|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
(1) How many Christians give out of obligation to make them look better as Christians and have a better shot for heaven?
(2)Then you have tax breaks or peer pressure (if you are in church and everyone gives $10 and you put $2 in, people would look, but the same goes for a secular company handing around the donation jar).
This isn't an attack on Christian or non-religious donating. But there are many, many factors that have not and are almost impossible to account for, like in those articles shown in your post after the one I quoted. |
(numbers are mine)
1. I don't know of a single Christian who thinks they will have "a better shot for heaven" by donating to charity. The Bible itself states that good works without faith is dead. It is not enough merely being "a good person". Belief or faith is the requirement. Good works may come from that. But belief is the cornerstone.
|
First, I am not arguing that Christians give less, they most certainly give more. This is why there are more bad (ie keep most of the money) "Christian" charities, because they know that Christians give more and they target them.
Second, I am glad you know all the Christians in Western society. The funny thing is, I know several Christians who have actually said this to me. They should follow what Jesus layed out for them, which includes giving to needy people, otherwise they won't get into heaven. You honestly think all Christians are good because of Jesus's teachings. Some really take the heaven/hell thing quite seriously (especially the Catholics I have known). Anyways, like I said, I met "a few" which does not make a majority, but certainly disproves the fact that there are none.
| Quote: |
2. I'm pretty sure you don't get much of a tax break for $10. And some Western governments are said to be thinking about reducing tax breaks for charity (if they haven't already)
Sure some "Christians" may give to feel better about themselves, same as non-religious people. That doesn't explain why Christians consistantly outspend non-religious people when it comes to giving to charity. In fact hardly any of those "other" factors account for that. |
No, you get a tax break on the 3.4% of the amount you give though, which is what the articles are saying. Where do you think that statistic comes from? Tax forms 
You did leave out the peer pressure part though, I wonder why?
Finally
| Quote: |
The Bible itself states that good works without faith is dead. It is not enough merely being "a good person". Belief or faith is the requirement. Good works may come from that. But belief is the cornerstone.
|
I can be a good person doing good works without belief in a 2000 year old book. The thing is, for you guys who beleive, you don't even follow it. (refer back to my #1) But maybe you are right, though the opposite would then also be true. That being a "bad person" isn't enough to be truly evil. Belief or faith is then the requirment. Hence, if athiests can never truly be good without belief, then they could never be bad either. I don't beleive this though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Of course, because people give money to their Church or church-based charity they must be better people. Or, maybe they are doing it because their imaginary friend told them to (and you don't wanna piss him off). Or, maybe they are doing it because to not do so would attract scorn and exclusion from the peers down at the imaginary friend room.
Either way, I don't know if you could prove who gives more. Can this even be quantified? Does a religious nut job (the kind who speaks in tongues and burns Harry Potter) count the same as a people who are essentially "ethnically" Christian (or, as Pastors call them, C&Es). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
Of course, because people give money to their Church or church-based charity they must be better people. Or, maybe they are doing it because their imaginary friend told them to (and you don't wanna piss him off). Or, maybe they are doing it because to not do so would attract scorn and exclusion from the peers down at the imaginary friend room.
Either way, I don't know if you could prove who gives more. Can this even be quantified? Does a religious nut job (the kind who speaks in tongues and burns Harry Potter) count the same as a people who are essentially "ethnically" Christian (or, as Pastors call them, C&Es). |
Of course you will always assume the worst about relgious people, so I'm not going to argue that point. You prefer to make cynical assumptions about religious people's motives for giving. Fine. I would expect nothing less, perhaps your own imaginary friend informs you about the motives of other people. Bottom line, when needy people around the world get relief from groups like The Salvation Army, YMCA, World Vision, Christian Childrens Fund, Catholic Charities, Good Will, etc, I bet they don't concern themsleves so much with the motives of the givers. Whether religious people give because they care a lot about others, or because "their imaginary friend told them to," it certainly does not translate into "danger" for those who receive, but rather betterment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Of course, because people give money to their Church or church-based charity they must be better people. |
Oh, by the way, perhaps you didn't look carefully at the first link I provided. Here is a paragraph from it:
Some people might object to my conflation here of religious and nonreligious charity. One might argue, for example, that religious charity is more likely to take place for non-altruistic reasons than is nonreligious giving and volunteering: Religious people might give because of social pressure, for personal gain (such as stashing away rewards in Heaven), or to finance the services that they themselves consume, such as sacramental activities. Therefore, disparities in charity might disappear when we only consider explicitly nonreligious giving and volunteering. The sccbs data do not support this hypothesis, however: Religious people are more generous than secular people with nonreligious causes as well as with religious ones. While 68 percent of the total population gives (and 51 percent volunteers) to nonreligious causes each year, religious people are 10 points more likely to give to these causes than secularists (71 percent to 61 percent) and 21 points more likely to volunteer (60 percent to 39 percent). For example, religious people are 7 points more likely than secularists to volunteer for neighborhood and civic groups, 20 points more likely to volunteer to help the poor or elderly, and 26 points more likely to volunteer for school or youth programs. It seems fair to say that religion engenders charity in general — including nonreligious charity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
A couple questions,
Does religion make people charitable or are charitable people more prone to become religious?
