1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pope backtracking on condom statement

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, Nov 22, 2010.

  1. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    Marriage is now a constitutional right? And what difference does it make to you what people want to believe as to how the earth was created? And now Christians are polluters as well because they don't run around in ugly sandals hugging trees?

    Now YOU are trying to play God, but unlike the Pope, nobody gives a shit what you have to say.
     
  2. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    Yes, you are confused but at least you can admit it.

    I never once hinted that people who believe in religion should force their beliefs on others.

    What I said was that if you believe in something - whatever it is - and you don't believe it is an absolute truth and applies to everyone than you are wasting your time with it.

    You believe there is no God and mock people who do as being "weak minded" and "foolish".

    How is that any different than people who believe in, Christianity, for instance, who believe that anyone who doesn't believe in Christ is going to hell?

    And for the record - I believe abortion is immoral, but to ban it would be impractical, I'm on the record 1,000 times as saying that homosexuals should be able to marry whoever the fuck they want and the government should get out of the marriage business all together and I'm not sure there is anyone trying to ban premarital sex anywhere, much less me.

    There is a huge difference between not condoning immoral behavior and trying to legislate it.

    But while we are at trying to not legislate morality, at least be as consistent as I am and let's also do away with every silly liberal scheme to redistribute wealth in this country, let's also do away with overbearing environmental regulations and let's also do away with forced compassion and sympathy in the form of foreign aid to third-world countries - because those are all forms of legislating morality as well.
     
  3. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Actually, what we really need is for you to try to have a discussion without the personal attacks for once. I highly doubt you can manage.

    Your version is one of absolutes. Others have beliefs that have room to accept that we don't have all the answers. They allow for questioning.

    So yes, you did hint at exactly what I said.
     
  4. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    No, I didn't.

    I never once said or approached or even hinted that you need to believe the same things I do and if you don't, you aren't going all the way with your faith.

    Not once, yet you, being the mush head you are, couldn't comprehend what I said and decided that you'd rather talk out of your ass than keep quiet until you actually could comprehend it fully.

    I'll try it again.

    What I said was this:

    If you don't believe that whatever it is YOU believe is the absolute truth, then why are you bothering in the first place?

    If you truly believe that Jesus is the way to heaven and the only way to heaven, why would you then say "well of course, there are other ways, too."

    It makes no sense.
     
  5. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Yes, it is.
     
  6. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    The insinuation that without a Bible to set us on our way, people wouldn't have figured out that killing each other and stealing each other's stuff is a bad idea should be offensive to anyone capable of rational thought.
     
  7. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    You're of course right on this, but they really opened this all up with Vatican II. If anything is open for reexamination, and the grounds for that reexamination aren't clearly articulated (are they? I don't think so, but I don't know Catholicism very well), then people feel that they can justifiably question anything & it's hard to explain why they can't.
     
  8. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    Good hit. It's called growing up.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  9. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    This touches on the key argument, which is : you can believe whatever you want, but don't impose
    the results of your private beliefs on my life. You don't have the right, in the vast majority of cases.
    And this is why so many people are fed up with the Hard Right, because of the social-conservative
    package hiding behind all the economic rhetoric.
     
  10. Captain_Kirk

    Captain_Kirk Well-Known Member

    I was thinking more the 15th century. Or at least post-Norman Conquest.

    Oh well, maybe some day....
     
  11. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Yes, you did. You are saying that if somebody doesn't believe in the way that you do, they are wrong.

    I understand what you are saying just fine. You, unfortunately, don't even fully comprehend the words you are typing, much less those of others.
     
  12. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Three things people shouldn't discuss on this board: politics, religion and sports. :)

    The debate of whether religion is for the weak-minded comes down to this, some try to prove with all of their might that God exists, and some go the opposite way. Most of the world lives in the middle where we just want a warm bed to sleep in, food to eat, and be safe.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page