way to protect both trans people and women, we can land people on the moon, this should be child's play, if people relinquish long held and pernicious notions, and simply look to what is best for people's emotional and physical well being.

 

[blü 2]

Without religion you are god, and you make your own rules.

You flatter me ...

As for making one's own rules, I think I've told you this before but anyway I remind you that morality doesn't come from God. It comes from our genes, since we've evolved to be gregarious apes. Thus all of us have moral tendencies towards child nurture and protection, dislike of the one who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group, and a sense of self-worth through self-denial. Our genes also give us a conscience and a capacity for empathy. The particular rules for how we interact with others, depending on their sex, relationship, tribe, authority, occasion, and so on, and the marking of life passages ─ coming of age, pairing, birth, death ─ are largely learnt.

None of that requires a god. All of that will fit in with a god if need be.

 

[PruePhillip]

You're going to have to explain how equality and ending persecution and discrimination of a minority group like people who happen to be gay, is going to destroy anything, other than homophobic bigotry?

To be honest this kind of histrionics sounds like another slippery slope fallacy to me. If we allow x, then y is bound to follow. Rather then asking oneself whether x, or y for that matter, are in any way pernicious behaviours.

Actually, when you consider the sexualization of school children in America we are already at the bottom of this slippery slope.
If you are a Muslim and you are forced to employ, say, some tattooed woke lesbian with a beard, this would be more than 'equality' or 'inclusiveness', it would be seen for what it is - a deliberate insult/attack upon that religion. People who insist a Catholic school employ someone who is outside the faith, or offended that faith on the grounds of being 'inclusive' wouldn't dream of offending some 'indigenous' or 'alternative' or Muslim/Buddhist/Hindu persuasion. It's our own culture we hate.

 

[pearl]

I think you mean "self-righteous".

Luke 5:32
I have not come to call the righteous to repentance but sinners.”

Either way we know what is meant.

 

[PruePhillip]

You flatter me ...

As for making one's own rules, I think I've told you this before but anyway I remind you that morality doesn't come from God. It comes from our genes, since we've evolved to be gregarious apes. Thus all of us have moral tendencies towards child nurture and protection, dislike of the one who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group, and a sense of self-worth through self-denial. Our genes also give us a conscience and a capacity for empathy. The particular rules for how we interact with others, depending on their sex, relationship, tribe, authority, occasion, and so on, and the marking of life passages ─ coming of age, pairing, birth, death ─ are largely learnt.

None of that requires a god. All of that will fit in with a god if need be.

So it makes you wonder about those in the Gospels who loved those that persecuted them, and willingly gave their lives for what they believe. You wonder where they got the strength to be something they weren't from their human nature.
So our genes tell us to hate and fear the other, to reward evil with evil, to impregnate another man's mate, to war and even eat others. We are animals, and increasingly and inevitably, we act like animals.

 

[PruePhillip]

The trans debate is a new one, and mistakes will be made, but you seem to want to pretend that one extreme view is right, personally I am inclined to avoid both extremes, as they are unlikely to provide solutions.

Try to think this through, and I am sure you can imagine a way to protect both trans people and women, we can land people on the moon, this should be child's play, if people relinquish long held and pernicious notions, and simply look to what is best for people's emotional and physical well being.

Have you got your pronouns worked out yet? These people demand not to be insulted, and will shut you down if you do - even your job, friends, tenure, social media connections etc.. And if you DO give in then within a year or two they will come up with some new hot button issue you must mentally or morally cave in for. Polygamy might be it, or pederasty.

 

[PruePhillip]

It's almost as if morality is subjective.
.

Human morality says it's fine for those Japanese pilots to risk their lives for their country and their emperor. They knew the story - America was opposed to Japan and embargoed their oil and steel. Same as the Germans who killed Jews - they knew what Jews did to Germans, Europeans and everyone else.
But under Christianity you can't kill, ever. Not even those seeking to kill you. It's absolute.
Do not kill
Do not committ adultery

absolutes.
human nature tells you to do both.

 

[Sheldon]

Actually, when you consider the sexualization of school children in America we are already at the bottom of this slippery slope.
If you are a Muslim and you are forced to employ, say, some tattooed woke lesbian with a beard, this would be more than 'equality' or 'inclusiveness', it would be seen for what it is - a deliberate insult/attack upon that religion. People who insist a Catholic school employ someone who is outside the faith, or offended that faith on the grounds of being 'inclusive' wouldn't dream of offending some 'indigenous' or 'alternative' or Muslim/Buddhist/Hindu persuasion. It's our own culture we hate.

That string of irrelevant subjective assumptions doesn't seem to have anything to do with my question. So here it is again then:

Can you explain how equality and ending persecution and discrimination of a minority group like people who happen to be gay, is going to destroy anything, other than homophobic bigotry?

 

[Sheldon]

So it makes you wonder about those in the Gospels who loved those that persecuted them, and willingly gave their lives for what they believe.

Not really, since it is unevidenced hearsay.

You wonder where they got the strength to be something they weren't from their human nature.

Did you wonder where Bambi's mother went when someone stopped drawing it?