Most importantly, does their charity make up for their policy nonsense?
Either way, I don't care. God (in the understanding of Christian/Islamic/Hindu...and so on) doesn't exist. Even if you are more charitable than my Free-thinking peers, you are still letting an imaginary friend tell you how to live your life. And, by extension, telling the rest of us how we may lead our lives via the political and social clout that the religious have.
Ultimately, I tend to dislike religion because those who believe have issues regarding sex and fun. If it feels good or if it is fun it shouldn't be done. And with that we get all sorts of stupid legislation and moral norms that have, at bottom, some white dudes imaginary friend as their foundation. We have an uptight culture and we can blame religion for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
Of course, because people give money to their Church or church-based charity they must be better people. Or, maybe they are doing it because their imaginary friend told them to (and you don't wanna piss him off). Or, maybe they are doing it because to not do so would attract scorn and exclusion from the peers down at the imaginary friend room.
Either way, I don't know if you could prove who gives more. Can this even be quantified? Does a religious nut job (the kind who speaks in tongues and burns Harry Potter) count the same as a people who are essentially "ethnically" Christian (or, as Pastors call them, C&Es). |
Of course you will always assume the worst about relgious people, so I'm not going to argue that point. You prefer to make cynical assumptions about religious people's motives for giving. Fine. I would expect nothing less, perhaps your own imaginary friend informs you about the motives of other people. Bottom line, when needy people around the world get relief from groups like The Salvation Army, YMCA, World Vision, Christian Childrens Fund, Catholic Charities, Good Will, etc, I bet they don't concern themsleves so much with the motives of the givers. Whether religious people give because they care a lot about others, or because "their imaginary friend told them to," it certainly does not translate into "danger" for those who receive, but rather betterment. |
First, I don't support the way BJWD goes about things.
Second, I am agnostic, so I don't only attack religious people, I attack atheistic people too when given the need (like BJWD's attack, I don't consider what he wrote an argument, it's just insulting). It just seems like I have to counter the religious people a lot more than I do the athiests. In my opinion, the reason is becasue athiests don't usually care what other people do in their lives, only when it interfers with theirs.
Now, on that point, flakfizer, there are religious people who do conversion work in the name of charity. I don't know how many we are talking about and I bet it's under 1% for domestic charity, and under 25% for international charity, but you can't deny there aren't a few (I've met them, just incase you try to deny it  ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
First, I don't support the way BJWD goes about things.
Second, I am agnostic, so I don't only attack religious people, I attack atheistic people too when given the need (like BJWD's attack, I don't consider what he wrote an argument, it's just insulting).
Well, we certainly agree here.
It just seems like I have to counter the religious people a lot more than I do the athiests. In my opinion, the reason is becasue athiests don't usually care what other people do in their lives, only when it interfers with theirs.
Now, on that point, flakfizer, there are religious people who do conversion work in the name of charity. I don't know how many we are talking about and I bet it's under 1% for domestic charity, and under 25% for international charity, but you can't deny there aren't a few (I've met them, just incase you try to deny it )
I don't know how to find stats on this, but I'm sure you're right to at least some extent. But the issue which I was addressing was the sweeping (and stupid) assertion that "religion is dangerous." I have shown that religious people tend to give more, not only to "religious charities" but also to "nonreligious" ones. Where is the danger? Also, numerous studies have shown (just google it, but here is one example http://www.themasterspen.com/archives/000346.html ) that the crime rate among regular church attenders is lower than non-attenders. Studies also show that regular church attendance lowers alcoholism rates, drop-out rates, divorce rates, and on and on. So where is the danger? Some people out there trying to do "conversion work?" Oh no. Imaginary Friend forbid that more people start acting like religious folk! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bignate
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Location: Hell's Ditch
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WOW I guess this Hijacking is only a little bit IRONICAL  ......continue fundamentalists.................  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
First, I don't support the way BJWD goes about things.
Second, I am agnostic, so I don't only attack religious people, I attack atheistic people too when given the need (like BJWD's attack, I don't consider what he wrote an argument, it's just insulting).
