OldBrownsFan Posted March 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Because I believe the truth has to be revealed I don't take offense when I get criticized for my beliefs (such as believing in absolute truth). Would I be critical or take offense at a blind man trying to judge art? In general though I see conservatives as seeing many issues as black and white while many liberals see most issues as grey areas and everything is relative. Conservatives get hammered by liberals for being too simplistic while I see liberals not having a strong foundation and sometimes lack of a strong moral compass without having strong principals that don't change to guide them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Posted Today, 11:31 AM I'd think that anyone who is all about liberal "inclusiveness" would try very hard not to be an insultin abusive prick to every single person who doesn't believe like they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Because I believe the truth has to be revealed I don't take offense when I get criticized for my beliefs (such as believing in absolute truth). Would I be critical or take offense at a blind man trying to judge art? In general though I see conservatives as seeing many issues as black and white while many liberals see most issues as grey areas and everything is relative. Conservatives get hammered by liberals for being too simplistic while I see liberals not having a strong foundation and sometimes lack of a strong moral compass without having strong principals that don't change to guide them. OldBrownsFan ******************************* Well, if you're going to be all reasonable, intelligent, and fair about it, you're no fun. No, I agree with ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Calm down overly paranoid Rob Lowe bahahaha I will never get this image out of my head whenever I think of ole' cal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Yeah, woodypeckerhead is all about hanging on other people's posts to go after somebody he disagrees with a lot, the little sniveling Gollum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Cal, you have a religious guy saying that he believes the Bible is the truth and a nonbeliever who believes there is nothing greater than what is going on right now. So because the nonbeliever says there are different versions of the truth for everyone instead of just being a jerkoff and saying "no, I am right and you are wrong" then somehow the nonbeliever is some sort of manipulator who "never has to honestly appraise issues". We aren't talking about whether or not 2+2=4. It is a faith based issue that most definitely means something different to each person. Log ************************************************** But I am not talking about people discussing different beliefs. I'm talking about blowehard saying that he has a different definition of the WORD "truth". You missed my point, but it's my fault, I reckon, because I didn't put TRUTH in quotes. Libs strongly tend to argue issues emotionally, and when they (usually) end up on thin ice, they simply change the definitions of their words so they are still "justified" in their stances. The primary example is when libs were losing their dramatic declaration of man made global warming doom, instead of backing up a bit, and looking at ALL the science, they simply redefine it by using different words - so, "climate change" is now what they were referring to as "man made global warming". Which, is obviously bogus, since climate does change all the time, going back before the Pleistocene era of earth's history. What they are still dishonestly referring to, is "man made global warming" pleas to allow them to control, and major liberal politicians to profit from, all the various activities of people. And, on a grander olde time global liberal scale... redistribute wealth to around the globe. And that's exactly why the Kyoto Treaty excluded the most polluting countries on earth - China and India, to name a few. Because it was all about redistribution of wealth, and having poor countries involved with the requirements of the treaty defied the intent of the stupid treaty in the first place. It was figured out, and that treaty went kablooey. We all have different beliefs.It's when you are ridiculed for not following the standard liberal line that it gets all emotional and screwed up with bickering about what the defintion of "IS" is. See? That's another example. Talk about an emotional fly off the handle rant. I think you are the libtard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Yeah, woodypeckerhead is all about hanging on other people's posts to go after somebody he disagrees with a lot, the little sniveling Gollum. No Cal, he actually summed up my thoughts on religion perfectly. "Define somebody's political affiliations religion does not." -master yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Little Woodypeckerhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcut4a_stupid-woodpecker_animals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Little Woodypeckerhead Typical liberal response.. reverting to personal insults when they nothing to say. Big serious trouble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 No, responding to insults in self defense. You libs never understand "self-defense". Want me to post that, which has been done in the past? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Well this thread cannonballed into the toilet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 It did. But my part was I just voiced a simple general opinion about what I was reading, somebody jumped at it, and all obamao hit the fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Cal did nothing! Anything he says is ALWAYS in response to hurtful, personal attacks. The poor guy. ... But this is going no where. I want to hear more responses from the discussion we were having on religion. It was interesting hearing Olds viewpoint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Well this thread cannonballed into the toilet. Which is why I wanted that twat to stay out of it. I want to hear more responses from the discussion we were having on religion. It was interesting hearing Olds viewpoint Same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 bloweshardonwoodypeckerhead blows as part of this board. At least woody has some merit to the board...he....eh......makes points about......uh.... never mind. I liked the board better when he finally was able to tear himself away from personal attacks involving me. Of course, he started with a few other folks. It's all he has to offer - nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted March 27, 2015 Report Share Posted March 27, 2015 Be religious, don't be religious, I don't really care. Many miss the mark on the arguments regarding using religious (mostly Christian) beliefs to influence or create laws. 90% of the "hateful, bigot-face Christians" couldn't care less about your lifestyle, your privacy, etc. They (we) just don't want to pay for your birth control, your weddings, your wedding fucking cake, your mosque, your art, etc. Or be told that we have to like it or support it. It's amazing that one side claiming tolerance and acceptance can "opt-out" of going to church on Sundays without social repercussion (and be real vocal shitheads about it too), yet the moment a "Christian" "opts-out" of a wedding/abortion/free birth-control/parade/free mosques, it's societal torch and pitchfork time. Quit being so fucking selfish and demanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 27, 2015 Report Share Posted March 27, 2015 Selfish? Everyone pays taxes for they don't want to. I don't want as much of my money going to defense spending, but it does. It's a fact of life. Religious groups shouldn't get an exception. How about my tax money not going to religious groups? They don't pay taxes, why should they benefit from tax payer services? