"Moderate" christians protest Hindu prayer in Senate [Archive]

Drake

05-03-2010, 07:15 AM

At least Christians aren't threatening to kill two guys who make funny cartoons.

Makes it no less depressing or ignorant. Sick that you'd back this kind of behavior

mawali

05-03-2010, 07:19 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viEG8440rT4

Boy, do I hate people who try to force their ideology on others!
There should be no such thing as a 'moderate' Christian! It should be by one's actions or lack thereof that determines and distinguishes good from evil.

MasterKiller

05-03-2010, 07:36 AM

At least Christians aren't threatening to kill two guys who make funny cartoons.

LOL! The group that made the threats was apparently founded and run by Joseph Cohen, a former Israeli Radical who use to live in a settlement in the West Bank. Joseph Cohen (aka Yousef al-Khattab).

Grew up in a Jewish neighborhood in New York and attending a orthodox rabbinical school in Israel, Joseph Cohen went to live in a settlement in the West Bank to help steal Palestinian land from Palestinians. His story is that he “converted” to Islam after meeting someone in a chat room.

Drake

05-03-2010, 08:38 AM

That was a state senate meeting, yah?

David Jamieson

05-03-2010, 08:43 AM

Boy, do I hate people who try to force their ideology on others!
There should be no such thing as a 'moderate' Christian! It should be by one's actions or lack thereof that determines and distinguishes good from evil.

dude, the only forcing i saw was a hindu trying to say a prayer in a state legislature.

church (any church) and state do not mix.
I don't blame those people for not accepting that at all.

Do they have christian prayers in the senate?
If so, that should stop too.

No praying to sky beings while making rule of law.
Pretty simple rule.

Drake

05-03-2010, 08:52 AM

It's an invocation, and they are nondenominational. Military does it too. I don't agree with it, but trying to change it is a pretty futile battle.

David Jamieson

05-03-2010, 11:06 AM

It's an invocation, and they are nondenominational. Military does it too. I don't agree with it, but trying to change it is a pretty futile battle.

futile or not, I"m not down with any praying in government halls outside of perhaps individuals praying in their offices by themselves.

Otherwise ALL religious rituals and ceremonials should be outright banned completely from government.

Drake

05-03-2010, 11:07 AM

futile or not, I"m not down with any praying in government halls outside of perhaps individuals praying in their offices by themselves.

Otherwise ALL religious rituals and ceremonials should be outright banned completely from government.

In other words, I fought the good fight and lost.

1bad65

05-03-2010, 11:18 AM

Makes it no less depressing or ignorant. Sick that you'd back this kind of behavior

Where did I back this kind of behavior?

Drake

05-03-2010, 11:20 AM

Where did I back this kind of behavior?

By dismissing it as being "not as bad" as more extreme behavior. Do you condemn and disapprove of what happened there or not?

1bad65

05-03-2010, 11:24 AM

By dismissing it as being "not as bad" as more extreme behavior. Do you condemn and disapprove of what happened there or not?

"Not as bad" means one is worse than the other. It doesn't mean one is ok.

I need to watch the video. But I'm sure they haven't beheaded anyone, or called for a country's destruction, or worn a sidearm to a UN meeting, or called for the killing of an author, or offered to pay money to suicide bombers, or flown planes into buildings, or gassed their own people. You know, things the 'peaceful' Muslims do.

1bad65

05-03-2010, 11:29 AM

I watched it. They shouldn't have done it. But I maintain I'd rather deal with them being upset about religion than deal with the 'peaceful' Muslims when they get upset about religion.

Reality_Check

05-03-2010, 11:31 AM

"Not as bad" means one is worse than the other. It doesn't mean one is ok.

I need to watch the video. But I'm sure they haven't beheaded anyone, or called for a country's destruction, or worn a sidearm to a UN meeting, or called for the killing of an author, or offered to pay money to suicide bombers, or flown planes into buildings, or gassed their own people. You know, things the 'peaceful' Muslims do.

Or bombed abortion clinics...
Or killed abortion providers...

Drake

05-03-2010, 11:38 AM

I watched it. They shouldn't have done it. But I maintain I'd rather deal with them being upset about religion than deal with the 'peaceful' Muslims when they get upset about religion.

Stop detracting. It was inexcusable behavior. These are grown men acting like children. People who are SUPPOSED to be representing the greatest nation in the world, acting like lunatics. And you try to lighten their deeds by bring up another religion?

Answer my question. Do you condemn their actions?

1bad65

05-03-2010, 02:20 PM

Or bombed abortion clinics...
Or killed abortion providers...

But can you show their priests/pastors/religious leaders calling for those illegal actions? I can show plenty of Muslim religious leaders who have called for bombings, beheadings, killing rape victims, etc.

1bad65

05-03-2010, 02:22 PM

Stop detracting. It was inexcusable behavior. These are grown men acting like children. People who are SUPPOSED to be representing the greatest nation in the world, acting like lunatics. And you try to lighten their deeds by bring up another religion?

