posted August 04, 2012 07:18 PM            

In my country, as backwater as it can be, literally anyone could walk in off the street and visit a dieing person no questions asked if they knew what part of the hospital they were in lol...

And if they some nurse did ask, just saying your a distant uncle or whatever would pretty much grant you unrestricted access

Ive had neighbors that I barely knew, come into my ward for a random chat when I was in hospital...

I know that this may also sound like madness, maybe even medical malpractice... did I mention Ireland is pretty lax about everything... "ahh sure she'll be fine!"

@PixieJane
Just a thought, while looking at the whole Bible against homosexuality argument. This really doesnt seem to hold water from a higher critical pov, could you please paste the biblical reference from a King James where you see it pointing to such claims of anti-homosexuality doctrine from any kind of a moral, or sociological view.

Im not defending the bible per say, its actually a case of me being against the use of it as a means to attack a minority by twisting claims.

posted August 05, 2012 07:12 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lei_Kuei:
while looking at the whole Bible against homosexuality argument. This really doesnt seem to hold water from a higher critical pov, could you please paste the biblical reference from a King James where you see it pointing to such claims of anti-homosexuality doctrine from any kind of a moral, or sociological view

---

I don't have any Bibles (and I forget, why is the KJV the only acceptable Bible to some people?) this should sum it up (I'm sure the KJV says pretty much the same):
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/homosexuality.html

That didn't mention the story of Sodom, btw, so I'll add commentary on it. After all, even my own family warned me to stay out of San Francisco and Los Angeles as they felt God was gonna pull another Sodom on them for their acceptance of homosexuality.

I'm aware that there are a few Christians and nearly every Jew I brought this up with who say that story is misinterpreted and that what it condemns is rape and lack of hospitality. But I don't buy that. I just can't understand the concept that had the mob raped Lot's virgin daughters (who may not have even been teens yet given how quickly a girl lost her virginity to her owner back then) that it's somehow "hospitable" and the Bible seems clear to me (just as it does to so many Christians) that if the men had raped the little girls instead of demanding men to rape then the city would've been spared. Granted, the angels don't explicitly state this, but they don't admonish him for his vile offer nor do they punish him with the rest so they do implicitly express this. So obviously the Christians who say the story condemns homosexuality and not rape (btw, rape in the Bible) are correct. Otherwise, the angels would've done something closer to what we're supposed to do in our more civilized age and remove the children from such a despicable father (if Lot was the best Sodom had then ALL the adults should've been destroyed and the angels take the children of the city to better parents).

In any case, Lot gets no award for hospitality in my book as offering your own daughters to be gang raped nullifies you for consideration. And NO Father of the Year Award for Lot either! (One Jewish friend of mine--and gay at that--who said I misunderstood tried explaining that back then females had almost no value and were just property, more like livestock than people, and so gang raping little girls didn't count as it did to rape full grown men as it was less offensive to God but then he trailed off as he realized just how barbaric and disgusting he made his god sound to me, and I think even to himself.)

Granted, I know we're supposed to hold God (and his angels) to much lower moral standards than we hold ourselves (so it's ok if God ordains someone's wives to be raped as a spectator sport and child to be killed as in 2 Samuel 12:11-18, for example), but I skipped that training, and Lot isn't God anyway.

Btw, fun fact, since you're into the KJV then read Judges 11 (from verse 29 on). If you can get Strong's Concordance and look to verify that Jephthah isn't mentioned as having done anything else and that yes, he slit his virgin daughter's throat and burned her body (not "send her to a convent" as some Christians like to say, especially given that they didn't even have convents for women back then). Now look up Hebrews 11:32. Such an inspiring role model for Christians to live up to, isn't he? Oh, and for the other examples listed to inspire good Christians in that verse (Jephthah is in good company!) see here.

posted August 06, 2012 09:43 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
I don't have any Bibles (and I forget, why is the KJV the only acceptable Bible to some people?) this should sum it up (I'm sure the KJV says pretty much the same)

---

The RSV aint bad, good translation. But some bibles have been translated to be purely evangelical works, devotional bibles... really bad misconstrued rubbish.

quote:

---

I'm aware that there are a few Christians and nearly every Jew I brought this up with who say that story is misinterpreted and that what it condemns is rape and lack of hospitality.

---

Hmmm well, no they had been condemned before that, the incident at Lots house would have made little difference from what I can see. And no, they were not condemned because the entire population was some homosexual haven lol

Although I'm sure Billy Graham and company would like to believe so

As regards them being spared if they allowed the rape, Nope I agree with you on that one. What you have to understand is that from a sociological point of view, women were not worth dirt, rape and murder all good to go! It was a chauvinistic society.

Morally reprehensible as that is to us 2000+ years later in the west, simply standard way of life to Lot and his heathen brethren.

quote:

---

Thank the gods that most Christians who say they're Bible believers and that the word of God never changes and they live by it even if society condemns them don't actually know what it says!

