Scotland now a “pagan” country.

Well, if the wall of seperation is ever damaged enough here in the States to become more or less ineffective at least I know there’s one country in the world that seems to share my mindset about things religious that I could move to.

90 thoughts on “Scotland now a “pagan” country.

  1. If you think the right direction is Paganism and Christainity is an evil, hate mongering rligion then yes. But to be fair, Pagans are winnign baseed on the same underhanded tactics they claim Christians use. Lies, deceit, and hypocricy isz rampent in Paganism, as they claim Christians are evil, bigoted and intolerent, then refuse to let Christaisn say or do anyhting.

    Paganism nowaadays is a :“Do as you feel ” relighion that leads inevitavbley to a shallow, meaningless life, that resembles nothign of the paggan worship of old and lacks the unity and love of the CHristian m,essage when implemented.

      I am a Chroistians, and personally do not like modfern Paganism presisely because the philosophy doesnt work and is hypocritical.

  2. Your syntax is to say the least…hypnotic. I am not a pagan but I suspect paganism is no more hypocritical than christianity and probably a lot less dangerous. When was the last time you heard about a pagan assasinating an abortion doctor? When was the last time a pagan picketed a funeral holding a sign saying “god hates fags”? When in history was a crusade mounted by pagans who killed and tortured those who would not renounce christianity and accept paganism as the true faith?

    I would respect christians more if they spent a little more time tending their own shortcomings than pointing out everyone elses…and then whining about how they are so persecuted.

  3. I just love how Christians are so quick to point their finger at other people, yet they forget “And why worry about a speck in the eye of your brother when you have a board in your own?” – Matthew 7:3

    I also love how billions of Christians eat pork, yet overlook “Pigs may not be eaten because although they have cloven hooves, they don’t chew the cud.  You may not even touch the dead bodies of such animals” – Deuteronomy 14:8

    These same stupid Christians have the audicity to scream “God hates fags!”  Most Christians have probably never even read the Bible.  I’ll bet more atheists know the Bible better than looney-toon Christians do!

  4. AHEM, I am Dyslexic so forgive the spelling.

        However Christainity is not only not evil, Paganism has more blood on its hands than Christainity. We all know Christainity spread with violebce and oppression, but thats also a myth, as histroy reveals a slower, gentler growth with few wars, aminly fought over land not theology./

            Pagans in the past treated women worse that Christainity, yet now we think they treated them as equels and Christinity came along and changed that.

        Oh, I am a vegitarian, however on that Pork reference, please note, thats part fo the Jewish Old Testement, there is a passage in the New that states we mau eat anyhtign we desire. So Christains are Hypocritical how?

  5. ALSO…to say you just love how Chriostains love pointign their findger is another unfair comment. When somoen posts a derogetory anti-Chrisatain mesage, yoiu are OK with it, if I defend my faith, its somehow me pointing fingers.

        Lets face facts, it was in no uncertain tersms called a step inb the right direction when peopel saw Christainity on the decline in Scotland.
        This is good why? Can anyone name the benifits of this decline, which happens to coincide with the moral declien and increase in an aleinated society?

        Can anyone really tell me whats wrong with Chriastain theolopgy, and for that matter hwy Paganism is such a good idea?

  6. ITS UNFAIR TO INCLUDE ALL CHRISTIANS IN THE POINTING FINGER STATEMENT.  GOD ONLY, IS OUR JUDGE.  HE IS THE ONLY ONE WE ANSWER TO.  OUR CONSCIENCE IS GOD SPEAKING TO US TELLING US WHEN WE’VE DONE SOMETHING WRONG, AND NO ONE NEEDS ANOTHER PERSON TO BRING THAT TO THEIR ATTENTION, BECAUSE GOD ALLOWS US TO ALREADY KNOW WHAT IS WRONG AND RIGHT.  GUILT, DOES IT SOUND FAMILIAR?
    WE’RE THIRSTY FOR A CLEAN CONSCIENCE.  WE CRAVE A CLEAN SLATE.  WE YEARN FOR A FRESH START.  WE PRAY FOR A HAND THAT WILL ENTER THE DARK CAVERN OF OUR WORLD AND DO FOR US THE ONE THING WE CAN’T DO FOR OURSELVES—MAKE US RIGHT AGAIN.  WE USUALLY GET WHAT WE HUNGER AND THIRST FOR.  THE PROBLEM IS, THE TREASURES OF EARTH DON’T SATISFY.  THE PROMISE IS, THE TREASURES OF HEAVEN DO.  READ LUKE 18:9-14.  GOD EXISTS.  PLEASE BE READY WHEN HE COMES AGAIN.

