Question: What is worse? These protestors or the anti-Prop-8 protestors going against the Churches?
This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 11th, 2008 at 1:27 pm and is filed under Domestic Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Design by Sunaryo Hadi. A Couple Things is proudly powered by
WordPress
Entries (RSS)
and Comments (RSS).
29 queries. 0.780 seconds.
November 11th, 2008 13:36
Once again, I hate protestors. 9 times out of 10 they are disrespectful and self-righteous. And as I write this, I am sure that there will be idiot protestors disrupting parades to honor our veterans today, just because they don’t like the Iraq war. Protestors in the year 2008 suck!
November 11th, 2008 13:53
What kills me is that the Church should know about the importance of a proper burial. Extremely low.
November 11th, 2008 14:16
Again, protestors are filled with self-righteous people who very rarely consider the feelings, emotions, perspective of people. And if Obama’s grandmother is as EFFED as they claim she is, perhaps rather than protesting her funeral, they pray for her….stupid.
November 11th, 2008 14:21
But that’s just it. When do religions ever take into account the feelings and views of groups they feel are in the wrong?
November 11th, 2008 14:23
All the time. You just have a bias against organized religion.
November 11th, 2008 14:25
Examples?
November 11th, 2008 14:34
Open your eyes and you will see them every single day. I’m not going to dig through the internet to find examples of Church communities keeping the feelings of people they disagree with in mind.
November 11th, 2008 14:39
It strikes me that organized religion, in some sense, really is social protest. It’s about protesting against prevailing norms and whatnot that might not be congruent with God’s wishes and desires. We could draw parallels between religion and social movements in that regard, no?
November 11th, 2008 14:41
What do you suppose goes on inside a church on Sunday? Christians scheming how to take over the world in the name of God? If that is the way you see it, then you truly do have a bias against organized religion. And that is fine, but do not speak as an authority for the goals and purpose behind religion.
November 11th, 2008 14:43
I know what goes on in Churches as I’ve been going to them for most of my life. It is: God says x; We believe x; Those that believe y are wrong.
This is no different than social movements that say the exact same thing and try to get others to follow.
November 11th, 2008 14:49
Then I need to start attending the church that you grew up in to see, because that has never happened in any church I’ve attended…and I’ve been to Catholic, Methodist, Presbyterian, Non-denominational.
You clearly are a smart and thoughtful young fella, surely you attribute religion more respect than your run of a mill cult organization.
November 11th, 2008 14:52
I think you’re being *way* too generous to what goes on in churches around this country, my friend. Are you honestly telling me that churches do not draw a line in the sand about what is right and what is wrong?
Christian churches are very clear: homosexuality is wrong. You cited the passages in the Bible just yesterday that exclaims this. There is no “taking into account of their feelings” or “listening to why their point of view might be right.” To the extent that Churches listen or take into account their feelings is simply to not appear confrontational (some do this; some, like this Baptist church, want to be confrontational about it). But make no mistake, a line has been drawn and if you happen to be on the wrong side, then that’s your problem. Either repent or we’ll see you in hell.
November 11th, 2008 14:58
Perhaps we are talking about different things. The problem that I have with protests is that they do not take into account other people’s feelings, as in their are in no way compassionate. I’m not saying that they should agree with their opposition, but that they should show enough compassion not to do something hurtful (like protest a funeral). You seem to be arguing that protestors are not taking other’s feelings into account if they don’t stop and ask, what are you feeling and why do you disagree with me? Is that what you are saying? If that is what you are saying, then yes, there are specific wrongs and rights in Religion that are non-negotiable, but in no way do the majority of religious groups live these rules without compassion for those who disagree.
November 11th, 2008 15:01
What’s worse? Not having any compassion or having a condescending compassion? To me I think protesting a funeral is better than saying “you’re going to hell, but I have compassion for you.”
Thoughts?
November 11th, 2008 15:05
That’s not what Christians say, which makes me wonder if you slept your way through Catholic school, or if your teachers were no better than the lady we commented on in a previous post.
November 11th, 2008 15:09
Right, but I’m trying to make a point here. I have a hard time believing in this compassion argument when the bottom line is this: If you are gay, what you are doing is wrong. Even if you love your partner and want to share your love together, that is wrong. Even if you were born this way, it is wrong. But, we appreciate that this is hard for you, but it is still wrong.
That doesn’t really strike me as compassion. Merriam-Webster defines compassion in the following way:
Main Entry:
com·pas·sion Listen to the pronunciation of compassion
Pronunciation:
\kəm-ˈpa-shən\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French or Late Latin; Anglo-French, from Late Latin compassion-, compassio, from compati to sympathize, from Latin com- + pati to bear, suffer — more at patient
Date:
14th century
: sympathetic consciousness of others’ distress together with a desire to alleviate it
What is going on with religion isn’t a consciousness of the other’s distress, nor a tremendous desire to alleviate it. In fact I think the Church could benefit from *more* consciousness of the distress that homosexuals feel and more empathy in attempting to understand their position.
