God

[packsaddle]

Menorah? Menorah? Holy Toledo, folks in this region have been hoodwinked. All this time we thought those were just candelabras.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

I call you ineducable, Ed, because you've demonstrated that in this forum. It's been pointed out to you many times by me and others that the Michigan mosque is subject to the SAME noise laws as everyone else, yet you keep bringing it up as a supposed example of unequal treatment. You say "freedom of religion is freedom of all religion," yet you keep using an example where one religion is being treated the SAME as all other religions as if it's a counterexample!

 

And that's why I call you ineducable.

[NJCubScouter]

Rooster says:

 

However, there was a time in this country, when many individuals literally found a soapbox and stood on a corner off of Main Street, or in a public square, or in the middle of a city park, and loudly proclaimed their opinion. Sometimes the message was religious, sometimes it was political, and sometimes it was just non-sense. Nevertheless, I believe they exemplified the free society that our founders fought for, and it was not only legal, it was celebrated.

 

and

 

Yes - everyone has a right to ignore the message of others. BUT - everyone should also have the right to proclaim the message of their own choosing in public squares.

 

All of that can still happen, and still does happen. It is less prevalent today, probably because much more efficient means of communication are available. The obvious example is the one that is literally at our fingertips as we have this conversation. The Internet allows you to proclaim your message nationwide, even worldwide, at the touch of a button, and at relatively low cost. Even before the advent of the Internet, desktop publishing, and before that something as low-tech as the early photocopiers alllowed people to get their messages across on a "mass" basis. I find leaflets, some religious in nature, under my windshield wiper on a regular basis, not to mention people coming to my home (fortunately, I am usually not there at the time) to give me literature about their personal version of God.

 

All of this mass communication can take place without having to bother chatting with one person at a time, though, as I said, people can still do that if they choose. Have you, Rooster, been prevented from doing so? Or have you heard of others being prevented from doing so? If so, how and by who were they knocked off their soapbox?

 

[BadenP]

Wow

 

Religious intolerance is alive and well I see from most of the posts in here, and its ironic that it comes from so called Christians. What are you guys debating anyway? The 1st Amendment applies to all faiths not just Christians. Even the Christians fight among themselves, Pentecostals hate Catholics, Baptists hate Episcopalians, etc. All of you have lost sight of the teachings of Jesus, he accepted everyone unconditionally, and it is nothing but bigotry to state your beliefs are more correct than others. You have a right to those beliefs, but not to force others to listen to them. God and religion can be debated and argued over, BUT IT IS ONLY GOD WHO HAS THE RIGHT ANSWERS. Everything else is only a human interpretation of scripture or tradition and is subject to errors. I can not ever claim to be able to speak for God and neither should any of you. Peace.

[evmori]

Spin spin spin.

 

My point, Merlyn, is a Christian group can do exactly what the Islamic group is doing & people like you will try to stop it! Yes religious freedom applies to all religions! I know that! You just can't see the forest through your hatred for Christians!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle]

STOP THE PRESSES!!!!

 

Merlyn, when did you convert to Islam?(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[scoutingagain]

Just food for thought within this thread.

 

I read this weekend about a website called Faith-o-matic or some such name. Apparently you can answer a questionnaire on your particular faith and values and the site with assign you to one of 2000 religions, including 500 different denominations of Christianity, based on your responses. I wish I could remember the name and pass it on, but I was struck by the number of different religions it claimed, although I believe atheism was included, so there may only really be 1999 religions if atheism is not really a religion.

 

SA

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

Ed writes:

My point, Merlyn, is a Christian group can do exactly what the Islamic group is doing & people like you will try to stop it!

 

No, Ed, now you're lying. People like me will argue for everyone being treated EQUALLY.

 

And I can't help noticing that you have no REAL EXAMPLES. You keep making up imaginary situations where someone MIGHT abridge the rights of Christians, while simultaneously whining about actual Muslims being treated EQUALLY in Michigan as if that's something shameful. And then you dishonestly state that "people like me" would try to stop Christians being treated the same as the Muslims in this situation. You're the one trying to "spin" the situation, by not owning up to your earlier complaints over how a mosque got special treatment (which turns out to be equal treatment), and by not using real examples of discrimination against Christians but instead making up straw man arguments where "people like me" would supposedly oppress Christians instead of treating them equally.

 

And, Ed, I hardly hate "Christians" as a class, being married to one for over 15 years.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

scoutingagain writes:

I read this weekend about a website called Faith-o-matic or some such name.

 

You might be thinking of belief-o-matic, though it only has 27 classifications of belief in the quiz:

http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html

[NJCubScouter]

Ed says:

 

Take down the manger in front of city hall but what about the menorah?

 

Try as I might to resist, I cannot. It is like an illness. Hi, my name is NJCubScouter, and I can't resist getting into the same pointless argument time after time. (Hello, NJCubScouter...)

