|
|
Post by liberaljoe on Jul 9, 2010 4:40:09 GMT -5
I see they are once again at work demolishing the Anglican Church.
They know full well that appointing a Gay Bishop that has a homosexual partner will cause schism in the Church
But do they give a bugger? (No pun intended)
Oh no, bollocks do they!
What is more important than anything including the integrity of the Church they belong to, is the forwarding of gay issues.
Has there ever been a more intolerant body than the Militant Gay Community?
|
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 9, 2010 6:21:53 GMT -5
Any militant community seems to me to be intolerant one way or another. Militant gays insist on parading their sexuality. Why? Heterosexuals don't feel they have to shove their sexuality in your face.
Take the African Anglicans. African Anglicans have been sharply criticized by Western liberal clerics and revisionist bishops over their practice of polygamy (with the church's blessing). Polygamy in the African mindset can reflect status. It is the Africans who rail against homosexuality most of all. Would you agree they too are intolerant?
Now I'm an atheist, but even I know that the Christian way is supposedly one man and one woman.
The bottom line is there is no god, that is blindingly obvious, but religion does provide plenty for the devout to fight over.
|
|
|
|
Post by liberaljoe on Jul 9, 2010 8:07:13 GMT -5
The bottom line is there is no god, that is blindingly obvious, Has the truth been revealed to you? You didn't have to go up that bloody mountain in Sinai again, did you, or was it that bloody road to Damasccus - so many potholes, people are forever falling off their camels? |
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 9, 2010 11:43:00 GMT -5
"Has the truth been revealed to you? "
Oh dear, Biblespeak.
The null hypothesis is always open to challenge. When you have the evidence put it forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by liberaljoe on Jul 9, 2010 12:07:48 GMT -5
"Has the truth been revealed to you? " Oh dear, Biblespeak. The null hypothesis is always open to challenge. When you have the evidence put it forward. Sorry Fret, But I haven't a clue what you are talking about! |
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 9, 2010 12:08:53 GMT -5
"Has the truth been revealed to you? " Oh dear, Biblespeak. The null hypothesis is always open to challenge. When you have the evidence put it forward. Sorry Fret, But I haven't a clue what you are talking about! That's ok joe. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2010 16:32:08 GMT -5
As a non-believer I am not concerned overmuch with the finer nuances of Anglican theology.
On the other hand, if (as appears to be the case) the church's position is that homosexuals should NOT be allowed to become bishops, why don't these people just go off and found their OWN church?
No one is forcing them to stop being queer.
All that the church appears to me to be saying is that homosexuals should not be permitted to act as vicars in the Church of England.
If I join a club I have to abide by the rules - why are these people so arrogant that they imagine that the rules which govern other mortals do not apply to them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2010 16:33:11 GMT -5
As a non-believer I am not concerned overmuch with the finer nuances of Anglican theology.
On the other hand, if (as appears to be the case) the church's position is that homosexuals should NOT be allowed to become bishops, why don't these people just go off and found their OWN church?
No one is forcing them to stop being queer.
All that the church appears to me to be saying is that homosexuals should not be permitted to act as bishops in the Church of England.
If I join a club I have to abide by the rules - why are these people so arrogant that they imagine that the rules which govern other mortals do not apply to them?
|
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 19, 2010 7:00:46 GMT -5
As a non-believer I am not concerned overmuch with the finer nuances of Anglican theology. Hold on, Mike. I thought you were an agnostic? |
|
nikki
Affiliate
Posts: 23
|
Post by nikki on Jul 19, 2010 8:16:13 GMT -5
As a non-believer I am not concerned overmuch with the finer nuances of Anglican theology. On the other hand, if (as appears to be the case) the church's position is that homosexuals should NOT be allowed to become bishops, why don't these people just go off and found their OWN church? No one is forcing them to stop being queer. All that the church appears to me to be saying is that homosexuals should not be permitted to act as bishops in the Church of England. If I join a club I have to abide by the rules - why are these people so arrogant that they imagine that the rules which govern other mortals do not apply to them? because discrimination based on sexual preference is and should be illegal. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2010 10:26:17 GMT -5
An agnostic IS a non-believer, Fret.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2010 10:27:57 GMT -5
As a non-believer I am not concerned overmuch with the finer nuances of Anglican theology. On the other hand, if (as appears to be the case) the church's position is that homosexuals should NOT be allowed to become bishops, why don't these people just go off and found their OWN church? No one is forcing them to stop being queer. All that the church appears to me to be saying is that homosexuals should not be permitted to act as bishops in the Church of England. If I join a club I have to abide by the rules - why are these people so arrogant that they imagine that the rules which govern other mortals do not apply to them? because discrimination based on sexual preference is and should be illegal. If you are a Christian (as far as I can judge from my own studies and from the words of the Bible) one aspect of that belief is that homosexuality is morally wrong. It's hard to see how someone who IS a gay could possibly be a bishop in the Church without automatically being a hypocrite. After all, I don't mind if the Women's Institute don't admit ME as a member! |
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 20, 2010 6:05:34 GMT -5
An agnostic IS a non-believer, Fret. An agnostic, the last time I checked, believes that nothing can be known about the existence of God. Which is somewhat different, don't you agree. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2010 11:45:09 GMT -5
An agnostic IS a non-believer, Fret. An agnostic, the last time I checked, believes that nothing can be known about the existence of God. Which is somewhat different, don't you agree. No, I don't as it happens. As it see it a theist believes in the existence of a god or gods. A monotheist believes in the existence of a single god; a polytheist in the existence of more than one god. An atheist believes in the non-existence of a god or gods. To An agnostic, NEITHER the existence NOR the non-existence of a god or god CAN be demonstrated. As such, that makes atheists BELIEVERS and agnostics the only true NON-BELIEVERS. Is that sufficient clarification for you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2010 12:11:41 GMT -5
An atheist believes in the non-existence of a god or gods. That is incorrect. An atheist does not believe. Period. What you're referring to is an antitheist, which is not the same. |
|
Alpha 
