Brad Pitt Rocks!
- Started
- Last post
- 58 Responses
- BRNK0
The commonly accepted definition of a religious moderate in the atheist community is on the other end of the spectrum from a fundamentalist... a person who ignores large parts of their so-called holy text in order to rectify their religious beliefs and their modern lifestyle.
When someone says "Everyone can believe what they want to." They are giving intellectual shelter to religious extremists who act out some of the loonier, more violent things written in the world's various "holy texts". I believe this is an amoral idea to postulate.
We've decided as a society that certain types of beliefs and behavior are simply harmful to the world (since by definition a true belief necessarily dictates action), like believing that children are suitable sexual partners or that a certain race of person is inferior and needs to be eradicated. Why then can you hold other, possibly equally harmful beliefs, if you do so under the banner of religion? As an institution throughout history religion has done much harm and should not enjoy the untouchable status it currently has in our society. Certainly no other equally valuable and helpful social institution, such as politics, enjoys such a status.
I'm pretty sure that you'd have a hard time finding atheists that are against gay marriage because the corner stone of atheism is rational thought and science has proven that homosexuality is a natural state (there is a gay gene), not a choice. Therefore opposing gay marriage is a restriction of civil rights.
Sorry for being inflammatory in my original post. I enjoy level headed discussions of this sort.
- gramme0
MarleyMarl: yes, I do have non-Christian friends. I'm a graphic designer after all. Christians are in the minority in my circle of colleagues. I've always been a theological/religious outsider when working for other people. I'm fine with that. I actually get along pretty well with people of all sorts. I even have friends with whom I can have heated debates and never agree, but we somehow still manage to clink pint glasses at the end of it all.
- gramme0
I agree with a few things you're saying, BRNK. I too take issue with people who ignore large parts of their so-called holy text in order to reconcile their beliefs and their lifestyle. Another way to define what you describe is idolatry, i.e. putting personal comfort/agenda above God. We all do it in some way shape or form from time to time (since there isn't such thing as a perfectly Christ-like Christian), but some "Christians" are more brazen or misguided about it than others. Oddly enough, I think of fundamentalism as an aberration as well, though some would see this as semantics. In the early 20th century, fundamentalism in Christianity was synonymous with orthodoxy, i.e. believing the Bible to be the inspired, infallible word of God, and all that follows thereafter. Afterwards, some (but not all) adherents of fundamentalism retreated from society out of fear and misunderstanding. They proceeded to build hedges of extra-biblical law around their communities, and before you know it they had wandered far afield. So, these days fundamentalism is a dirty word to many orthodox Christians, myself included.
I wholeheartedly agree with your second paragraph. I will caveat that Jesus' message was about peace, but not a "let's all agree with each other" kind of peace. In fact, to that point he even said that he "came to bring the sword." In context, this doesn't mean Jesus or his followers did/should advocate violence, but it's merely Jesus saying that his ideas were radical, would piss people off, and that many of his followers would die for their faith.
I agree that some beliefs are harmful to the world, such as your examples of pedophilia and racism. I have said here before though, and I think it bears repeating, that (at least in the case of Christianity) people are to blame for atrocities committed in the name of Christ, rather than the other way around. I know Ghandi said something like "I'd like Christ more if people actually acted like him", but in truth one does find, without looking too far, Christians who are kind, humble, patient, and generous people. These people have become this way because of the life-changing power God exerts in the lives of those who belong to him.
About the specific issue of homosexuality. Where's the gay gene you mention, BRNK? Last I heard, it was yet to be found. I'm no scientist, so it's possible you know something I don't. BTW even if there is such a thing, it doesn't change the way I see things. Scientists have found a genetic disposition to alcoholism; and while that explains how some people end up as alcoholics, no one in their right mind considers it to be an excuse. So if we follow your argument about civil rights to its logical conclusion, then genetically-driven alcoholism should also be sanctioned by society, maybe even given a tax break or two, simply because going against one's genetic bent in some areas is surely a high crime.
To that end, I'd still contend that whether there's a gene or not, homosexuality is a degradation of the kind of relationships which were originally intended for mankind. You could even look at it from a naturalistic standpoint, since male and female physically fit together, but male/male, female/female, it doesn't work quite so well... although I believe of course that gender is much more than skin-deep.
- Hey gramme, did you get my email?TheBlueOne
- Yessir, I did. It was a doozy! I plan to reply soon. :)gramme
- alcoholism is harmful to society... gay marriage is not...SigDesign
- gramme - i've read and agreed with a great many things you've said on this site -> but this intellectual rationalisation for homophobia isn't one of them.lukus_W
- homophobia isn't one of them.lukus_W
- schjetne0
That's quite an essay there.