So our genes tell us to hate and fear the other, to reward evil with evil, to impregnate another man's mate, to war and even eat others.

Not mine, you may want to get your genes checked out.

We are animals, and increasingly and inevitably, we act like animals.

We always were animals so why would you think we ever didn't behave like animals, though the claim is suitably vague.

 

[blü 2]

So it makes you wonder about those in the Gospels who loved those that persecuted them, and willingly gave their lives for what they believe. You wonder where they got the strength to be something they weren't from their human nature.

Who says they were transformed into something extraordinary? People die for stories all the time, be it for family or tribe or belief. It's not a Christian thing, it's a human thing.

So our genes tell us to hate and fear the other

That can be good advice in particular circumstances ─ good in the sense of enhancing family and tribal survival.

to reward evil with evil

So you think it was wrong for Ukraine to resist the Russian invasion? You and I are worlds apart.

to impregnate another man's mate

Yes, rape as intimidation and as the victor's right is all through the bible. God expressly orders it at times, just as [he] orders or arranges human sacrifices to [him]self, invasive wars, massacres of conquered populations.

We are animals

How else would we be alive?

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
you seem to want to pretend that one extreme view is right,

Have you got your pronouns worked out yet? These people demand not to be insulted, and will shut you down if you do - even your job, friends, tenure, social media connections etc.. And if you DO give in then within a year or two they will come up with some new hot button issue you must mentally or morally cave in for. Polygamy might be it, or pederasty.

Do you even read the posts you're responding to? Your posts look to me like you're simply preaching.

 

[PruePhillip]

Do you even read the posts you're responding to? Your posts look like you're simply preaching to me.

Or maybe the facts I present are doing the preaching?

 

[Sheldon]

Human morality says it's fine for those Japanese pilots to risk their lives for their country and their emperor.

Nope, that was their subjective moral view. I am a human and I don't think this is moral. You do realise they were theists, who believed their emperor that they followed unquestioningly, was a living god? You are trying to champion absolutes, and decrying their effects in the same post?

They knew the story - America was opposed to Japan and embargoed their oil and steel. Same as the Germans who killed Jews - they knew what Jews did to Germans, Europeans and everyone else.

Gibberish sorry, you seem to enjoy responding to posts, then ignoring them completely and reeling off another of your disjointed rants. Morality is subjective, that is simply a fact supported by overwhelming evidence.

But under Christianity you can't kill, ever.

Good one. You know that a census in 1939 showed that 96% of the German population were Christians, as of course they had been for centuries? You had to be a theist to join the SS who ran the death camps, in his odious self aggrandizing tome Mein Kampf Hitler repeatedly asserted he was destined to do "god's work". Where is it you think European anti-Semitism came from if not Christianity?

Not even those seeking to kill you. It's absolute. Do not kill Do not committ adultery absolutes. human nature tells you to do both.

No it isn't, Christians do those things all the time, and the claim is a subjective one anyway, you can assume a deity wants x y and z, but that is just as subjective as all other human morals. The Japanese were theists, who believed their Emperor was a living descendant of the sun god. Devout Nazis followed Hitler without question, as did the most ardent devotees of Stalin. Blinding following what we think are moral absolutes is the problem, not the solution. If our morality cared about the emotional and physical well being of other humans, then we might try harder to avoid or where possible prevent all unnecessary suffering.

Blind adherence to dogma and archaic religious doctrine isn't morality, even good Nazis managed to blindly and unquestioningly follow rules.

 

[Sheldon]

Or maybe the facts I present are doing the preaching?

Nope, you just appear to be preaching, while ignoring the posts you pretend to be responding to. Most of what you post is not factual, you even admitted you rarely fact check your own claims, though that came as no surprise obviously.

 

[PruePhillip]

No it isn't, Christians do those things all the time, and the claim is a subjective one anyway, you can assume a deity wants x y and z, but that is just as subjective as all other human morals. The Japanese were theists, who believed their Emperor was a living descendant of the sun god. Devout Nazis followed Hitler without question, as did the most ardent devotees of Stalin. Blinding following what we think are moral absolutes is the problem, not the solution. If our morality cared about the emotional and physical well being of other humans, then we might try harder to avoid or where possible prevent all unnecessary suffering.

Blind adherence to dogma and archaic religious doctrine isn't morality, even good Nazis managed to blindly and unquestioningly follow rules.

No, Christians do not kill and committ adultery.
People who do such things are not living by the tenants of Christianity.

The point with the Japanese was that they saw America as the enemy due to, above all else, the oil embargo. Hitting a wicked enemy wasn't just your duty, it was a moral act. Humans are moral beings - only as woke shows you these days, morality has become deeply political and highly subjective.

 

[PruePhillip]

Nope, you just appear to be preaching, while ignoring the posts you pretend to be responding to. Most of what you post is not factual, you even admitted you rarely fact check your own claims, though that came as no surprise obviously.

When did I say that ???????

 

[Sheldon]

No, Christians do not kill and committ adultery.
People who do such things are not living by the tenants of Christianity.

Yes they do, you are using a no true Scotsman fallacy.