---

Aint that the truth, also the fact that they believe its the inspired word of Yahweh/LORD etc is deeply troubling.

What they fail to understand is that it wasn't like it is today where everyone can have a bible or a Torah in their house, back then only the priestly class had access to it (most people were illiterate anyhow), and what do you think happens when you have control of the supposed divine word of god...

Leviticus receives its name from the Septuagint and means “relating to the Levites.” The Levites were the priests who were chosen of God to minister to the nation. The book of Leviticus contains many of the laws given by God to direct them in their work as priests for the worship of God.

You end up with bull$hit like Leviticus

Encase you haven't caught on, I'm not the least bit interested in the bible for any kind of spiritual or moral guidance (I don't think anyone from a rational frame of mind should be). I am however deeply interested in it from a anthropological pov, as I am with all religions -nods-

------------------

posted August 07, 2012 05:23 PM            

But then maybe this "pic to restore faith in humanity" represents more Christians than I thought:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/expresident/pictures-that-will-restore-your-faith-in-humanity

posted August 10, 2012 04:06 PM            

quote:

---

That line at Chick-fil-A touched me like a banner of unwelcome, like a vigilante caravan of people who could hardly wait for the opportunity to openly express their belief that I was an enemy to be conquered -- someone they longed to see be put back in her place as an anamoly, a threat to society, a pervert, a half-person.

It broke my heart.

Part of me wanted to scream my pain at the crowd. To reach into those cars, extend my hand, and somehow convince those Chick-fil-A supporters that I didn't deserve this -- that I'm a good person, a good neighbor, someone worthy of equality. The wiser, more experienced part of me knew that nothing I might say -- no quality I might hold, and nothing I might actually be -- would matter. The marrow of hate is rarely extracted by reason, or quelled by consideration. Hate exists, as thoughtless as any desert viper, ready to deliver a painful, poisonous strike against anything that feels like its opposite.

I drove home, closed my gate, and for the first time since I've lived here, locked it -- another visceral response I didn't expect. Much like someone who has been robbed and never again fails to check their doors and windows, tonight was a brutal lesson in loss. The loss of delusion, of feeling at ease, of innocence, of acceptance, of feeling like maybe, just maybe, I might be welcome in this largely conservative, but seemingly nice community

---

posted August 11, 2012 02:08 PM            

HOWEVER, CHIK FIL A apparently has been guilty of years of discrimination against gays in hiring and in employee relations for those gays who DO get through to jobs there.

also against women http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/27/brenda-honeycutt-chick -fil-a-sues-gender-discrimination_n_1709645.html

and against those who do not participate in company prayer meetings
http://www.alan.com/2012/07/26/chick-fil-a-faced-12-employment-discrimination-s uits-since-1988/
this IS the province of government, especially local government (like mayors and townships).

the second link mentions that Cathy apparently considers MARRIED employees better workers. so his support of ANTI-GAY-MARRIAGE organizations is an INDIRECT discrimination against gays.

posted August 12, 2012 02:01 PM            

People should be able to express their religion as long as others are not being harmed. So no sacrificing virgins, and no burning witches and heathens at the stake in this country.

So if someone is not okay the gay, they have a right to express it, as long as they don't get out of hand. (freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.)

But remember "ALL MEN are created EQUAL." ALL!!! All men! that means gay men as well. (can we seriously change it to all people/humans are created equal? As a woman the men part really bugs me. ha)

So to me...
"Freedom of Religion"+"All men are created equal"=This whole gay people being treated like minorities has got to stop. If they can't get married like straight men, they are not being treated equally. This is America!, freedom of religion...meaning you don't have to be from a religion that has that belief, to get married. Same sexes going at it does not harm straight people.

Even when gay marriage becomes legal, who am to tell someone they can't disagree with it? I also feel like if a priest or whatever doesn't want to marry a gay couple they shouldn't have to...why would a gay couple want to get married from someone who doesn't agree with it. The wedding should be a day of positivity. If I was gay I wouldn't want to force someone the help in my marriage that wasn't keen about it. I would just find someone else I'm sure there are preachers and stuff out there that would gladly marry a gay couple. Weddings are about being around positive and supportive people.

posted August 16, 2012 12:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katatonic:
lol, P.J....

gay marriage will only take stigma away from gays and their kids, it won't hurt "straight" folk one iota.

---

posted September 20, 2012 04:30 AM            

quote:

---

In a press release, the Civil Rights Agenda (TCRA) cites Chicago Alderman Proco "Joe" Moreno as confirming that Chick-fil-A officials declared in an internal document that the company "will treat every person equally, regardless of sexual orientation." TCRA reportedly served as an advisor to the alderman as he negotiated these concessions with Chick-fil-A executives, though details of exactly what those negotiations entailed remain unclear.

