Subject:
|
Re: Why I spoke up -- little issues left alone sometimes become big issues
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 13 Dec 1998 20:36:10 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.#nomorespam#com
|
Viewed:
|
389 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Berry wrote:
>
> Hmmm... Something told me this would get to this point. This is long gang --
> sorry.
And this is longer.
Steve, you've erected several straw men and then knocked them down. If
you want to spar with me, disagree with what I say directly, please, or
at least what is actually a valid inference from what I said, instead of
trying to put words in my mouth.
> And, yes I'm aware that historical calendars put Christ's birth many months
> outside of December. Some scholars have thought it was more likely in June.
> I don't dispute that, but I stand by my earlier observations.
Fine, but irrelevant. No one is arguing the point that Christmas has a
special meaning to Christians. The point argued by you was that
Christmas is somehow only a christian holiday, and others can't use the
time of year, or the label, to celebrate as they see fit. We get lots of
joy from the holiday, as a time to share love, and material possessions,
and good fun, eating, gaming, shopping, watching movies, sitting around
and arguing with relatives, and lots of other things, without any
references to faith or any putative higher beings. People have been
doing that for thousands of years.
> Why I spoke up about Larry's footnote:
>
> Well, because I often see my side of the belief isle pushed aside quickly and
> harshly at times in discussion groups and secular society in general(sorry
> Larry, I know you believe we Christians live in our ivory towers immune from
> criticism and persecution).
Never said that. Quote me, please. What I did say was that Christians,
especially American evangelicals are quick to trot out the persecution
claim, but actually are net persecutors. History abounds with examples
of people professing to espouse christian ideals, chartered by the
extant christian institutions of the time, busily oppressing. The
inquisition, the entire Spanish conquest of America, the crusades, the
KKK, and the clinic bombers are all groups that come to mind pretty
quickly. I live in Grand Rapids and I can witness to persecution by
Christians every day.
Further, what I have said elsewhere is that certain christians are
pretty darn self righteous about it, and among the most closeminded and
intolerant members of our species I've ever enountered (not sure I'd
even characterize all self professed christians as human, as anyone who
tortures another, for any reason whatever, isn't human, by my morality).
But that is far afield from my original point and brought up only to
deflate your (what seems automatic) assertion that if someone speaks up
and points out that you're being closed minded, that they are
persecuting you.
But this is a straw man. You brought up the persecution thing as a
defence for your intolerance.
> Look at politics for your proof. Dan Quayle, a
> Christian,
c /Christian/Buffoon, moron, and bigot/ and you might get somewhere with
this statement. Face it. He can hardly tie his shoes without help.
Fortunately he's not smart enough to cause any trouble. I hope he wins
the 2000 republican nod. I might even vote for him. An ineffective
president is better than a misguided or evil effective one. (I've pored
over some of his speeches, so I'm pretty sure he's clueless... even if
his writers wrote everything he's too clueless to recognise it as
tripe...)
> gets ridiculed to this day for misspelling potato and attacking
> Murphy Brown, yet Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton continue to ride the waves of
> popularity despite their many infidelities.
c /infidelities/crimes of murder, usurpation of power and outright
theft/ and I might agree with you here. Dan Quayle's evil is no excuse
for Bill's, and vice versa. Both parties of the duopoly are rotten to
the core. And the mainstream media is a big part of the problem. Too
many marxists in the Columbia School of Journalism, I guess.
But this is a straw man. I never said anything about any politicians in
this thread that would draw Danny or Bill into the topic.
> I guess this wouldn't bother me
> if I didn't see other beliefs go unchallenged and in some cases, reveled in.
> Some of that is the fault of Christians, for cowering to the secular culture's
> pressure.
That is a load of malarky. I have never seen a christian cower. Another
straw man.
> There are examples of the above found in newsgroups unrelated to atheism,
> Christianity or other "belief systems." Including, less we forget, during
> previous RTL discussions in the past. For example, Tim Courtney was
> practically run out of RTL (if that were possible on a newsgroup) due to
> comments he made about not agreeing with homosexuality.
