Random Thoughts Thread

[catnip]

...a lot of you are really offensive sometimes and it goes unchecked. It's sad.

You do realize that a great many on this forum still believe and live our lives based on this fairy tale, right? We're so stupid and we need a crutch, so we've hitched our coat tails to this feel good story about redemption

But, it isn't just me and other forum members you are offending, it's the 73% of Americans who identify themselves as Christian / Catholic (2012 Pew Poll).

I certainly am sorry if I offended you, as that was not my intention. I definitely like a lot of things about the Bible, and think that it can be very inspirational/a great starting point to creating a moral framework based around love and acceptance, which I think is the ultimate goal, really.

That said, believing in the teachings of the Bible, and believing in the events that transpired therein, are two very different things. I don't think what I said was terribly offensive. Ignorant? Perhaps, as I haven't read the specific passage about contraception. All I was trying to say was that arguing against something "because God said so" shouldn't hold up in any real sense. Not tryin' to come down on anyone, I believe some shit that many would find ridiculous. Just tryin' to make a little fun.

[dsheinem]

Let's face it, the entire 'religious' angle was just a front for Hobby Lobby to go "boo hoo Obamacare" and get it taken to the supreme court.

No, I don't think so. I have no doubt that they believe that those drugs are abortion-causing and, thus, against their religious principles. Getting a chance to dig at Obama is likely a bonus, not the driving force.

And frankly, religion vs. science and the Right vs. Obama were sideshows in this case. The ruling is irritating mostly because, following Citizens United, it further establishes the "personhood" of corporations.

[dsheinem]

I haven't read the specific passage about contraception.

That's because they don't exist.

Contraception "rules" in Christianity today are mostly a Catholic thing. Here's the Wiki on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_ ... traception. Hobby Lobby's owners are Protestant, not Catholic, and don't have a problem with most forms of birth control.

But the case, really, wasn't about "contraception" for those most invested in its morality. It was about abortion.

[Flake]

The ruling is irritating mostly because, following Citizens United, it further establishes the "personhood" of corporations.

The only solace I take is that this ruling has created the precedent for corporate "personhood" to become such a problem that the entire concept has to be revisited. There is effectively nothing stopping any corporation from claiming that something they don't like violates their religious beliefs - pollution, taxes, giving employees time off, arbitration... As long as the company is closely held and the leadership is filled with people whose devotion to the buck outweighs their religious scruples, the argument is there.

That's not something that can be allowed to exist unchecked.

[mjmjr25]

I definitely like a lot of things about the Bible, and think that it can be very inspirational/a great starting point to creating a moral framework based around love and acceptance, which I think is the ultimate goal, really. .

That may be a goal for some organizations, governments, or even individual people. It is not a "goal" for anyone who has accepted Christ as their Saviour. This issue is too complex to try and explain in a single post - so i'll do my best briefly. Many people point to odd / oft horrible FACTS that occurred in the Old Testament and do not understand there is a clear and DIVINE separation of Old and New Testament. In the New Testament teachings; we have the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who says, "Ya know what, you guys are right - these guys aren't doing God's Will, despite being picked by God, here's the real deal." When people point to flaws, intolerances, injustices - they point to the Old Testament and have no clue what they're really pointing to. Yes God was in control then too, of course, and has always been in control, but he also gave the gift of Free Will and left to do as we choose, we have chosen temptation (and sin) time an time again. After thousands of years of sin he sent a Son in human form to speak for him. A chance to be born again. Again - leaving too much out, but hopefully this can be helpful to some.

All I was trying to say was that arguing against something "because God said so" shouldn't hold up in any real sense.

It is the only thing that matters, or makes "real sense" to those who live these temporal lives and have been blessed with the opportunity to serve witness. I understand this board doesn't accurately depict the American or world populace at all, but it would be nice if the tolerance and respect to belief systems were on an even playing field.

[dsheinem]

It is the only thing that matters, or makes "real sense" to those who live these temporal lives and have been blessed with the opportunity to serve witness. I understand this board doesn't accurately depict the American or world populace at all, but it would be nice if the tolerance and respect to belief systems were on an even playing field.

I agree. We've had many chats focusing around religion over the years on Racketboy that didn't resort to name-calling or belittling but rather strived to reach understanding of specific commonalities, differences, and their causes. I think it's fair to say that the more religious members of the board have been the ones most likely to do this in the spirit of inquiry and debate, whereas it's usually some reactionary anti-religous zealot that comes in and ruins everything and (sometimes) gets a thread locked up by hurling insults.

So yeah: it's fine to be critical of Hobby Lobby and their position, to take to task the underlying logics of the case or to question its outcome, but let's not just attack religious beliefs and those who hold them because "OMG RELIGIOUS BELIEFS HUR DE HUR!".

[catnip]

let's not just attack religious beliefs and those who hold them because "OMG RELIGIOUS BELIEFS HUR DE HUR!".

If this is what y'all thought I was doing, I'm sorry. I'm certainly down for tolerance and respect. I don't think I was being intolerant/disrespectful. Made a joke; wasn't well-received. My bad, dawgz.

[TSTR]

/personal confession on

As an angry young man, I used to be extremely hateful toward religion and its adherents--Christianity in specific. It started from shock value pentagrams, inverted crosses, and heavy metal; to vandalism and theft; and then went to something very dark (no people or animals were harmed, fyi). I even briefly considered an act of domestic terrorism to remove a giant cross that I saw as a blight on the beautiful mountains of Asheville.

However, I have since with time become less angry and spiteful and realized how stupid my previous behavior and feelings were. My opinions have changed quite a bit.

If you're down with tha G.O.D., whatever it be, that's cool with me.

I draw the line where people who are not of a particular belief system are forced to do/deprived of things due to the influence of said belief system.

Witnessing personally is one thing. I don't mind Witnesses of Jehovah knocking on my door early Saturday morning as long as they don't mind me shutting the door in their face, politely.

Turning witnessing into a push for legislation is another. You do you, I'll do me, and we'll all live in harmony.

/personal confession off

[ZeroAX]

So if I am a muslim/jew and I start a firm in America does that mean I can "force" all women who work for me to wear a hijab? Either hide your skin and hair or you're fired?


Also fighting so hard for the rights of sperm and an egg, only to be so against free healthcare/education and in general supporting the baby that will be born from that sperm and egg till it's able to become independent, imo goes against everything the bible teaches, that's what I meant with my comment.

[Jmustang1968]

So if I am a muslim/jew and I start a firm in America does that mean I can "force" all women who work for me to wear a hijab? Either hide your skin and hair or you're fired?

That logic is backwards. The company isnt forcing its employees to not use birth control nor are they firing those who do. They just wont help subsidize it through insurance.