"We are very pleased with this outcome and thank Alderman Moreno for his work on this issue,” Anthony Martinez, executive director of TCRA, said in the statement. “I think the most substantive part of this outcome is that Chick-fil-A has ceased donating to organizations that promote discrimination, specifically against LGBT civil rights. It has taken months of discussion, both with our organization and with the Alderman, for Chick-fil-A to come forward with these concessions and we feel this is a strong step forward for Chick-fil-A and the LGBT community, although it is only a step.”

---

posted September 24, 2012 11:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aquacheeka:
I find it amusing how the most bigoted (most religious) states are also statistically the fattest. Finally, the connection between fast food and hatred is complete.

---

posted September 24, 2012 08:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aquacheeka:
I find it amusing how the most bigoted (most religious) states are also statistically the fattest. Finally, the connection between fast food and hatred is complete.

---

Double LOL!

posted December 13, 2012 03:09 PM            

As just ONE example, the Catholics attack condoms in Africa while American evangelicals try (and sometimes succeed) at getting "kill the gays" bills passed. Meanwhile, very real dark ages style tyranny, torture, execution of witches, literal slavery, death camps, and the like are going on in Africa, and without condoms AIDS becomes a lot worse as does famine, and it's said the reason baby raping is supposed to be so common out there (but THAT doesn't bother evangelicals, so much for "caring about babies") is because there's a belief (imported from Victorian England, IIRC) that raping a pure virgin (such as an infant is guaranteed to be) would transfer a deadly disease (like AIDS) into the baby and out of the rapist. Rape is all too common as well (it's so bad that the "rape condom" was developed in which woman literally booby trap their private parts, though many are scared to wear it rightfully fearing they'll be killed when several tiny hooks mutilate the penis of her rapist, especially as it's designed to help identify and convict rapists as well), but that doesn't bother "good Christians" anywhere as much as consensual sex, or even true love, between people of the same gender. Full grown men holding hands is EVIL to them yet full grown men (many being rapists, perhaps even baby rapers) passing out guns to little boys to take part in a genocide does not concern them. Go figure.

Seriously, how is that not messed up?

If they instead focused their energy on helping Doctors Without Borders, in brokering peace and ending slaughter, and if they MUST dictate punishment then going after rapists (especially baby rapists) instead then think how much better it might be there? But the truth is they're evil. As Jesus said, you will know a tree by the fruit it produces, and they're generally blind to their own evil nature (defined as devoid of compassion and trying to promote suffering, both "just because" and because it gives them power).

Unfortunately, it's not just Africa (which just provides a stark, extreme example that no one can rationalize), it's all too common everywhere.

Just one example from my own personal life is I used to live a couple blocks from a Catholic Church that once held a prayer rally in support of the antigay Prop 8. And at that specific prayer rally many showed up blocking driveways in our neighborhood, and a couple came out after praying in their church to rip out of their parking spot to run over a neighbor's cat (she saw it happen). As a small complaint the church refused to pick up dog droppings less than a foot off their property until I (godless heathen that I am) did it for them. Much more significantly, I've been menaced by gang rape twice by people who are likely members of their church, but their church has NOTHING to say about rape culture. Or, for that matter, child sex trafficking or even children abused in the Catholic Church. How can I not see that as evil when they go after love but not actual evil, including evil by their own members?

Btw, when I was a kid in the Bible Belt me and some other kids "adopted" old people in an old folks home because the good Christians there would leave those forgotten by the good Christians in their own filth (at least one was even killed by fire ants before anyone noticed) and so we tricked Christians into thinking family still cared by claiming to be grandkids or great grandkids and hinting that our parents were still concerned (luckily they never checked to verify our stories, but I'm sure such good Christians would never imagine that kids could possibly have compassion on their charges). Of course they said I was the Satan worshiping **** , but what's one more lie on their part? Which leads me to another observation that maybe life would be better if Christians were more concerned with FOLLOWING the 10 commandments rather than pasting them everywhere.

posted December 13, 2012 03:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lexxigramer:

---

Btw, their music vid (and it's REAL!):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBV2hnPxESw

posted December 15, 2012 07:37 PM            

Here's the screenshot, but given the entirely justified profanity IMO (and coming from me that's saying something) I'm linking to it rather than showing it:
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/576287_381460298612812_615397244_n.jpg

And Christians are liking it instead of knocking the kool aid out of his hands. As Christians continue to attack those who are morally superior to them by far I'm thinking of something Jesus himself said in Matthew 7:4: "Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?"

ETA: looks like Westboro is gonna publicly praise God for it, too:
http://twitter.com/DearShirley/status/279953994124783618

quote:

---

Westboro will picket Sandy Hook Elementary School to sing praise to God for the glory of his work in executing his judgment

---

posted December 16, 2012 11:04 AM            

quote:

---

I have wondered how much better the world would be if Christians tried to attack suffering rather than promoting a philosophy that created suffering.

---

if only............