  7. I’ve been meaning to respond to a couple of comments in this entry for awhile now. Suppose I should get to it.

    ITS UNFAIR TO INCLUDE ALL CHRISTIANS IN THE POINTING FINGER STATEMENT. GOD ONLY, IS OUR JUDGE. HE IS THE ONLY ONE WE ANSWER TO. OUR CONSCIENCE IS GOD SPEAKING TO US TELLING US WHEN WE

  8. Heh heh, that’s a great response towards Zarove (Or should I say SHEL? What is it with Zarove and Caps lock?). Zarove is always good for a good laugh, rather than arguing with him.

    Zarove I didn’t know you were a ‘Chroistian’. Is that some sort new religion I’ve never heard about?

    “I am Dyslexic”
    If your Dyslexic, how can you claim to be a British journalist for a Tennessee newspaper? 

    I agree with Eric’s statement on the topic.

  9. 1: I am not Shel. So drop that line.
    2: No matter how often peopel form OLS claim me to be stupid, and evil, and other things, Nothign will be served by it aside fom further pain inflicted, which i your goal.
    3: Edotors and assistance staff helped out my articles to-gather.
    4: Nothing I have said in any way is affressed by you, only another cheap shot, which is how you tend to work. I mean relaly you actively use Google searhc engines to gind my last posts, and then post where I have posted just to harrass me, come off it.
      As tot he cheap shot at a spellign error, you can shove it.

  10. If the majority of us were totally honest with ourselves we would admit that we have absolutely no idea which religion is the true one or for that matter what happens to us when this life is over and lets face it, isn’t that what scares us the most. On some weird t.v programme I saw a few years back, some bloke said “the world may destroy itself completely, but the laws of the cosmos would still remain”. This is the ultimate truth. The universe will exist with or without us.

  11. I am not concenred with religion so much as bogotry. The claims that Christianity is an evil religion, and shoudl be stopped, is based on lies and misocnceptions. Mpst peopel misrepresent, or distory, what Christianity teaches, then throw examples of evil deeds in the past that either dodnt happen the way peopel said they did, or are soley Roman Catholic and denounced, even while happening, by the rest of the christain world.

      Christainity gets a bad reputation, and its not wholey deserved.

  12. I’m guessing English isn’t your first language.

    Christianity’s bad reputation is one it earned fully and deservedly.

  13. BAM!! shut down by the master himself!
    whew…

    christianity on this website is continually represented by weaker and weaker people, suggesting that christianity is infact weak.
    However I’m starting to realize that any christian who realizes how stubborn and willfully dismissive of the facts of christianity the atheists on this site are, would cease to bother reasoning with them. How can one reason with those that have a brick-wall preconcieved bias towards the truth?
    Fair enough?

  14. “How can one reason with those that have a brick-wall preconceived bias towards the truth?”

    1).  That’s a little unclear.  I thought “favoring the truth” or having a “bias toward the truth” was a GOOD thing.  I’m betting that your intent was closer to “bias AGAINST the truth.”

    2). Damn.  I totally didn’t realize what a close-minded bigot I was.

    I really TRIED to engage in meaningful debate with Hires.  I did, really.  I addressed every point that he made, read his posts word for word, subjected them to critical analysis and pointed out the logical flaws in his arguments.  I, by engaging with the suppositions that he presented, attempted to draw closer to a recognition of the “truth.”

