www.advocate.com/society/religion/2012/05/01/north-carolina-pastor-advocates-punching-gay-acting-children#.T6CIU88_X5U.facebook
Short, but...disgusting article. I want to cry, because it's hard to believe a human being can actually think this way, and feel so righteous.
That audio clip is pretty horrible. Gah.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 02, 2012, 03:59:18 AM
That audio clip is pretty horrible. Gah.
I couldn't bring myself to listen...
I can't stomach this kind of hatred.
Sickening beyond words.
There are times when I hate to admit that I belong to the same species as such people.
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 09:20:07 AM
There are times when I hate to admit that I belong to the same species as such people.
Would you mate with one? If not you do belong to a different species!
Nothing to add to the above.
This man is a total arsehole and deserves to be answered with a deafening silence.
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 09:23:46 AM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 09:20:07 AM
There are times when I hate to admit that I belong to the same species as such people.
Would you mate with one? If not you do belong to a different species!
Mate with one? I don't even like the idea of being on the same continent!
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 06:18:50 PM
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 09:23:46 AM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 09:20:07 AM
There are times when I hate to admit that I belong to the same species as such people.
Would you mate with one? If not you do belong to a different species!
Mate with one? I don't even like the idea of being on the same continent!
There are times the Atlantic and 1776 are good things ;D
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 06:23:13 PM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 06:18:50 PM
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 09:23:46 AM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 09:20:07 AM
There are times when I hate to admit that I belong to the same species as such people.
Would you mate with one? If not you do belong to a different species!
Mate with one? I don't even like the idea of being on the same continent!
There are times the Atlantic and 1776 are good things ;D
:P The Atlantic is not always a good thing. :-[
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 06:32:21 PM
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 06:23:13 PM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 06:18:50 PM
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 09:23:46 AM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 09:20:07 AM
There are times when I hate to admit that I belong to the same species as such people.
Would you mate with one? If not you do belong to a different species!
Mate with one? I don't even like the idea of being on the same continent!
There are times the Atlantic and 1776 are good things ;D
:P The Atlantic is not always a good thing. :-[
That is true. And there is always a chair over here waiting for you ;)
:D
:-X
:'( How awful.
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 06:37:25 PM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 06:32:21 PM
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 06:23:13 PM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 06:18:50 PM
Quote from: Tank on May 02, 2012, 09:23:46 AM
Quote from: Velma on May 02, 2012, 09:20:07 AM
There are times when I hate to admit that I belong to the same species as such people.
Would you mate with one? If not you do belong to a different species!
Mate with one? I don't even like the idea of being on the same continent!
There are times the Atlantic and 1776 are good things ;D
:P The Atlantic is not always a good thing. :-[
That is true. And there is always a chair over here waiting for you ;)
Can i please come? :3
Quote from: Sweetdeath on May 02, 2012, 08:11:34 PM
Can i please come? :3
Of course! I'd be delighted to share some real-life time!!!
Quote from: OldGit on May 02, 2012, 10:39:08 AM
Nothing to add to the above.
This man is a total arsehole and deserves to be answered with a deafening silence.
Yet he got cheered. :(
This pastor has no sense of Christ-like compassion and/or love.
Hmm... Not clicking on the link. Don't currently have any one to whine about humanity in general and religious assholes in particular.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on May 02, 2012, 09:21:33 PM
This pastor has no sense of Christ-like compassion and/or love.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure Jesus would not endorse smacking little children around :(
I wonder at times about the implicit message behind posting these kind of stories. This gentleman clearly occupies the lunatic fringe of Christianity. It's actually an incitement to child cruelty and is a perversion of any
tenable version of Christian belief. It is redolent to me of theists pointing out the horrors inflicted by Stalin as examples of the evils of atheism.
Quote from: En_Route on May 02, 2012, 11:36:49 PM
I wonder at times about the implicit message behind posting these kind of stories. This gentleman clearly occupies the lunatic fringe of Christianity. It's actually an incitement to child cruelty and is a perversion of any
tenable version of Christian belief. It is redolent to me of theists pointing out the horrors inflicted by Stalin as examples of the evils of atheism.
I see what you're saying. However were the ideals of the pastor informed (at least in part) by Biblical/Religious doctrine/attitude and how were Stalin's ideals informed by atheist doctrine?
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on May 02, 2012, 09:21:33 PM
This pastor has no sense of Christ-like compassion and/or love.
I agree completely.
Stalin believed religion was a barrier to the institution of a Communist society and bumped off large numbers of people on this basis. The pastor is basing his views on a warped interpretation of the bible that the overwhelming majority of Christians would find repugnant.