Answer my question. Do you condemn their actions?

A lunatic is someone who flies a plane into a building to kill thousands of innocent people and thinks he will be rewarded with a bunch of virgins. These guys interrupted a prayer with some words. While both are wrong, please tell me you see a huge difference here...

Drake

05-03-2010, 03:08 PM

A lunatic is someone who flies a plane into a building to kill thousands of innocent people and thinks he will be rewarded with a bunch of virgins. These guys interrupted a prayer with some words. While both are wrong, please tell me you see a huge difference here...

It's irrelevant. I could just as easily say it was much worse during the Inquisition, but it has no relevance. I am talking solely about the childish and intolerant behavior at the senate meeting, and you attempt to detract with something unrelated. You could say Genghis Khan was worse, too, but...IT ISN'T RELEVANT.

Seriously, either stay on track or discuss this one all by yourself, because I don't fall for silly distractions from the topic. In fact... you might as well, because you still dodge the question.

KC Elbows

05-03-2010, 03:14 PM

A lunatic is someone who flies a plane into a building to kill thousands of innocent people and thinks he will be rewarded with a bunch of virgins. These guys interrupted a prayer with some words. While both are wrong, please tell me you see a huge difference here...

The difference is, he's discussing the topic at hand, while you're bringing a non sequitor that has no bearing on the topic as if it does. It's fine to introduce new elements to a discussion, but to do it in a way that puts the onus of answering on everyone but you is not strong argumentation.

Using the same tact, someone could mention that muslims have opened the senate with prayers, and behaved better than these Christians or the extremist muslims. By your tactic, you lose every time a moderate of any religion is compared to those politicians acting that way.

EDIT- Drake beat me to it, and managed to bring up Genghis Khan. ****.

1bad65

05-04-2010, 07:03 AM

Of course it is relevant. These guys in the Senate did what they did because of religion. And those 'peaceful' Muslims do what they do because of religion.

Reality_Check

05-04-2010, 07:28 AM

But can you show their priests/pastors/religious leaders calling for those illegal actions? I can show plenty of Muslim religious leaders who have called for bombings, beheadings, killing rape victims, etc.

Randall Terry.

1bad65

05-04-2010, 09:14 AM

Randall Terry.

So you can name ONE. :rolleyes:

And I've never even heard of the guy. Is he in prison, btw? If he lives in America, and openly calls for violence, he will be in prison like the peaceful Muslim clerics in American prisons.

Drake

05-04-2010, 09:19 AM

This thread just went stupid.

Reality_Check

05-04-2010, 09:34 AM

So you can name ONE. :rolleyes:

And I've never even heard of the guy. Is he in prison, btw? If he lives in America, and openly calls for violence, he will be in prison like the peaceful Muslim clerics in American prisons.

You've never heard of Operation Rescue? I find that hard to believe.

And why would he be in prison for advocating violence? It's his 1st Amendment right.

Reality_Check

05-04-2010, 09:35 AM

This thread just went stupid.

They all do eventually.

1bad65

05-04-2010, 10:23 AM

You've never heard of Operation Rescue? I find that hard to believe.

You didn't mention them. You said Randall Terry.

And why would he be in prison for advocating violence? It's his 1st Amendment right.

Omar_Abdel-Rahman is in prison for it. And you cannot openly call for violence. It is a crime. As is yelling "Fire!" in a movie theater, even with the 1st Amendment.

David Jamieson

05-04-2010, 10:26 AM

...you cannot openly call for violence. It is a crime.

Bush jr , Cheney and Rumsfeld as well as Powell, Frum, Rice and the rest should all be arrested.

as well, so should Obama and Clinton for making the nuclear threats against the rogues gallery of the UN. :p

all of these are calling, have called for or are now calling for violence to be perpetrated by americans.

Reality_Check

05-04-2010, 10:33 AM

You didn't mention them. You said Randall Terry.

Um...Randall Terry founded Operation Rescue.

1bad65

05-04-2010, 12:24 PM

Bush jr , Cheney and Rumsfeld as well as Powell, Frum, Rice and the rest should all be arrested.

as well, so should Obama and Clinton for making the nuclear threats against the rogues gallery of the UN. :p

all of these are calling, have called for or are now calling for violence to be perpetrated by americans.

Oh Jeez, here we go again.

We are talking American law, not international law. This incident happened in the US Senate, so the UN is moot.

Of course I say the UN is a huge joke. When they elected Iran to it's Commission on Women's Rights, they proved that.

1bad65

05-04-2010, 12:25 PM

Um...Randall Terry founded Operation Rescue.

Does he preach violence? I'm not up to par on them, but I thought they just protested peacefully.

1bad65

05-05-2010, 06:29 AM

David Jamieson

05-05-2010, 06:34 AM

Looks like another peaceful Muslim was arrested on terror charges. Faisal Shahzad was also a registered Democrat, and I don't believe he was a memeber of Operation Rescue either.