Missed that, before my time. I certainly would not have taken part in
it. I would have been standing up defending his right to hold whatever
views he cared to as long as he was not advocating denying rights of
others. I personally can never envision myself ever going that way. But
nonetheless I would defend any group that wasn't hurting others to be
left alone and receive equal treatment under the law. (note that I
oppose affirmative action and the EEOC law, among other things)
However, I have time and again seen professed christians going way
beyond explaining their views, and advocating using the government to
oppress people that had made choices they did not agree with... when
called on it, they usually claim they are being repressed. I'd have to
search Deja to know the particulars here, so please be aware I am not
saying that's what happened then.
The synthetic point here is that the net is libertarian in nature, it
tolerates diverse viewpoints and ideas but doesn't tolerate repression
well. Many Christians seem to naturally repress, and get flamed for it,
over and over. Deal.
> Here's a younger guy
> speaking out against something he knew would not be popular on RTL. Heck, I
> don't even remember how the discussion got to that point, but I thought it
> would have been nice for someone to say -- regardless if they believed in
> Tim's stance or not -- good job for speaking up for what you believe in. I
> regretted not doing this myself.
I would have.... but this is a straw man.
> There are many other examples... There have been politically incorrect
> comments made by unknowing younger folks, who had to beg and plead for
> forgiveness from frequenters on RTL (and from what I remember, these people
> were not offended Christians). So, I wonder how unique this Christian's
> response really is?
No idea which ones you're referring to, no idea what other responses
are, but a straw man nonetheless.
> So, my point is, it was time for me to say something. I just thought it odd
> that Larry felt the need to footnote what he did in a LEGO trains newsgroup.
> And, I know most of you find it just as odd and irrational that I did what I
> did. But sometimes (IMO), letting the little stinks become big stinks is
> better than letting those little stinks go unanswered. How's that for
> philosophical?
Now we at last get closer to the central core. I said something that I
and many others claim was in context, not an advocacy of anything, and
completely appropriate, and you in the classic intolerant manner of so
many professed christians, jumped all over it, attempting to repress the
very mention of a characteristic of myself that I felt was relevant to
mention.
If I mention in context that I am right handed without advocating that
everyone should be, it would be just as silly for some left hander to
point out that it wasn't appropriate. Less silly, actually.
> I would feel more embarrased about speaking up if I often interjected my
> personal religious beliefs into discussions about LEGO (footnotes, SIGS or
> whatever). But, I don't do that. Jim Baker, I invite you to search Dejanews
> for evidence. This is the first time I've done it and aside from my initial
> response on lugnet.trains, I've taken the rest of my comments to this off-
> topic area. And, kudos to Larry for bringing the discussion here to begin
> with.
>
> Finally, I do not dislike Larry nor do I dislike those who agreed with him and
> decided to counterattack my beliefs or lecture me about the ways of the
> world. I only hope the best for them and I hope they can forgive me for what
> I chose to do here. I do pray that God or whatever they believe in gives them
> what Christ has given to me and my family -- a direction, a sense of hope in
> the face of adversity, the power to find inner courage and strength, and an
> understanding of what it means to have FAITH. For those things go beyond any
> philisophical discussion we might have here, or any little stinks I make into
> big stinks.
Please do not pray for me. I do not wish anyone praying on my behalf and
get offended when people do it in my presence. I certainly can't stop
them or you, it certainly is their right... but don't waste your breath.
I'm happy that you have FAITH (in all caps), but I have only reason,
evidence and logic, and I get along just fine, as does the rest of my
family. In fact I'd say we're happier and better adjusted than most
christians I know.
Note that I explicitly waive my right to be in heaven, because I
explicitly reject the christian god. There is no god, but if there were,
and such an implausible place as heaven existed, but merely living an
honest life was insufficent for entry and instead he required idolation,
he's a god that has no legitimacy by my moral code, merely a bully. Not
a heaven I'd care to be in. You're welcome to it.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
12 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