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted March 27, 2015 Report Share Posted March 27, 2015 Selfish? Everyone pays taxes for they don't want to. I don't want as much of my money going to defense spending, but it does. It's a fact of life. Religious groups shouldn't get an exception. How about my tax money not going to religious groups? They don't pay taxes, why should they benefit from tax payer services? Such a good little boy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted March 27, 2015 Report Share Posted March 27, 2015 Selfish? Everyone pays taxes for they don't want to. I don't want as much of my money going to defense spending, but it does. It's a fact of life. Religious groups shouldn't get an exception. How about my tax money not going to religious groups? They don't pay taxes, why should they benefit from tax payer services? Ha. Your taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Yeah? Hi there... I pay taxes. Too bad for me they aren't as much as you, huh? My point still stands. Get sidetracked if you want, easier than making any point of your own I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Almost a whole year's worth too. and I already made a point you stupid dick - you "sidetracked" that conversation with your tax history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Be religious, don't be religious, I don't really care. Many miss the mark on the arguments regarding using religious (mostly Christian) beliefs to influence or create laws. 90% of the "hateful, bigot-face Christians" couldn't care less about your lifestyle, your privacy, etc. They (we) just don't want to pay for your birth control, your weddings, your wedding fucking cake, your mosque, your art, etc. Or be told that we have to like it or support it. It's amazing that one side claiming tolerance and acceptance can "opt-out" of going to church on Sundays without social repercussion (and be real vocal shitheads about it too), yet the moment a "Christian" "opts-out" of a wedding/abortion/free birth-control/parade/free mosques, it's societal torch and pitchfork time. Quit being so fucking selfish and demanding. Leg ********************************************************** Yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Almost a whole year's worth too. and I already made a point you stupid dick - you "sidetracked" that conversation with your tax history. I made a point using taxes dumbass. If religious people want to opt out of paying taxes for things they don't like, I want to opt out of my tax money paying for religious use at churches, mosques, etc. They don't pay taxes, why get the benefits? Also, I have more than a year buddy..... Almost 2... It is just funny you can attempt to spin not tolerating intolerance as being "selfish". If a religious person thinks abortions are bad, then fine, don't get one. They shouldn't force that on others. You think being gay is a sin? Good for you, but you should be able to discriminate against them and deny the right to treat them equally while hiding behind religion. It's pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Ha, his post got deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 I made a point using taxes dumbass. If religious people want to opt out of paying taxes for things they don't like, I want to opt out of my tax money paying for religious use at churches, mosques, etc. They don't pay taxes, why get the benefits? Also, I have more than a year buddy..... Almost 2... It is just funny you can attempt to spin not tolerating intolerance as being "selfish". If a religious person thinks abortions are bad, then fine, don't get one. They shouldn't force that on others. You think being gay is a sin? Good for you, but you should be able to discriminate against them and deny the right to treat them equally while hiding behind religion. It's pathetic. I was referring to these businesses paying fines because they don't "opt-in". Not worried about the tax issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Also, churches don't receive money or funding from taxes. I'm not sure which Salon article told you they did. Tax breaks, sure (no income tax etc) but so does every major corporation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 I made a point using taxes dumbass. If religious people want to opt out of paying taxes for things they don't like, I want to opt out of my tax money paying for religious use at churches, mosques, etc. They don't pay taxes, why get the benefits? Also, I have more than a year buddy..... Almost 2... It is just funny you can attempt to spin not tolerating intolerance as being "selfish". If a religious person thinks abortions are bad, then fine, don't get one. They shouldn't force that on others. You think being gay is a sin? Good for you, but you should be able to discriminate against them and deny the right to treat them equally while hiding behind religion. It's pathetic. An interesting study conducted a few years ago attempted to put a value on the economic worth of one church. The study estimated that the First Baptist Church of Philadelphia provided over 6 million dollars of economic value to the community, a figure that is nearly 10 times the church's annual budget. Churches minister to the poor and needy and provide social services. The social benefits churches provide the community and their economic worth justifies its tax exemption. Helping those in need..isn't that what you bleeding heart libfucks are looking for?... Or is that only the responsibility of the govt? Read up... http://articles.philly.com/2011-02-01/news/27092987_1_partners-for-sacred-places-congregations-churches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 Churches helping people doesn't endear those helped.... to become dependent on the democratic party during elections. That's why the gov and libs want the gov to do all the helping - dependency locks in votes for them. In the long run, the poor never figure out that they don't get help, to get on their feet and off the public dole.. ....the dems need them to still be dependent on them the NEXT election. And on it goes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 Also, churches don't receive money or funding from taxes. I'm not sure which Salon article told you they did. Tax breaks, sure (no income tax etc) but so does every major corporation. I never said they received direct funding. I said they benefited from tax money and they benefit from tax breaks. Basically, any service that is funded by taxpayers, that a religious building/group could use, even though they never paid into. It is like our entire country is subsidizing religion, even if you don't want to. Religious groups receive more tax breaks than corporations (though shady shit can happen there). Everyone has to pay for things they don't want to in some way or another, I see no reason why religious groups should be any different. You shouldn't be able to use your religious beliefs as an excuse to be intolerant. Intolerance of intolerance isn't intolerance in itself. So why should religious groups get to be tax exempt and then also get to decide what they don't want to "fund" that everyone else does? That seems like a lot of special privileges. If religious people/groups can decide they don't want to pay for certain things everyone else does, then I don't want to pay to help support those religious groups. Also, I don't read Salon. I read The Blaze, Top Right News, Fox, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.