Quote from: En_Route on May 02, 2012, 11:52:40 PM
Stalin believed religion was a barrier to the institution of a Communist society and bumped off large numbers of people on this basis. The pastor is basing his views on a warped interpretation of the bible that the overwhelming majority of Christians would find repugnant.
Thankfully most people find child abuse horrendous.
I have to disagree with what the guy was saying. Children should be beat simply for being children, not because they display effeminate tendencies.
Quote from: En_Route on May 02, 2012, 11:52:40 PM
Stalin believed religion was a barrier to the institution of a Communist society and bumped off large numbers of people on this basis.
The institution of a Communist society is not an atheist doctrine, nor is it an ideal toward which atheists aspire.
I do agree with
AnimatedDirt that this bigoted pastor is not exhibiting any Christ-like attributes. On the other hand, both homophobia and violent "correction" of children are condoned in the Bible. Thus the pastor, in exhorting his church members to thrash their children for showing possible signs of homosexuality, can righteously affirm that he's a good Christian who follows the teachings in the Bible. From the approving noises made by some of the more vocal members of his congregation, he obviously has some support in his thinking.
We can take it as a given that Stalin was an atheist, but as far as I can tell from my reading of the history of Soviet Russia during his time in power, atheism was the basis for none of the atrocities which he ordered. He was motivated by paranoia and a ruthless drive to power; his atheism was irrelevant to that. As a parallel, I could look to another dictator from history. Napoleon was a Catholic, but I would not consider any of the negative things that he did (which resulted in millions of deaths) to be attributable to his religion.
Quote from: ThinkAnarchy on May 03, 2012, 12:48:11 AM
I have to disagree with what the guy was saying. Children should be beat simply for being children, not because they display effeminate tendencies.
Well, at least you're being fair about it.
Quote from: Recusant on May 03, 2012, 12:58:24 AM
Quote from: En_Route on May 02, 2012, 11:52:40 PM
Stalin believed religion was a barrier to the institution of a Communist society and bumped off large numbers of people on this basis.
The institution of a Communist society is not an atheist doctrine, nor is it an ideal toward which atheists aspire.
I do agree with AnimatedDirt that this bigoted pastor is not exhibiting any Christ-like attributes. On the other hand, both homophobia and violent "correction" of children are condoned in the Bible. Thus the pastor, in exhorting his church members to thrash their children for showing possible signs of homosexuality, can righteously affirm that he's a good Christian who follows the teachings in the Bible. From the approving noises made by some of the more vocal members of his congregation, he obviously has some support in his thinking.
We can take it as a given that Stalin was an atheist, but as far as I can tell from my reading of the history of Soviet Russia during his time in power, atheism was the basis for none of the atrocities which he ordered. He was motivated by paranoia and a ruthless drive to power; his atheism was irrelevant to that. As a parallel, I could look to another dictator from history. Napoleon was a Catholic, but I would not consider any of the negative things that he did (which resulted in millions of deaths) to be attributable to his religion.
Atheism was a necessary element of Stalin's ideology. Religion being the opium of the people etc as per Marx. Clearly some atheists did and some still do aspire to a Communist society. In fact, given that atheism is not a philosophy or doctrine per se, we all we can say about atheists is that they do not follow any known religion. The bible is of course a mess of conflicting theologies and there is a basic irreconcilability between OT and NT, so it's possible to justify almost any set of beliefs however twisted by reference to selected passages. However, I don't think mainstream Christianity would approve of violent correction of children, but I agree that it does view the practice of homosexuality as a sin, which has had a malevolent influence on social attitudes to gay people. I am just wary of this simplistic ."Atheist good, Christian Bad" mindset which exhibits the same blinkered intolerance that we are so quick to denounce on the part of the religious Right.
Quote from: En_Route on May 03, 2012, 10:13:19 AM
I am just wary of this simplistic ."Atheist good, Christian Bad" mindset which exhibits the same blinkered intolerance that we are so quick to denounce on the part of the religious Right.
On this we are fully in agreement, and I do see such a simplistic attitude cropping up once in a while (not here, in particular, but in the theist/atheist dialog in general). I don't think that pointing to Stalin is going to do much to curb it, however, because most atheists have already heard the "look at Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot" line, and essentially throw it out as the lame propaganda that it is. I think that one does much better when they say precisely what they mean without resorting to ineffective tropes.
Quote from: Recusant on May 03, 2012, 04:46:52 PM
Quote from: En_Route on May 03, 2012, 10:13:19 AM
I am just wary of this simplistic ."Atheist good, Christian Bad" mindset which exhibits the same blinkered intolerance that we are so quick to denounce on the part of the religious Right.