Well, we certainly agree here.
It just seems like I have to counter the religious people a lot more than I do the athiests. In my opinion, the reason is becasue athiests don't usually care what other people do in their lives, only when it interfers with theirs.
Now, on that point, flakfizer, there are religious people who do conversion work in the name of charity. I don't know how many we are talking about and I bet it's under 1% for domestic charity, and under 25% for international charity, but you can't deny there aren't a few (I've met them, just incase you try to deny it )
I don't know how to find stats on this, but I'm sure you're right to at least some extent. But the issue which I was addressing was the sweeping (and stupid) assertion that "religion is dangerous." I have shown that religious people tend to give more, not only to "religious charities" but also to "nonreligious" ones. Where is the danger? Also, numerous studies have shown (just google it, but here is one example http://www.themasterspen.com/archives/000346.html ) that the crime rate among regular church attenders is lower than non-attenders. Studies also show that regular church attendance lowers alcoholism rates, drop-out rates, divorce rates, and on and on. So where is the danger? Some people out there trying to do "conversion work?" Oh no. Imaginary Friend forbid that more people start acting like religious folk! |
|
While I believe it's up to the individual people, please don't imply religious people are better. It just isn't true, as much as Christians would have us to beleive. Sorry. A lot of what you said is wrong.
| Quote: |
Fundamentalist Christians have the highest suicide rate among all demographic groups (APA, 1998). Christians and Jews have the highest divorce rates and Baptists have the highest of all Christian denominations (Barna, 2000) and the highest divorce rates are in the Bible Belt. Christians make up the highest percentage of the prison population (FBOP, 1997 & SDOC, 1999). The highest murder rates are in the Bible Belt (DOJ, 1998). The highest infant mortality rates in are in the Bible Belt (AAPP, 2001). The lowest education standards and highest high school drop-out rates are in the Bible Belt (DOE, 1999 & Fordham Foundation, 2000). The highest teen pregnancy rate is in the Bible Belt (PPA, 1997). |
http://www.alabamaatheist.org/awareness/debates/debate018.htm
Here is the site for the divorce. The others can be found on the respective websites.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
Or read this...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-2-1798944-2,00.html
Another one
I especially like this one
| Quote: |
If so, then why does Louisiana, with America's highest church attendance rate, have twice the national average murder rate?
|
http://www.creationtheory.org/Morality/CrimeAndDivorce.shtml
Your article is about personal religion, it talks about individual people. Mine are about society. Religion is bad for society, but not for the individual. If only people would keep religion personal and get rid of organized religion, we would all be better off. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
(1) How many Christians give out of obligation to make them look better as Christians and have a better shot for heaven?
(2)Then you have tax breaks or peer pressure (if you are in church and everyone gives $10 and you put $2 in, people would look, but the same goes for a secular company handing around the donation jar).
This isn't an attack on Christian or non-religious donating. But there are many, many factors that have not and are almost impossible to account for, like in those articles shown in your post after the one I quoted. |
(numbers are mine)
1. I don't know of a single Christian who thinks they will have "a better shot for heaven" by donating to charity. The Bible itself states that good works without faith is dead. It is not enough merely being "a good person". Belief or faith is the requirement. Good works may come from that. But belief is the cornerstone.
|
(1) First, I am not arguing that Christians give less, they most certainly give more. This is why there are more bad (ie keep most of the money) "Christian" charities, because they know that Christians give more and they target them.
(2) Second, I am glad you know all the Christians in Western society. The funny thing is, I know several Christians who have actually said this to me. They should follow what Jesus layed out for them, which includes giving to needy people, otherwise they won't get into heaven. You honestly think all Christians are good because of Jesus's teachings. Some really take the heaven/hell thing quite seriously (especially the Catholics I have known). Anyways, like I said, I met "a few" which does not make a majority, but certainly disproves the fact that there are none.
| Quote: |
2. I'm pretty sure you don't get much of a tax break for $10. And some Western governments are said to be thinking about reducing tax breaks for charity (if they haven't already)
Sure some "Christians" may give to feel better about themselves, same as non-religious people. That doesn't explain why Christians consistantly outspend non-religious people when it comes to giving to charity. In fact hardly any of those "other" factors account for that. |
(3) No, you get a tax break on the 3.4% of the amount you give though, which is what the articles are saying. Where do you think that statistic comes from? Tax forms
You did leave out the peer pressure part though, I wonder why?