November 11th, 2008 15:17
I thought you were anti Webster’s dictionary?
MATTHEW 7:1-5: Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3″Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Jesus knew that people struggle with self-righteousness all the time. Christianity is not based on the movement to separate the right from the wrong, but to recognize that we are all fallen and all do wrong. I am no better than someone who struggles with his or her sexuality…I just have different struggles and different sins that haven’t become politicized.
November 11th, 2008 15:18
OK so now I’m confused. You admit that Churches draw a line in the sand between right and wrong, but are also saying that Christians shouldn’t judge. Is it not the highest form of self-righteousness to believe that you know what is right and what is wrong?
November 11th, 2008 15:26
Are you saying that you don’t draw a line between right and wrong? Or are you too self-righteous? No, I think you can have a sense of right and wrong without being self-righteous.
November 11th, 2008 15:27
Sure, I draw a line between right and wrong. But my line isn’t given to me by some ghost in the sky and I don’t take the words from that ghost and try to impose them on others (like the folks in this Baptist church do; like the LDS church does when it comes to prop-8, etc.). That is self-righteousness.
November 11th, 2008 15:39
We’ve been posting on these topics for a few days now, and I’ve been waiting for you to use the name God…it hasn’t happened. Does that name offend you in some way?
Agreed. But Jesus’ command to refrain from judgment is anything but self-righteous, and Jesus’ commands are the basis for the Christian church.
November 11th, 2008 15:45
LOL, no the name God doesn’t offend me. But I do think it is a helpful corrective to occasional ground ourselves and reflect upon what we’re talking about here, particularly when it comes to real issues on the ground. Here we have homosexuals being told that they can’t get married because of what a ghost in the sky is believed to have said to someone who wrote it down thousands of years ago. I’m not trying to belittle religion, but it is important, I think, in public policy debates to put everything on the table.
What is your conception of “judgment”?
November 11th, 2008 15:50
You are indeed trying to belittle religion. It’s okay, but be honest with what you are doing. God is an ever living and breathing presence in our daily lives…not just “some ghost in the sky.”
What do you mean my conception of judgment?
November 11th, 2008 15:54
From the perspective of public policy (which is what we’re discussing when it comes to protests or Prop-8 voting), it doesn’t matter. God could be a ghost in the sky, ever-living spirit in everything, or a bowl of Cheerios. It just does not matter from a public-policy point of view. The bottom line is something, you call it God, I call it a ghost, says that x is wrong and some people want to take that instruction and apply it to other people.
I’m asking you what it means to judge someone. When you see a homosexual, what would it be to judge them? And what it would be to not judge them and be compassionate?
November 11th, 2008 16:00
Look up judgment in your Webster’s dictionary and I’ll go with that one.
November 11th, 2008 16:03
I don’t do anything when I see a homosexua. I suppose other Christians might pray for him or her so that he gets to know Christ…and if he or she already knows Christ, that he goes to Him with his sins and asks for genuine forgiveness. It would warrant, I suppose, the exact same reaction to any other sinner (which is everyone).
November 11th, 2008 16:03
Main Entry:
judg·ment Listen to the pronunciation of judgment
Variant(s):
or judge·ment Listen to the pronunciation of judgement \ˈjəj-mənt\
Function:
noun
Date:
13th century
1 a: a formal utterance of an authoritative opinion b: an opinion so pronounced2 a: a formal decision given by a court b (1): an obligation (as a debt) created by the decree of a court (2): a certificate evidencing such a decree3 acapitalized : the final judging of humankind by God b: a divine sentence or decision ; specifically : a calamity held to be sent by God4 a: the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing b: an opinion or estimate so formed5 a: the capacity for judging : discernment b: the exercise of this capacity6: a proposition stating something believed or asserted
synonyms see sense
—
I would imagine that your position is that only God can judge?
November 11th, 2008 16:04
The problem, Yankees Fan, is that you’re infinitely more reasonable than the Christians we routinely blog about.
November 11th, 2008 16:14
November 11th, 2008 16:18
Honestly though, does it not bother you how some of these folks give Christians such a bad name? They’ve completely pilfered the teachings of Jesus and use them for their own public policy ends (which are often based on bigotry).
November 11th, 2008 16:22
Absolutely, why wouldn’t it?
November 11th, 2008 16:22
I’ve now spent two hours defending the Christian faith because of these idiots.
November 11th, 2008 16:23
Andrew Sullivan refuses to actually call them Christian, but rather “Christianist.” I think that is a useful term actually. They take some principles from Christianity and use them for their purposes, but they definitely aren’t Christian as in representing the core ideals that Jesus professed.
November 11th, 2008 16:30
These Westboro thugs are to Christianity what The Weather Underground is to the Democratic Party. Vile, reprehensible, unrepentant, smug, self righteous. But, at least the Westboro morons never killed anyone, as far as I know, will Ayers and his pals did.
November 11th, 2008 17:38
The Westboro group are an embarrassment and disgrace to other Christians. God calls us to love our neighbors as ourselves – that includes everyone. Judgment is for God – not for people. I’ve attended church my entire life, and I’ve never heard a minister condemn homosexuals or people of other religions.