    In return, he didn’t read a damn thing I wrote—Just cut-n-paste from CS Lewis’ “Mere Christianity.”

    Also, I recall quite a few scientific “facts” (primarily accredited to Mr. Hovind) being summoned forth in defense of Christianity, only to be fairly thoroughly debunked.  If even a few of Mr. Hovind’s claims were true he would be an exalted member of the scientific community, and his work would be changing the face of science as we know it.

    But whenever someone points to the flaws in logic,  (Hovind, Lewis, pick your apologist), fundies simply accuse the pointer of being “close-minded” and reassert the infallibility of Biblical revelation.

    Two people in a room:  one attempting to engage in debate, the other with his fingers buried in his ears to the third knuckle, wildly shaking his head back and forth while screaming “I can’t HEAR you!”

    Which “side” is being “close-minded” here? 

    Pot, Kettle, black.

    Yeah, that’s fair enough.

  15. What master cut me down, exactly?And is that the value tyou espouse, insult and cut downs?

    Can you name, in history, an example of Christain evil that exceeds the evils of other cultures?

    Popular on the list, we find the Crusades. They where denounced bu the eastern orthedox and independant churches, so are only RCC. Further, theyw here politically motivated, and woudl ahve happened reardless of religious backing. The Muslims further where hardly nice people in the ordeal, themselves repsoncible for killing ANY nonmuslim Pilgrim to Jerusalem, be theu Jewish or Christain. No one complains baout the Islamic community, not should they are htis event is H-I-S-T-O-R-Y.

    How aboutthe “Burnign times.” witches talk about? Never happened. Combination of the crusades, fought elsewhere than in europe agaisnt Islam, or witchtrials that had nohtign to do with Paganism and where the result of Superstition. Similar waves of histeria had fripped Pagan nations liek Greece and Rome before.That was just the las titme it happened.

      Inquesition? Sorry, thats not “Christain” ts Catholic. Yes, catholics are Christain, but who where the victims of the Inquesition. Protestants. So you will blame protestants for the Inqauesition which was worked agaisnt them?

    Lets talk about other facts of Christain history, as Christainity is clearly weak, as stated.

    Another common charge levied agaisn the faith is sexism. It is said Pagans treated women with equel repsect as men, and Christainity came along to make it a second class citisien role for women to live in. Thats a lie. Pagans treated women like crapola and Christaimnity, though not far by todays standards, was far more progressive. Women who had been raped where expected to commit suicide for “The shame brought on by themselves” in the ” Enlightened” pagan times. All this is verifiable, htough few will.

      Incedentally, English is my first language, as sttated above, I am dyslexic. Open minded and tolerent though you are, you seem to want to attack my bad spelling as a sign my od intellegence Being low. This after I told of my condition.

        This is strength to you? An ad Homonim attack?

        Christainity isnt being defended by weaker and weaker people, rather,you use weaker and weaker tactics, those of attackign individual people like myself on personal failings.

    Again, I ask you, can you name any histoical event happenign as a direct result of Chrisyainity that was evil?

    ( Let me guess, Hitler… a facist, will soemhow be added, dispite his clearl lack of reverence for the Church. Also of nore how the Soviets, stalin especially , are ignored as atfhist monsters, and Pagans included Caligula, Alexander, and a host of other ” Conquering heroes” who worked barbary long before Christs time.)

    Tell me hiw weak is Christainity, when its attackers use low blows to attack peopel who defend the faith from unkind attacks?

  16. Zarove, take a deep breath and think for a second about what you have said. The Crusades, the Inquisition, the European and American witch trials…Christian religious belief is at the core of each of those events. Remove the religious belief and there would have been no reason for any of them to have occurred. The Crusades do have an arguably political motivation as well but the Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow, to deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny. Since it was the church that decided to send these holy warriors off in a religion inspired land grab that goes against Christianity.

    The Inquisition was indefensible terrorist action directed against anyone who did not follow the church. Murder, torture, rape, false imprisonment, theft, arson, destruction of property – all in the name of god. That also goes against this loving and tolerant religion you defend.

