Where you are on the issues vs how you vote

[TitanTiger 20,460]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

This isn't about rights, speech or religious, this is about simply being uncivil.

It's purely political nonsense.  Nothing was proven other than, being a jerk causes everyone pain.

Yeah, i know you feel that way and I still disagree. 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

11 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Yeah, i know you feel that way and I still disagree. 

I wish you would consider more deeply with the love of Jesus in your heart.

[TexasTiger 12,782]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

This isn't about rights, speech or religious, this is about simply being uncivil.

It’s about kindness, compassion AND freedom of belief. The best way to get most people to call you what you prefer is to ask nicely. The best way to get folks to understand things they’re not accustomed to is for people to tell their stories. The least effective way to get people to extend courtesy is to compel speech under threat of termination.

Similarly, the best way to get a pregnant person to carry a baby to term in a healthy manner is to extend compassion  and support to them and the child, not to compel them to do it.

Civility, compassion, grace and kindness is in short supply across the political spectrum. But they can’t be compelled, particularly in our legal system. If we are relying on the legal system to compel those things, the end result is hollow at best and likely counterproductive.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

It’s about kindness, compassion AND freedom of belief. The best way to get most people to call you what you prefer is to ask nicely. The best way to get folks to understand things they’re not accustomed to is for people to tell their stories. The least effective way to get people to extend courtesy is to compel speech under threat of termination.

Similarly, the best way to get a pregnant person to carry a baby to term in a healthy manner is to extend compassion  and support to them and the child, not to compel them to do it.

Civility, compassion, grace and kindness is in short supply across the political spectrum. But they can’t be compelled, particularly in our legal system. If we are relying on the legal system to compel those things, the end result is hollow at best and likely counterproductive.

Agree.  That is exactly how the school handled this situation.  The professor told them that he would only call the student by their last name.

I do not know how the student handled the situation.  She may be just as stubborn, rude and intolerant (uncivil).  In my mind, that is the real problem here.  You could easily have people creating, even manipulating,  these situations in which the taxpayer ultimately picks up the tab.  Bad all around but,,, I expect a professor to show more maturity.

[homersapien 11,337]

23 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I stated that purpose. Clearly. Repeated it for you. I’ll do it one more time, although I’m starting to think you have no interest to having an honest conversation on the topic. Your use of the word “harm” is particularly loaded in this case.

A poster appeared to support termination over someone not using a persons preferred pronouns. If one supports that, where’s that line? Pronouns have gotten much more complicated than merely using the ones typically used for male or female. Perhaps you think there is no line. If so, say it. One can take the position that everyone should accommodate every single preferred pronoun that has been or has yet to be created, and if not, face termination. Is that your position? Your position is either that or something short of that—ie, a limit.

Certainly short of firing someone. 

No, I don't.

No, it's not.

 

 

 

[homersapien 11,337]

On 5/9/2022 at 2:43 PM, TexasTiger said:

That’s a dishonest framing. I don’t think transexuals or transgendered people represent any inherent harm. The state firing or threatening to fire folks for reasons that aren’t well articulated or consistent with other existing rights is another matter.

It's not "dishonest".  It's an honest and sincere opinion I have.

In addition, I don't think "the state firing or threatening to fire folks for reasons that aren’t well articulated or consistent with other existing rights" is a wide spread problem regardless of the fact it might have been attempted by some idiot at some university.

I don't take it as a serious threat - certainly not worth debating it for hours on end.

Edited May 10, 2022 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,462]

On 5/6/2022 at 2:37 PM, TitanTiger said:

And I condemn yours in that you evidently believe that compelling a person to express sentiments they believe to be tantamount to lying is perfectly civil.

Perhaps the real "lie" is pretending that you support Jesus by being disrespectful to others.  Perhaps the "lie" is spreading the idea that Jesus does not love gay and trans people.  Perhaps the "lie" is believing salvation is more about the Bible in your head than,,, Jesus in your heart.

[TexasTiger 12,782]

9 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Perhaps the "lie" is spreading the idea that Jesus does not love gay and trans people. 

Can you link to where @TitanTigersaid this or are you just making stuff up?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Can you link to where @TitanTigersaid this or are you just making stuff up?

Can you show me where I asserted that he did?

The point is, you cannot love people and then treat them with disrespect, actively work to reduce their place in society.  That would be hypocrisy.