On this we are fully in agreement, and I do see such a simplistic attitude cropping up once in a while (not here, in particular, but in the theist/atheist dialog in general). I don't think that pointing to Stalin is going to do much to curb it, however, because most atheists have already heard the "look at Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot" line, and essentially throw it out as the lame propaganda that it is. I think that one does much better when they say precisely what they mean without resorting to ineffective tropes.
The very point I was making was that stigmatising Christianity by highlighting those of the fruitcake persuasion is just as hackneyed and misleading as theists' invocation of the usual suspects such as Stalin.
I wouldn't base my opinions of all Christians on that clip, but I don't think checking in on the "fruitcake" factions of any group is irrelevant. They might be a minority, but they're still part of the dialogue. People used to dismiss the impact of creationist ideology until they got big enough to build their own "museum" and started legally challenging the validity of science in the classroom.
Am I the only one bothered by how this rant is being taken as about homosexuality?
I know that this was supposedly coming from a pastor's speech's where he is trying to get his church's people to ban same-sex marriage (shouldn't that be a problem we're focusing on, BTW? A pastor trying to mix religion with law), but what he was talking about isn't even homosexuality, nor was it even 'gay-acting'. A 'boy' wearing a dress and acting out on 'childhood fantasies' isn't talking about homosexuality. It's talking about being transgendered. It's more a rant about gender roles than it is homosexuality.
Now knowing how bad he sounds in his speech and what this is related to, he may be one of those people who can not even distinguish between the two concepts. It is not something I could ever understand, but I have run into homophobic people lately who act like homosexuality and being transgendered are one and the same.
I've just never thought of a boy wearing a dress as 'acting gay'. Are these people really so ignorant and removed from reality that they can't even tell the difference between being attracted to the same sex and wearing the opposite sex's clothing? Is it all really that simple in their minds?
Quote from: Radiant on May 03, 2012, 11:05:08 PM
Is it all really that simple in their minds?
I think that it is. At least that has been my experience with certain types of rabid anti-gay individuals. They don't differentiate, nor do they care about the distinctions you mention.
I noticed it was a gender role thing too.
Most logical people understand a girl with short hair cut doesnt equal gay, or a boy wearing a dress or pink isnt gay.
I think most christians want a certain look for people, and anyone not fitting that "mold", sexuality involved or not- - must be disctiminated against.
Quote from: Radiant on May 03, 2012, 11:05:08 PM
Am I the only one bothered by how this rant is being taken as about homosexuality?
I know that this was supposedly coming from a pastor's speech's where he is trying to get his church's people to ban same-sex marriage (shouldn't that be a problem we're focusing on, BTW? A pastor trying to mix religion with law), but what he was talking about isn't even homosexuality, nor was it even 'gay-acting'. A 'boy' wearing a dress and acting out on 'childhood fantasies' isn't talking about homosexuality. It's talking about being transgendered. It's more a rant about gender roles than it is homosexuality.
Now knowing how bad he sounds in his speech and what this is related to, he may be one of those people who can not even distinguish between the two concepts. It is not something I could ever understand, but I have run into homophobic people lately who act like homosexuality and being transgendered are one and the same.
I've just never thought of a boy wearing a dress as 'acting gay'. Are these people really so ignorant and removed from reality that they can't even tell the difference between being attracted to the same sex and wearing the opposite sex's clothing? Is it all really that simple in their minds?
This "man" is ignorant as well as bigoted. He does not understand the difference between a homosexual and a cross dresser. In addition he also does not understand the difference between a cross dresser and a transsexual. Cross dressing is defined as persons of one gender who wear the gender specific clothing of the opposite gender. A transsexual is a is a person born to one gender who thinks they should have been born to the other gender. There are homosexual cross dressers, but most cross dressers are in fact heterosexual. However, I am digressing. I will conclude my post by saying that it is a good idea to understand what you are ranting about least you sound like an idiot as wall as a bigot.
I think that in this cultural context, ignorance of the distinctions you're describing is a given and a prerequisite. Indeed, even if one were aware of such distinctions, displaying any knowledge of them would be rather suspect.
Quote from: Recusant on May 24, 2012, 10:45:53 PM
I think that in this cultural context, ignorance of the distinctions you're describing is a given and a prerequisite. Indeed, even if one were aware of such distinctions, displaying any knowledge of them would be rather suspect.
I am afraid that you are probably right. It is probably to much to hope that he will nominate himself for a Darwin Award.