    Burnings of people accused of witchcraft never happened? I suppose that Hitlers final solution never happened either? Nice attempt at historical revisionism but men and women accused of witchcraft were burned mostly in Europe, although at least one incidence of burning at the stake happened in the American colonies. Are you arguing that it would have been okay if they were only pressed to death with stones? Anyhow, I do agree that it was superstition that condemned these people to death, but it was church inspired superstition. Remove Christianity from the equation and just who was this ‘Satan’ the witches were accused of cavorting with?

    Your argument that Catholicism is not christian rings false since they believe that Jesus was the savior same as you. Their practices and rituals do not define them as christian, it is this believe in Jesus that does. Follower of Christ (or king), do you need me to draw you a picture?

    The rest of your screed is a mish-mash of look at the evil pagans – they were sexist, or look at the Soviets – they were evil and Atheists. So is your argument that Christianity may be wallowing in the mud but look at all the other pigs in here with us? Are you not supposed to strive to be better than the rest of us instead of trying to hide your shortcomings behind revisionism? The first step in fixing a problem is admitting that you have one.

    I wish you and your church luck.

  17. Revisionism is the tale of the Burnign tomes. I didnt say peopel wherent Burned, I denied the existance of the Burning times themselves.( The Burning times is when the “Christain Church decided to wipe put Paganism.” Paganism was dead already.

      ( An an aisde, its God, not god. All Proper nouns get capped, save god, who is ultimatley devalued in modern society.)

      Firther, the Muhammadans ( As they where then called) wherent nice either, so you missed the whole point. ( The Christains, who where all Roman Catholic, where not just bad hiys tryign to kill people. The motivation was complexe. Further, saying this si when Christauns ( in general) attacked another religion is fale sence the crusades where denounced by the Eastern Chruches.)

      History isnt so cut-and-Dry on this matter. Yet I am weak and behind a brick wall because I want them to open a history book and think.

        also, sthe witch trials, they didnt attack Pagans, that was my central point.( Many still think 9 million pagans where killed. Which is riiculously high for the time, thats 1/3 of all of europe’s popylation during the middle ages.)

    Speakign of which, in many areas the Church officials OPPOSED witchtrials. That, too , is part of History, that peopel seem to forget. The bulkm of th witch trials where tried in secularm not religious cpurts.
        Further, punishment was hanging, not burning alive, in most cases.
    Catfholics Burned Heretics ( You know, like me, I am also protestant. which means Inquuisitions and crusades are NOT part of my spiritual lineage.)Not witches.
     

      Also, the idea that attrocities woudlnt have hapened had Christainity not arisen ignores the bloodshed doen under Pagan empires like rome, Greece, Asstria, Egypt, Babylon, ect… and often those wars had rleigious beleifs at their core. Why do we praise Paganism, and hate Christainity? Its the same roadmap.

    Peopel instead assume their religions where OK but Christainity has doen more evil than any other.That alone is ridiculpus.

      History is far more complexe than people seem to realise on these matters to begin with.

    On the Inquesition, you also ignored the poitn made. That was that Chridtains didnt work these actions agisnt nonChristains, but rather the Roman Catholic Church worked them agaisnt protestants. So if you do complain, why say “Christaisn did it” when ots obvious that the bulk of the peopel who suffered where themselves Christains?

    Laying the whoel religion at fault because of the actiosn of a single denomination is absurd. its like claiming All Islamic adherents are at blame for 9/11. Instead we welcome Islam with open arms, for a recent terrorist attack, yet persecute ( and this is an acucrate word, considering the amount of hate liturature producd here ) agaisnt Christains is allowed.

    This is itsself a doubte standard.( Not that I want peopel to speak disparingly agaisnt slam, but only to show, Chrisyainity is not the only rleigion who had problems in its past, ans yet it is the only oen I see attacked routinely.)

      even the few bad examples peope; throw around arent as bad as peopel claim they are.( Inquesition doesnt ffect Protestant denominations. So thus baptists, Chruch of Christ, Pentacostals, ect, shoudl not be made to feel guilty over soemthign they didnt do.)
      Further, the motivatiosn themselves wher eoften more complexe than simpley’They where Christan and evil and forced peopel to convert.”