 

[SaltyTiger 7,757]

On 5/7/2022 at 5:01 PM, homersapien said:

Well, if you want to get technical all of our major problems are synergistic.

Global warming will result in major famines and migrations directly threatening global security, thus increasing the chances of nuclear war.

Same for income equality on a global basis.  A huge and increasing proportion of the global population will starve  and some of these are currently residing in countries that possess nuclear weapons.

And keep in mind it's not the blast and irradiation (which will kill multi millions) the ultimate threat is the nuclear winter that follows. 

A decade or more of no farming anywhere on the globe will pretty much take care of the billions who survive the wars direct effects.)

We could actually prevent the worst effects of AGW but I don't think we will .

We could also prevent a nuclear war by banning nuclear weapons, which may sound far-fetched but is actually doable.  After all, it's not like anyone on earth can benefit from their use.  (Not that I think we'll do it though).

(Salty - you asked once how I could be depressed? Well, now you know. Guess I'll take your advice and drink a beer.)

I think we are pretty much ******.  The Anthropocene will end badly. Possibly before I die, and I am (only) 72.

Certainly agree that we have screwed up a sensitive environmental system. When did the “ depression “ begin? 

[TexasTiger 12,782]

On 5/7/2022 at 1:59 PM, homersapien said:

From the perspective of people who are of different sexualities the issue is about compassion, empathy, acceptance and fair treatment (if not respect).

Using logic to argue against those goals is an admirable task, but is more likely to reveal a lack of real understanding of the subject.  

 

Do you understand biological sex to exist in mammals? The current ACLU doesn’t:

https://reduxx.info/aclu-claims-males-females-do-not-exist-court-docs/

Do you think the recognition of biological sex creates discrimination or hatefulness?

[jAUSon 2,836]

Wow. Came in to find out where @McLoofus left off. One of my favorite football guys ever. He cut me pretty bad on vaccines. I thought Bill Maher solved this topic.

[jj3jordan 2,039]

On 5/11/2022 at 9:45 AM, icanthearyou said:

Perhaps the real "lie" is pretending that you support Jesus by being disrespectful to others.  Perhaps the "lie" is spreading the idea that Jesus does not love gay and trans people.  Perhaps the "lie" is believing salvation is more about the Bible in your head than,,, Jesus in your heart.

Jesus does love all people including gay and trans. However as with the adulterous woman, He requires someone who receives His gift of salvation to change (repent) turn away from their sinful life (homosexuality, adultery) and sin no more (not continue in their sinful life). The “lie” is that you can claim Jesus love and still continue in your sinful life. 

Like the adulterous woman, Jesus commanded her to go and sin no more.

Jesus even delved into homers favorite subject: whataboutism.  Tested by the Pharisees about stoning her, Jesus wrote in the dirt “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her”.

Jesus also forcibly called out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Called them serpents, a brood of vipers. Pretty strong language. Doubtful this passes the ICHY test of kind language but this is from Jesus Himself. 

 

[PUB78 1,353]

On 5/16/2022 at 11:25 AM, TexasTiger said:

Do you understand biological sex to exist in mammals? The current ACLU doesn’t:

https://reduxx.info/aclu-claims-males-females-do-not-exist-court-docs/

Do you think the recognition of biological sex creates discrimination or hatefulness?

 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

1 hour ago, jj3jordan said:

Jesus does love all people including gay and trans. However as with the adulterous woman, He requires someone who receives His gift of salvation to change (repent) turn away from their sinful life (homosexuality, adultery) and sin no more (not continue in their sinful life). The “lie” is that you can claim Jesus love and still continue in your sinful life. 

Like the adulterous woman, Jesus commanded her to go and sin no more.

Jesus even delved into homers favorite subject: whataboutism.  Tested by the Pharisees about stoning her, Jesus wrote in the dirt “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her”.

Jesus also forcibly called out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Called them serpents, a brood of vipers. Pretty strong language. Doubtful this passes the ICHY test of kind language but this is from Jesus Himself. 

 

Sadly, you do not understand the love, grace, mercy of Jesus.  Do you know the bible or, do you know Jesus?

Your words illustrate the problem with religion.  Your words illustrate why so many believe religion is a curse.

[CoffeeTiger 5,063]

1 hour ago, jj3jordan said:

Jesus does love all people including gay and trans. However as with the adulterous woman, He requires someone who receives His gift of salvation to change (repent) turn away from their sinful life (homosexuality, adultery) and sin no more (not continue in their sinful life). The “lie” is that you can claim Jesus love and still continue in your sinful life. 