Also, he was able to board a plane despite being on the 'no fly list'. So comforting to the Federal airport screeners are doing such a great job. But hey, they did delay Joe Foss several years back when he was trying to board a plane.

LOL. This is the most idiotic thing I've read today. Awesome.
Thanks for spewing the Limbaugh on the floor.

Why do you follow that obese drug addict anyway? His mind is as screwy as an old rusty bolt. He gets a radio show because people like you are easy to rile up and simple in their world view.

1bad65

05-05-2010, 06:54 AM

LOL. This is the most idiotic thing I've read today. Awesome.
Thanks for spewing the Limbaugh on the floor.

Why do you follow that obese drug addict anyway? His mind is as screwy as an old rusty bolt. He gets a radio show because people like you are easy to rile up and simple in their world view.

Who cares who said it. It's 100% true. :D

You may despise every fiber of his being, and you may feel the same way about me, but what I posted is 100% fact.

Drake

05-05-2010, 07:02 AM

Threadjack is now complete. Original subject lost, and every question unanswered. FAIL.

David Jamieson

05-05-2010, 09:49 AM

Threadjack is now complete. Original subject lost, and every question unanswered. FAIL.

back on topic, I would have vocally protested the prayer, hindu or otherwise.

ALL religious ritual, rites or ideology has to be completely and utterly removed from any government office or state run office or school or public place.

religion should be like your sex life. 100% private and none of any one else's business.

so the hindu was wrong for trying to pray there and the Christians were wrong for countering with their own little prayers and in the end they all look like a pack of ignoramuses.

Secular Humanism is the only way to be fair and impartial in law and governance.

Drake

05-05-2010, 10:58 AM

back on topic, I would have vocally protested the prayer, hindu or otherwise.

ALL religious ritual, rites or ideology has to be completely and utterly removed from any government office or state run office or school or public place.

religion should be like your sex life. 100% private and none of any one else's business.

so the hindu was wrong for trying to pray there and the Christians were wrong for countering with their own little prayers and in the end they all look like a pack of ignoramuses.

Secular Humanism is the only way to be fair and impartial in law and governance.

He was invited...it's not like he wandered in there and started praying...

David Jamieson

05-05-2010, 11:02 AM

He was invited...it's not like he wandered in there and started praying...

then the invitation was an error as well.
With that in mind, it was also likely to be a provocative move by the person who extended the invitation and serves as a great example of why there should be zero religious activity of any kind whatsoever in society at large and government in particular.

religion should be kept in peoples places of worship and in their homes.

it is as personal and private as ones sexual life and should have no influence whatsoever on the day to day doings of society as a whole.

1bad65

05-05-2010, 11:04 AM

back on topic, I would have vocally protested the prayer, hindu or otherwise.

ALL religious ritual, rites or ideology has to be completely and utterly removed from any government office or state run office or school or public place.

religion should be like your sex life. 100% private and none of any one else's business.

so the hindu was wrong for trying to pray there and the Christians were wrong for countering with their own little prayers and in the end they all look like a pack of ignoramuses.

Secular Humanism is the only way to be fair and impartial in law and governance.

While we disagree, I do admire the fact you are not picking and choosing on this topic. You're message stays the same, regardless of the religion in question.

David Jamieson

05-05-2010, 11:07 AM

While we disagree, I do admire the fact you are not picking and choosing on this topic. You're message stays the same, regardless of the religion in question.

I have my belief, it is mine. I do not undertake to push it onto anyone else.
In secular matters we debate and argue until we find a solution or put the subject away until cooler heads prevail.

But taking religion out of secular humanist activities is paramount to moving forward.

If not for the barriers that comes with pushing a religion on someone, we'd probably be mining asteroids, walking on mars and living on a pristine and beautiful planet instead of killing it daily with our ever widening hungry jaws of destruction.

1bad65

05-05-2010, 11:14 AM

David Jamieson

05-05-2010, 11:25 AM

Religion is a wonderful thing, when used for good. Feeding the poor, helping your neighbor, giving to charity, obeying the laws, etc. But when it's used to promote hate and violence, it's a horrible thing.

It is not necessary at all to do the former and as for the latter, well that's how it has always been.

SnowDog

05-05-2010, 11:55 AM

and as for the latter, well that's how it has always been.

This just made me think of Tool Lyrics....LOL!!!!!

Credulous at best
Your desire to believe in
Angels in the hearts of men.
But pull your head on out (of) your hippie haze
And give a listen
Shouldn't have to say it all again

The universe is hostile
So impersonal
Devour to survive
So it is, so it's always been ...

KC Elbows

05-05-2010, 01:51 PM

So, I'm trying to get this straight. The buddhist is bad for allowing religion into the political sphere, the christians are bad for being intolerant and mannerless losers, and the muslims were bad in absentia?

Am I following this correctly?

Where do the Zoroastrians fall?