          Indeed, claimign everyone who defends the faith is living behind a brick wall and callign them, and the relaigion weak, is not a way to present any logical points. Its only an insult game, and proves not strength form my oponants, but rather tired games of tryign to feel superior.
      Righeous indignation asid, have any of you actually studied real hisotry? Or theology?

      Do you know what CHristaisn exactly did go ont he crusades? If it was universal to all Chrisyains?

      What do you know aboutthe divisions in Chrisytainity?

        What attrocities where the Meathodists associated with?

      HNow about thise nice Pagans we hear about, what whre their cultures really like?

        This is more my point.

    Indeed there are two.

    1: History is more complexed than is assumed here. Not all Chrisyaisn did the attricoties most peoepl talkabout, or where they general to Chrisatinity, or nessisarily part fo the beelif system. Further, other attricoties where commited by nonchritains, and yet their rleigions arent compaliend about , nor seen as “Weak” or “Stupid” or” The greatest wvils of all time.”
      Islam stands as a prime example. Many died because “There is no god but allah” , and faced murder and persecution id they didnt convert to islam. Islamic extremeists recently bombed the US and continue a terror coampagn.
      All of this is seen as a small fringe group, not represntign the whole religion. Yet hisotry also hows Muslims attackign people, and all of it is dismissed as an abuse ofthe religion.( Not on this board, but I have seen it.) Yet use the same lien of reasonign with Christainity, that only one denomination, and a small number in those, are guilty, and that peopel abused the religion, and you ar elaughed off the board and accused of living in denial.
      Is this rleigious tolerence? A doubel standard?( Again I repeat, I do not wish to aggitate desctimination of Islam. But had Christaisn blown uip the WTC you woudl bet it owudl show how evil Chrisyainity is.)

        2: Religious toelrence, and overall freedom, is not secured by attackign a religion you disagree with, and singling out CHrisyaimity for abuse is itself persecution AGAISNT Chrisytainity, which itsself is wrong.

    Is that air? And be honest. I have presented more a case than any detractor, and yet all they can do is call me weak and stupid.

  18. Also, I wanst tryign to show how bad everyone else was. When I showed howSexist Paggans where back then it was an illustration of a point, not an attack.

    When I cited Stalins atheism, I was illustrating a point, not attakcign Atheists.

    I am not sayign Christainity is wallowiugn in the mud but look at everyone else.

    What I was saying is that peopel who claim Chrisyainity is the purest form of evil that has ever existed, and that no other religious beleif has ever caused so much suffering, is wrong.

        The main point there is that peopel assume Christainity is worse than the others, when in fac tit can be better, and we all can be better.

    No, I wasnt sayign its all wallowing in the mud, and so to hide any shortcomings, I was showing that Christainity is not the only oen with shortcomings, which is implicit in the attacks agaisnt it.

  19. So many things to address, so little time…

    That was that Chridtains didnt work these actions agisnt nonChristains, but rather the Roman Catholic Church worked them agaisnt protestants. So if you do complain, why say

  20. I’ve been meaning to chime in on this one for ahwile, but Eric seems to be doing a pretty good job of it so I’ll hold off until I have more time.

  21. 1: Mulsims do, in fact, try to dictate laws. Just not in the west where they ar ein a Minority. Many antions do follow Muslim Law, and currently in Iraq Muslim leaders want to cease controle.

    2: Homosexual marriage is opposed by Many rleigions, not just CHristainity.

    3: opposition to a behaviour is not racism, and I am pretty derned sick of Homosexuality beign linked to race. Its not proven to be genetic, and in fact the research indicates the oposite. its just popular to claim its genetic to win the morality argument and create a false persecuted Minority. ( In this vein, there is more link between my Vegitarianism to Homosexual because of it beign a behaviour, than to differences between black and white.)