Like the adulterous woman, Jesus commanded her to go and sin no more.

Jesus even delved into homers favorite subject: whataboutism.  Tested by the Pharisees about stoning her, Jesus wrote in the dirt “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her”.

Jesus also forcibly called out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Called them serpents, a brood of vipers. Pretty strong language. Doubtful this passes the ICHY test of kind language but this is from Jesus Himself. 

 

 

By that logic there are very, very many straight Christians who are living in sinful heterosexual marriages at this very moment because of their sinful divorces, cheating, ect. 

The only Biblically valid reason for divorce and remarriage that is provided for in the Bible is due to adultery from the other partner. If one divorces their spouse for any other reason they can not Bible remarry another person for the rest of their life. If they do that is a sinful marriage. 

I know of very few Christian Churches or denominations that actually enforce this view or really teach it since it would step on the toes of many of their own members and while Christians are perfectly fine telling gay and trans people they aren't allowed to ever marry or form "sinful" relationships, those same people would never accept that the Bible states that THEY themselves can't re-marry if their divorce wasn't due to adulatory from the other partner. 

[jj3jordan 2,039]

27 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Sadly, you do not understand the love, grace, mercy of Jesus.  Do you know the bible or, do you know Jesus?

Your words illustrate the problem with religion.  Your words illustrate why so many believe religion is a curse.

My words came from the gospels of the New Testament spoken by Jesus.  The love of Jesus comes to us via His words from the Bible. There are problems with religion, no doubt. The salvation of Jesus is clear and easy to understand.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

1 minute ago, jj3jordan said:

My words came from the gospels of the New Testament spoken by Jesus.  The love of Jesus comes to us via His words from the Bible. There are problems with religion, no doubt. The salvation of Jesus is clear and easy to understand.

Again, sadly, you do not seem to understand the words at all.  The meaning of the words has a lot to do with where your heart is. 

[jj3jordan 2,039]

2 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Again, sadly, you do not seem to understand the words at all.  The meaning of the words has a lot to do with where your heart is. 

The meaning of the words has nothing to do with where my heart is. Sadly you continue to deny the words of the Savior you profess to follow.

[jj3jordan 2,039]

13 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

By that logic there are very, very many straight Christians who are living in sinful heterosexual marriages at this very moment because of their sinful divorces, cheating, ect. 

The only Biblically valid reason for divorce and remarriage that is provided for in the Bible is due to adultery from the other partner. If one divorces their spouse for any other reason they can not Bible remarry another person for the rest of their life. If they do that is a sinful marriage. 

I know of very few Christian Churches or denominations that actually enforce this view or really teach it since it would step on the toes of many of their own members and while Christians are perfectly fine telling gay and trans people they aren't allowed to ever marry or form "sinful" relationships, those same people would never accept that the Bible states that THEY themselves can't re-marry if their divorce wasn't due to adulatory from the other partner. 

Rationalize all you want, it does not change anything. I do not wish poorly on anyone. I will call out what I believe is a misunderstanding of salvation attained thru Jesus when it clearly conflicts with scripture from the New Testament gospel accounts of His ministry.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

12 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

The meaning of the words has nothing to do with where my heart is. Sadly you continue to deny the words of the Savior you profess to follow.

That is just not true.  The meaning of the words has everything to do with your heart.  Love is the key to following Jesus.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

28 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

The love of Jesus comes to us via His words from the Bible

No.  Jesus loves us directly.  He is in our hearts, if we allow.  He is the word.

 

[I_M4_AU 7,752]

21 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

No.  Jesus loves us directly.  He is in our hearts, if we allow.  He is the word.

 

Are you the priest of your own religion?

[jj3jordan 2,039]

25 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

No.  Jesus loves us directly.  He is in our hearts, if we allow.  He is the word.

 

True. We can have a personal relationship with Jesus thru prayer.  That is absolutely required of us for our salvation.  My statement was that our knowledge of Jesus and His love does come to us from the Bible.  Pastors and teachers spread that Word to us over the years. We still have to make that choice and repent from our sin. He is in our hearts if we ask Him enter our hearts.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

43 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Are you the priest of your own religion?

Yes, I suppose I am.  As I have said before, I no longer consider myself a "Christian".   I am but a humble sinner, a follower of Jesus.