- BRNK0
This may be a bit scattered, but bear with me. :)
In regards to removing religion/religious figures from the crimes committed in their name, I have this to say: Guns kill no one without a murderous person pulling the trigger, but this fact does not make guns any less dangerous or any less of a weapon. The same applies for religion. The fact that it's the people leveraging it toward malicious ends does not absolve it of containing the tools for such mischief. Furthermore, religion lacks the necessary tools to remedy the situation because any meaningful changes to religious doctrine can easily be correctly identified as moving "away from god" by any fundamentalist that would choose to do so. What defense does a religious moderate have in that case, when his opponent has "the word of god" on his side? He has no argument other than to say that he somehow knows better than the holy book. When you start down this path of thought, and then consider the myriad reasons the judeo-christian go demands that you murder your fellow man, it becomes clear to a rational minded person that there is no consistent moral narrative at work there.I guess I'm a bit behind on the gay gene debate, it seems earlier claims that it indeed exists are under dispute now... and I'm certainly no geneticist, so I won't go on defending that position, especially since it doesn't really matter, as you said.
I have to say that I feel your reasoning on homosexuality is colored quite strongly by religious dogma and isn't really rational. Your whole argument against homosexuality is based on some perceived intention for humanity. Who's intention? (I know, I know... god.) Where is your proof of this intention?
If you were honest about your naturalistic point of view, you'd have to admit that over population is a serious threat to humanity and homosexuality is a good countermeasure that really hurts no one. Since you disagree, I challenge you to prove that homosexuality is very harmful and dangerous... you must think so if you can justify wanting to dictate a very private aspect of people's lives (remember, using law to dictate rules for harmless, private behavior of citizens is the hallmark of fascism).
It seems to me that your stance on this issue is weaving quite the complicated and sticky web of logic.Your alcoholism analogy is simply broken. Alcoholism is a behavioral disease that some people are more likely to get due to genetics, like OCD or dyslexia. I never came anywhere near inferring that people should be punished for not not fulfilling their perceived "genetic destiny" or bent as you call it. People should be allowed to live in or out of the closet, to suggest that I inferred anything else is contentious hyperbole.
- blaw0
Ann Curry interviewed Brad Pitt recently and asked if he would run for mayor or New Orleans. To which he scoffed, saying “I'm running on the gay marriage, no religion, legalization and taxation of marijuana platform. I don't have a chance."
Funny guy.
- version30
his deaths in meet joe black and burn after reading are both quite nice
- sea_sea0
Why do Christians think that their way is the only way? Quite closed minded and pretentious if you ask me. I hate talking about religion, because who the F cares what I believe in or not, and honestly I could care less if you believe in gawd or not. Ultimately your actions and how you live your life this very instant is what truly defines you, not what you did or what you plan on doing.
This thread is about the fact that Brad, good or bad actor, drop dead gorgeous or not is doing more than any government agency to help people. The fact that he supports the legalization of a medicinal plant, doesn't buy into organized religion and supports marriage between two consenting human beings regardless of race or gender only makes him a better and more tolerant human being IMO.
- gramme0
Misunderstandings abound.
Will address some things here later, but I've got some work that was just dropped on my plate. For now sea_sea: it's not my way or any other Christian's way; it's God's way. That's neither pretentious nor close-minded; it merely implies a source of faith which some possess and others do not. It has absolutely nothing to do with any human merits, and everything to do with Christ. It appears close-minded and pretentious to you because you do not share in those beliefs.
Where, I must ask, is your moral basis for considering Pitt to be a better person based on your criteria above? Where did this moral standard come from, this idea that he's a better person because he supports gay marriage, legal pot, and opposes organized religion? I'm not back-handedly knocking you here, I'm asking a genuine question. Because we must be honest with ourselves: our sense of morality, what's acceptable or not acceptable, always comes from somewhere. Because your criteria have been hawked ad nauseum from one corner of our society to another, it seems to be more of a latter-day humanistic group-think at play here than any moral system that's been generated by a higher power. So let me ask you: is popular societal consensus a firm moral foundation to stand upon? How can statements of absolute truth come from such a footing, if truth is an inherently moving target that has more to do with perspective than with anything that is fixed? Interested in your thoughts here.
More later.
- Sorry in advance for any hyperbole, it's how I think. It's in the genes, I guess. ;)gramme
- sea_sea0
i should have known.. i really don't have time for this do i?
*holds palm to head. (nothing against you gramme.)
- Coffeemaker0
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nunc ornare nulla quis dui commodo bibendum. Aenean quis sem at nunc venenatis dapibus. Curabitur sit amet tincidunt felis. Maecenas lacinia eleifend lorem sit amet pharetra. Aenean vitae libero eget diam venenatis lacinia. Donec sit amet quam eget ante pretium imperdiet elementum a libero. Donec tempus egestas dolor et malesuada. Sed ac mauris id quam fermentum ullamcorper. Vivamus elit turpis, bibendum ac cursus sit amet, auctor ut diam. Fusce id neque quis leo porta lobortis. Aliquam semper blandit porta. Aenean elementum lectus at nisl venenatis a pulvinar arcu semper. Nulla velit nunc, consequat at hendrerit interdum, bibendum quis orci. Vivamus mattis, dolor venenatis auctor semper, purus est scelerisque dui, ut pretium dui ipsum a metus.