    4: Callign everyone who is against Homosexuality a Homophobe and bogot is wrong. There are reasonable reasons to oppose, its another of thise complexe issues which people assume is simple, and its easy to villify one side or the other. On a board liek this, villifying peoiple who oppose ( Who are all 100% Christains , by the way, in many peopels minds. They cant fathom the concept of Atheists agaisnt Homosexuality, though many are.) as all Bigots who are irrational is goign to be common. But what about peopel who legitimately CARE about the issue and oppose it based on a mroal styand, and because they honesyly think it the best thing to do? Not based on gear or a desire to controle, but who think sincerely that Homosexuality is morally wsrong?

      The issue deserves more consideration than simpley saying these peopel are all Bifots.

    The Church also opposes Sex outside of marriage. Vlaimign its Bigotry to be opposed to Homosexuality is the same as sahyign its Bigotry to say that sex outside of marriage os wrong.

    5: Again, those ” Quiet practicing” pagans didnt really exist. Or at leats no evidence has occured. There i no histrical evidence for persecution of Pagans in the middle afes.
    An aside to that is, witchcraft and Paganism are not the saem thing. Modern day usage has them linked, btu again I repeat, the majority of Pagan cultures also banned witchcrafct. Witches where not the preists and preistesses of the old religion, and Rome summerily kill.ed suspected witches without trial for centuries before Jesus was even Born. And I doubt they cared about Moses’s law concernign witches.

        Those killed for witchcraft where not killed for practicing an ancient Pagan religion, nor where they killed because it was beleived they where. in fact the vast majority where Christain themselves.

      As to the cause, it was ggenerated by mass hysteria and superstition, not religious persecution.

      6: You need to open your midn to the benigits of religion. As a Chrisytain, the net users I encouter asusme I am automaticlaly anti-everyone else. I am not. Religion has been shown to imrpove lives in many Psycoogical studies. Granted, nto all rleigions do. ( Cults, as you mentioned.) But many, such as ( using a Ninchristain example) Buddhism have shown to reduce stress is practices. As well as to help focus life.

      Religion is a tool, not designed to be oppressive.

      Saying Christains woudl turn America into an oppressive theocracy if given the chance doesnt gove enough crfedit to Christaisn liek me, who often fights chrisyaisn and nonbeleivers because both seem irrational.

      7: As to your ” Dont preach to me” conclusion, again, I am defending historacity and the faiths potential for good. I did not address you sapcifically with lines such as ” You are damned to Hell, repent now.” did I?

      Why assume I am doign anythign other than addressign the cruelties aimed againt the faith?Swhy assume this is a prosltrising mission?

    8:

    I have to sat this, but dull services arent really sych a tradefy. Besides, you coudl have had worse, coudl have had Church of Christ like I did.  So dotn complain.

    9: As tot he definition ot Persecution, you knwo vert well I was usign the term in a looser definition than you where., All i need do is flip the proverbial switch and the net goes off. Or not visit this site.

    My pronciple motivation is to eliviate hatred and ignorance. Not to promote the faith, as you and other sseem tothink, nor to tear into other people.

      Historically, Christainity did less damage than it is beelived.( Please do not cite spacific examples, i said less than is beleived, not none.) Other groups have doen lots of damage on their own.( No, I am not just tryign ti hide shortcomigns of Christyainity by blamign others, but makign a point.)

      Nothign is served by hating soemthign that, by and large peopel ahve demonstrated no knowlege or understanding of. ( The theology they seem to understand is primitive and often wrong, thoug mucg is based on their predetermined hatred distorting the theologu.)

      So why cast disparagy agaisnt one faith adn not others? Muslims woudl take the political reigns of they could, and have in many nations. So woudl Buddhisst. All religions have that as an operative agenda, why hate one for it?

      There is no need for firther hatred, and my last poitn is that c,aiming Christainity is a force of hatred is not proven by beign a forc of hatred Agaisnt HCirstainity, and takign cheap shots isnt wlecomes.

  22. Dude, you really need to start using a spell checker or something. This is just getting silly. It makes it very hard to take anything you say seriously.