Finally
| Quote: |
The Bible itself states that good works without faith is dead. It is not enough merely being "a good person". Belief or faith is the requirement. Good works may come from that. But belief is the cornerstone.
|
I can be a good person doing good works without belief in a 2000 year old book. (4)The thing is, for you guys who beleive, you don't even follow it. (refer back to my #1) (5) But maybe you are right, though the opposite would then also be true. That being a "bad person" isn't enough to be truly evil. Belief or faith is then the requirment. Hence, if athiests can never truly be good without belief, then they could never be bad either. I don't beleive this though. |
(numbers are mine)
1. That may be true ( do you know any bad Christian charities specifically?) but even so, it makes the charities bad, not the people.
2. If people believe this then they are obviously not Christian. Good works do NOT get you into heaven. Only faith does. This is what the Bible itself says "Good works without faith are like dirty rags" If they are not following what the Bible itself says, how can they be called Christians?
3. I was including the peer pressure with the "other factors" See my last post
4. What do you mean we don't follow it? Nobody is perfect. But at least we try.
5. No. The opposite is not true. Here's why. The Christian view is that ALL people are guilty of sin and deserving of hell. In order to be saved you must have faith and accept Christ as your saviour. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Ultimately, I tend to dislike religion because those who believe have issues regarding sex and fun. If it feels good or if it is fun it shouldn't be done. And with that we get all sorts of stupid legislation and moral norms that have, at bottom, some white dudes imaginary friend as their foundation. We have an uptight culture and we can blame religion for that. |
Nonsense, I believe. And if it feels good or it is fun I will do it. Most things anyway. You have a very warped view of Christians. We are not all somber people dressed in black on our knees 24/7. Some of us believe drinking is ok, some don't. Some of us believe going to church on Sunday is a good thing, some of us believe it doesn't matter. Some of us give to charity, some of us don't
We are all different. About the only thing that Christians share is a belief in God.
Your stereotype is rude and offensive, not to mention 100% wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
(numbers are mine)
1. That may be true ( do you know any bad Christian charities specifically?) but even so, it makes the charities bad, not the people.
|
I was arguing for Christians there. I was saying that the people are good therefore the bad charities target them for their "goodness".
| Quote: |
2. If people believe this then they are obviously not Christian. Good works do NOT get you into heaven. Only faith does. This is what the Bible itself says "Good works without faith are like dirty rags" If they are not following what the Bible itself says, how can they be called Christians?
|
My entire problem with "preachy" Christians is that they usually aren't in actions, and only in judgements
| Quote: |
3. I was including the peer pressure with the "other factors" See my last post
|
ok
| Quote: |
4. What do you mean we don't follow it? Nobody is perfect. But at least we try.
|
Not everyone does, and too many people do what they feel is right and back it up with some interpretation of the bible. Until there is a consensus on the writings, people will just quote what they want to (for the most part)
| Quote: |
5. No. The opposite is not true. Here's why. The Christian view is that ALL people are guilty of sin and deserving of hell. In order to be saved you must have faith and accept Christ as your saviour. |
I can't debate that, it's a view of something that can't be proven. But I will say I have always hated this view (even if there was a God, which I don't know if there is or not, I would go up and tell him to shove that). I could go on for a long time about my view of that opinion, but I can't prove mine, so here we just have to agree to disagree |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| flakfizer wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
First, I don't support the way BJWD goes about things.
Second, I am agnostic, so I don't only attack religious people, I attack atheistic people too when given the need (like BJWD's attack, I don't consider what he wrote an argument, it's just insulting).
Well, we certainly agree here.
It just seems like I have to counter the religious people a lot more than I do the athiests. In my opinion, the reason is becasue athiests don't usually care what other people do in their lives, only when it interfers with theirs.
Now, on that point, flakfizer, there are religious people who do conversion work in the name of charity. I don't know how many we are talking about and I bet it's under 1% for domestic charity, and under 25% for international charity, but you can't deny there aren't a few (I've met them, just incase you try to deny it )
I don't know how to find stats on this, but I'm sure you're right to at least some extent. But the issue which I was addressing was the sweeping (and stupid) assertion that "religion is dangerous." I have shown that religious people tend to give more, not only to "religious charities" but also to "nonreligious" ones. Where is the danger? Also, numerous studies have shown (just google it, but here is one example http://www.themasterspen.com/archives/000346.html ) that the crime rate among regular church attenders is lower than non-attenders. Studies also show that regular church attendance lowers alcoholism rates, drop-out rates, divorce rates, and on and on. So where is the danger? Some people out there trying to do "conversion work?" Oh no. Imaginary Friend forbid that more people start acting like religious folk! |
|
While I believe it's up to the individual people, please don't imply religious people are better. It just isn't true, as much as Christians would have us to beleive. Sorry. A lot of what you said is wrong.