People can pick and choose scripture to “justify” most anything. When you look at the Bible as a whole, though, the message of respecting and taking care of each other is pretty clear.
November 11th, 2008 18:41
Amen Carol.
November 11th, 2008 19:17
Carol, well said.
BTW, the chili recipe on your blog is nearly identical to the way I make it. Thumbs up.
November 12th, 2008 10:27
YankeesFan- I’m with you about 9 of 10 protesters being self-righteous, pompus, disrespectful people. Twice a year, my campus is invaded by anti-abortion protesters – talk about self-righteous bigots!
And those people who protested in Tianamen Square – PRChina knew what to do – KILL THEM!
I could go on and on – the Boston Tea Party – who do these people think they are???
Thanks for helping me remember that “what’s right, is wrong.”
November 12th, 2008 10:29
Very nice points, Gene. If it weren’t for protesters, this country might not exist.
November 12th, 2008 10:36
Because of those Boston Tea Party idiots, some old woman wasn’t able to have her tea that morning…Selfish, selfish, selfish.
Obviously there are some protests that are worth-while (hence the 9 of 10), but unfortunately the majority of protestors come across as angry, hostile, and are often extremely disrespectful.
November 12th, 2008 10:38
What exactly is wrong with being angry and hostile?? You say these things like they, in and of themselves, are bad. Why?
If one is angry about a particular policy, how would you recommend they fix the situation?
November 12th, 2008 10:41
Anger and hostility often clouds people’s judgment and the ultimate purpose behind what a protest actually should be.
November 12th, 2008 10:42
That doesn’t answer the question.
You’re mad about something.
You’re angry.
The government is doing something you don’t agree with.
What do you do about it?
November 12th, 2008 10:43
Change the law.
November 12th, 2008 10:44
Yes, you’re getting close. Good.
Now, how does one change the law?
November 12th, 2008 10:48
This isn’t a law class, look it up. It’s pretty clear how to change law and affect policy. Are the Baptists here doing anything to change the law? Are the students at a certain woman’s college changing the law when they stood up and turned their backs to Madeline Albright in protest as she gave her Commencement address? These days protests are not in the name of changing law or affecting policy. When they are, that’s great…but I only see that 1 out of 10 times.
November 12th, 2008 10:50
See you don’t want to answer the question because you know the answer to the question. You change the law through social protest. That is what makes this country great.
How did black Americans get the right to vote? The right to attend the same schools as white Americans? Was it by sitting home and writing their Congressmen? Of course not. It was by taking to the streets, protesting against the government, showing them that they are wrong and things need to change.
And it worked.
Your complacency when it comes to the government is scary. Government responds to the will of the people, not the other way around.
November 12th, 2008 10:57
No, you change the law through elected officials or referendum, so you are wrong on that point.
Social protest only brings issues and problems to light. Respond to my last point, which offsets everything you just said. Social protest in the name of changing law and policy can be very valuable…what about this protest here does anything to change law and policy? what about protesting speakers who come to campuses? They are stupid, inappropriate, and disrespectful.
November 12th, 2008 11:02
People thought that the black students who went to white college campuses were being disrespectful as well.
Your causal logic is completely backwards. Laws reflect, ideally, the will of the people. To demonstrate the will of the people, the people need a voice. They need agency of some kind. In a democracy social protest is a very important source of that voice and agency. You should be thankful we’re allowed to protest in this country; not every citizen of the world has the same right.
November 12th, 2008 11:03
Way to side step the question…so you support these Baptist protestors…I guess we disagree on that point too.
November 12th, 2008 11:05
I absolutely disagree with their message and point of view. I absolutely agree with their right to express their voice. 100%.
It frightens me that you place so much trust in your government. That’s scary.
November 12th, 2008 11:08
Whoever said that they don’t have the right to protest? Of course they have that right…but they, like most protestors hurt their cause more than they help it.
November 12th, 2008 11:13
And thank the Lord that more protesters don’t listen to your advice. For if civil rights leaders had in the 60s, for example, I shudder to think of the consequences.
November 12th, 2008 11:17
So you think the Baptists are coming out well on this one? that people are going to say, wow, I didn’t see it there way at first, but now I’ve seen the light because of their protest?
November 12th, 2008 11:19
No, but where you’re 1 in 10 protests are good and useful, I’m 9 in 10 are good and useful. This is an outlier group of hate.
I put much more faith in the people than I do the government. The government must respond to us, not the other way around.
November 12th, 2008 11:21
That’s why we have elections…we can vote them out if they are not responding to us.
November 12th, 2008 11:22
That is only a small piece of this. Elections don’t tell politicians what legislation to pass. Nor are elections enough representation. Getting to vote someone out every 2 or 4 years is relatively unagentic if you ask me.
November 12th, 2008 11:24
Maybe you should start a protest.
November 12th, 2008 11:24
Against your ridiculous blog comments?
November 12th, 2008 11:27
cute.