Nulla varius felis eget neque iaculis porttitor. Cras rutrum faucibus ornare. Sed vitae metus ipsum. In quis augue aliquet lectus tincidunt auctor a a lacus. Phasellus felis enim, facilisis in ornare id, volutpat non turpis. Donec non felis massa, id eleifend metus. Sed turpis libero, scelerisque nec egestas ac, lobortis sit amet odio. Suspendisse sodales faucibus tortor sed vestibulum. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Ut porttitor accumsan urna, eget interdum felis scelerisque in. Fusce quis augue ut enim dignissim volutpat.
Sed ultricies ornare neque eget consectetur. Donec venenatis convallis dolor dictum dictum. Aliquam magna elit, porta nec scelerisque vel, viverra vitae arcu. Integer ornare nisi sed tellus blandit laoreet. Fusce non luctus diam. Vestibulum nec purus vel libero consequat volutpat vel vitae orci. Fusce egestas suscipit risus, ornare aliquam velit accumsan a. Quisque sit amet sem magna, vitae vulputate dolor. Donec tincidunt quam ac nunc tincidunt sit amet hendrerit diam fermentum. Nunc tortor tellus, pulvinar et sodales sed, dictum nec erat. Donec quis diam nisl, eu blandit purus. Aenean tincidunt ornare consectetur. Donec mattis venenatis pretium. Duis tellus magna, suscipit vel laoreet id, vestibulum eget ante.
Nullam vehicula turpis congue neque consequat auctor. Sed rutrum justo non ligula dictum non pellentesque risus blandit. Nunc iaculis varius mi sollicitudin rutrum. Vivamus eleifend, eros sit amet cursus hendrerit, diam erat gravida erat, vel bibendum urna libero ac tortor. Mauris nisl lorem, mattis at luctus in, porttitor at nibh. Fusce convallis, sapien eget consequat imperdiet, neque neque tempus elit, non aliquet eros quam non erat. Mauris mattis condimentum porta. Aenean tellus metus, rutrum iaculis feugiat vel, elementum nec felis. Vestibulum vitae est lectus. Phasellus quis dolor ac risus fermentum consectetur. Vestibulum interdum tortor vel mi vulputate sit amet bibendum nunc sagittis.
Nunc sed ligula mi. Aenean non quam arcu, eget elementum massa. Ut ut pretium augue. Sed vehicula, leo quis porta pulvinar, leo augue condimentum justo, ut ultricies risus lacus quis ipsum. Vivamus id nisl ut neque mattis dignissim. Nullam sed odio nibh, et faucibus lacus. Etiam interdum tempus lectus, id condimentum velit tempor sit amet. Nunc vitae massa quis metus imperdiet luctus. Curabitur nibh velit, consectetur a aliquam id, tincidunt sed metus. Nullam sollicitudin laoreet massa non pharetra. Vivamus lobortis hendrerit nibh, in rhoncus lectus tempor quis. Aliquam sodales ornare neque, nec vehicula tortor laoreet id. Praesent egestas faucibus urna at ornare. Nullam eu malesuada nisl. Sed sed quam ut velit tempor aliquet in a nunc. Vivamus placerat tincidunt enim, sit amet ullamcorper mi placerat at. Fusce vitae scelerisque urna. Duis ultricies, mi vel bibendum vehicula, ipsum urna pulvinar ipsum, et ornare ligula enim hendrerit lacus. Proin dui metus, vestibulum sit amet laoreet quis, semper nec risus. Pellentesque cursus porttitor dolor, nec consectetur ipsum dignissim sit amet.
- ooops, sorry, wrong window/application...Coffeemaker
- Nice raggramme
- i just scratched my ass on that rag. what a relief..Coffeemaker
- itchiness abounds in the great outdoors.gramme
- Ooohhh..an old school catholic! The latin gave you away :)TheBlueOne
- yeah i always tend to write latin when i didn't get my meds in time...Coffeemaker
- locustsloth0
"it's not my way or any other Christian's way; it's God's way. That's neither pretentious nor close-minded; it merely implies a source of faith which some possess and others do not."
That's a nice neat little sentence, that last one. Kinda reaches around and starts gobbling it's tail until *POP*.. it's as if it were never there
- It's not like it's an exclusive club man. The possession of faith is a matter of revelation, not intelligence or performance.gramme
- —Nor is the reasoning circular; you just don't like the fact that faith can't be empirically disected.gramme
- And that it can provide answers.gramme
- my point was that you begin by saying it's not pretentious and then end the sentence sounding pretentiouslocustsloth
- Ah, well that's what we call a matter of opinion.gramme
- ...and misunderstanding.gramme
- Coffeemaker0
some say religion is a genetical issue, you know, like albino's only less rare.
think of it of a disease. religious people have it, in the way gay people are sick, and negro's, jews etc.
- i didn't type that. evil demons take over after an aggressive wasp injected poison in me today..Coffeemaker
- Nobody says that.gramme
- i just wanted to end this thread with a comment that just doesn't make sense..Coffeemaker
- Coffeemaker0
that killed it. well done.
*pats self on back
- identity0
I wouldnt want to get in an argument with either Gramme or BRNK
:-)
- iCanHazQBN0
Back to the topic at hand!