 

OK, Ed, what about the menorah? Is this about that Pittsburgh/Allegheny County case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court, again? If so, Ed, you and I have discussed that case before and, with all due respect, including a recognition that you live in Pittsburgh and you think you know what that case is about, I really don't think you understand what the case is about. Among the things you refused to acknowledge that last time we discussed this was that the ACLU sued to remove both the nativity scene and the menorah.

 

It is a very complicated case, because it has various justices joining in parts of various others justices' opinions. It also involves two different settings, one of which was a nativity scene by itself, the other of which was a display that included a 45-foot Christmas tree, an 18-foot Hanukkah menorah, as well as a sign containing a message from the mayor about how the city "salutes liberty with these festive lights." Contrary to "nobody having a problem with the menorah" as Ed has said in the past, of the nine justices, seven saw no distinction between the two. In fact, four were of the opinion that both the nativity scene and menorah on public land were constitutionally acceptable, and three were of the opinion that both displays were unconstitutional.

 

Only Justices O'Connor and Blackmun (this was in 1989) believed that there was a constitutional distinction, and they were the deciding votes. Those two justices believed that the nativity scene was unconstitutional but that the menorah, as part of the overall "symbols of the season" display, was constitutional. As a result, the nativity scene "lost" by a 5-4 vote while the menorah "won" by a 6-3 vote. To make it even more interesting, in re-reading the opinions of both Justices Blackmun and O'Connor, it is pretty clear that if the menorah had been by itself in a display, without the Christmas tree, the menorah would have been found unconstitutional as well, meaning both displays would be unconstitutional by a 5-4 vote.

 

(I will add, because I personally think it is interesting, that there were Jewish lawyers on both sides of the case, but at the time, every justice of the Supreme Court was Christian. I just think it's interesting.)

[Rooster7]

BadenP,

 

Before you claim the entire world saved in the name of Jesus, please read your Bible.

 

Matthew 3:7

But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?

 

Matthew 5:22

But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother[ 5:22 Some manuscripts brother without cause] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[ 5:22 An Aramaic term of contempt] ' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

 

Matthew 23:15

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.

 

Luke 12:5

But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.

 

Does this sound as if Jesus has no expectations for those who want salvation? Do you believe that Jesus died for all, regardless of what they believe? When he was on the cross, one criminal hurled insults at him while the other, confessed his sins and asked Jesus to remember him. To the repentant criminal, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." He made no such comment to the other man who apparently remained unrepentant.

 

Jesus also said,

 

Matthew 7

13"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

 

[NJCubScouter]

Um, I just took that Belief-O-Matic quiz. I just found out something I never knew: I am a Sikh. The answers I chose matched 100 percent with Sikhism. I had no idea. Pretty wild for a nice Jewish boy born in Newark, New Jersey. Less surprisingly (or maybe more surprisingly depending on how you want to look at it), the religion that I actually grew up in, Reform Judaism, is a close second with 96 percent. Of course, as I have described in a few posts awhile back, I don't completely believe in all the beliefs of my ancestral religion, either.

 

Seriously (though it is absolutely true that the top of "my list" says Sikhism 100%) these sorts of quizzes are flawed in a number of ways. The particular questions in this quiz are geared much more to "philosophy" than "faith." Several specific indicators of faith that I thought would be there, were not there. As a result, this quiz is easily "manipulable," not just on purpose, but accidentally by choosing between two very close philosophical choices.

 

It is an interesting exercise, however. I really like the disclaimer:

 

Warning: Belief-O-Matic assumes no legal liability for the ultimate fate of your soul.

 

[packsaddle]

100% Liberal Quaker, 99% UU.

So what I observe is that we are isolated from each other by strongly held beliefs, with the certainty of faith and no objective evidence for any of them. And where some of us are ready to fight to the death for doctrine, others of us are ready to accomodate and fully support their right to fight to the death.

Why can't we just love one another and get along?

I guess I'm for sure going to hell.

[OldGreyEagle]

Liberal Quaker? Now thats an oxymoron!!!

[BadenP]

Rooster

 

You need to learn to read these posts more accurately as well as your Bible. Your constant jabs at others who don't believe as you is a perfect example of your bigotry and intolerance. I can take a piece of scripture and quote it out of context too, as you repeatly seem to do. What I said was that Jesus was open to all who wanted to listen whether Jew or pagan, free or slave. There are many paths to God. You and others in this thread are constantly berating other Christians with your obvious lack of education and understanding of Scripture. Now before you lash out at me I warn you I have a Masters and Doctorate in Theology so choose your words carefully, because in this discussion you are at a real disadvantage. I suggest you talk to your pastor about your anger and intolerance. I thought you learned your lesson in the other thread on religion a while back, I guess not. Try reading Mt.5 and see how it applies to your life.