Yes wrong, according to an atheist web-site. I'm convinced. I deliberatley looked for sites that were NOT Christian to back up my points. This site is a copy of an email sent to someone to try and debate the merits of Christianity.
| Quote: |
Fundamentalist Christians have the highest suicide rate among all demographic groups (APA, 1998). Christians and Jews have the highest divorce rates and Baptists have the highest of all Christian denominations (Barna, 2000) and the highest divorce rates are in the Bible Belt. Christians make up the highest percentage of the prison population (FBOP, 1997 & SDOC, 1999). The highest murder rates are in the Bible Belt (DOJ, 1998). The highest infant mortality rates in are in the Bible Belt (AAPP, 2001). The lowest education standards and highest high school drop-out rates are in the Bible Belt (DOE, 1999 & Fordham Foundation, 2000). The highest teen pregnancy rate is in the Bible Belt (PPA, 1997). |
http://www.alabamaatheist.org/awareness/debates/debate018.htm
Here is the site for the divorce. The others can be found on the respective websites.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
I read that one too. Everything there is too vague to make any conclusions. "Born again Christian" means what? My stats invloved people who regularly attend church or other relgious services. How many people call themselves "Christian" in the US and rarely attend church or read the Bible? Lots. I've known lots. Of course there would be no difference in divorce rates between those sorts of "Christians" and the non-religious...there's no differences in their lifestyles whatsoever.
Also, perhaps you can fiind a site that gives stats in terms of divorces per marriages. The "divorce rates" used at all the sites I found were divorces per 1000 people. But this does take into consideration the fact that some states also have higher marriage rates. For example, Mass. has one of the lowest divorce rates at 2.5 (2002 data) but it also has a fairly low marriage rate at 5.9. Tenn. has a fairly high divorce rate at 5.2, but it has pretty high marriage rate at 13.1. So Tenn (a Bible Belt state with a "high" divorce rate), actually has fewer divorces per marriage (.389 divorces per marriage) than Mass. (.424 divorces per marriage). Look, more and more people are deciding to live together and not get married at all. This makes for lower marriage and divorce rates per 1000 people. However, it does not make for lower divorce rate per marriage.
Or read this...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-2-1798944-2,00.html
Another one
I especially like this one
| Quote: |
If so, then why does Louisiana, with America's highest church attendance rate, have twice the national average murder rate?
|
You especially like that one? Why? Unless they show that the murders themselves were committed by those who regularly attend church, it proves nothing at all. What kind of argumentation is this? "Louisiana has the highest rate of Tabasco consumption and has a murder rate twice as high as the national average!!!" Draw your own conclusions.
http://www.creationtheory.org/Morality/CrimeAndDivorce.shtml
Your article is about personal religion, it talks about individual people. Mine are about society. Religion is bad for society, but not for the individual. Please explain this. I'm trying to think of anything that is good for individuals (good job, good health, education, etc.) but is not good for society. If only people would keep religion personal and get rid of organized religion, we would all be better off. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Ultimately, I tend to dislike religion because those who believe have issues regarding sex and fun. If it feels good or if it is fun it shouldn't be done. And with that we get all sorts of stupid legislation and moral norms that have, at bottom, some white dudes imaginary friend as their foundation. We have an uptight culture and we can blame religion for that. |
Nonsense, I believe. And if it feels good or it is fun I will do it. Most things anyway. You have a very warped view of Christians. We are not all somber people dressed in black on our knees 24/7. Some of us believe drinking is ok, some don't. Some of us believe going to church on Sunday is a good thing, some of us believe it doesn't matter. Some of us give to charity, some of us don't
We are all different. About the only thing that Christians share is a belief in God.
Your stereotype is rude and offensive, not to mention 100% wrong. |
Offensive perhaps, but untrue, I don't think so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Ultimately, I tend to dislike religion because those who believe have issues regarding sex and fun. If it feels good or if it is fun it shouldn't be done. And with that we get all sorts of stupid legislation and moral norms that have, at bottom, some white dudes imaginary friend as their foundation. We have an uptight culture and we can blame religion for that. |
Nonsense, I believe. And if it feels good or it is fun I will do it. Most things anyway. You have a very warped view of Christians. We are not all somber people dressed in black on our knees 24/7. Some of us believe drinking is ok, some don't. Some of us believe going to church on Sunday is a good thing, some of us believe it doesn't matter. Some of us give to charity, some of us don't
We are all different. About the only thing that Christians share is a belief in God.
Your stereotype is rude and offensive, not to mention 100% wrong. |
Offensive perhaps, but untrue, I don't think so. |
Untrue of myself and just about every other Christian I know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