    1: Mulsims do, in fact, try to dictate laws. Just not in the west where they ar ein a Minority. Many antions do follow Muslim Law, and currently in Iraq Muslim leaders want to cease controle.

    OK, so what’s your point? That because the Muslims try to do it that makes it OK for the Christians and everyone else to do it as well? If all your Christian buddies jumped off a bridge, would you follow them? (Please say yes.)

    2: Homosexual marriage is opposed by Many rleigions, not just CHristainity.

    And again your point is, what? I thought Christianity was supposed to be the religion of love and tolerance?

    3: opposition to a behaviour is not racism, and I am pretty derned sick of Homosexuality beign linked to race. Its not proven to be genetic, and in fact the research indicates the oposite. its just popular to claim its genetic to win the morality argument and create a false persecuted Minority. ( In this vein, there is more link between my Vegitarianism to Homosexual because of it beign a behaviour, than to differences between black and white.)

    I suppose whether the research supports the idea of homosexuality being genetic depends on who’s research you’ve been reading. Most of what I’ve seen by those involved in genetics as a science indicates that it does have a genetic basis whereas most of the research I’ve seen from various religious groups tend to suggest it isn’t genetic. If it is genetic then a good argument can be made that persecuting homosexuals is racism.

    Regardless of whether it’s genetic or not, people who are homosexual are still a minority by definition. Race and genetics aren’t requirements for establishing a certain class as a minority.

    4: Callign everyone who is against Homosexuality a Homophobe and bogot is wrong. There are reasonable reasons to oppose, its another of thise complexe issues which people assume is simple, and its easy to villify one side or the other. On a board liek this, villifying peoiple who oppose ( Who are all 100% Christains , by the way, in many peopels minds. They cant fathom the concept of Atheists agaisnt Homosexuality, though many are.) as all Bigots who are irrational is goign to be common. But what about peopel who legitimately CARE about the issue and oppose it based on a mroal styand, and because they honesyly think it the best thing to do? Not based on gear or a desire to controle, but who think sincerely that Homosexuality is morally wsrong?

    I agree that not everyone who opposes homosexuality is a homophobe or bigot in the most literal definition of those words. I would like to hear what you consider to be reasonable reasons for opposing homosexuality.

    As for the people who think homosexuality is morally wrong, fine, don’t engage in it then. No one said you had to participate in it. But that’s not what you want, you want to go further and not allow others to participate in it either.

    Say, I think Christianity is a pretty stupid, pointless and harmful religion to participate in. Should I be allowed to pass laws that restrict your right to get married if you’re an admitted Christian? How about laws allowing me to fire you over it or not rent an apartment to you? What? You say that’s not fair? Well that’s what you’re proposing here with the homosexuals.

    5: Again, those

  23. Dude, you really need to start using a spell checker or something. This is just getting silly. It makes it very hard to take anything you say seriously.

    {Having explained my Dyslexia already, I am shown your open mindedness and tolerence.}

    1: Mulsims do, in fact, try to dictate laws. Just not in the west where they ar ein a Minority. Many antions do follow Muslim Law, and currently in Iraq Muslim leaders want to cease controle.
    OK, so what

  24. Also, two last poiutns, as I was cut off.

    Christainity is not the rleigion of Love and tolerence. it is ta religion based on love. Tolerence is not always identicle to love, and in fact sometimes love demands into,lerence. Before you leap for joy at this seemign admitance of evil, your own claims that you wanted me to leap pff a bridge, and your snide remarks along that vein, and your antireligiosu stance, makes you hightly intolerent yourself.

        Intolerence is sometimes needed for love, for if you love someone, you will want what is best for them, and will want to prevent them form destoryign themselves.

        Also, about the famous seperation of Church and state. Its a lie. well, not the seperation, but the reaosn you offered. Your foundign fathers didnt look back on a hiosotry controled by the (Christain) chruch, and see a hisotry of isurt and thus, in their wisdom, decide to prevent such oppression from ever grippiugn America. The seperation of Church and sttae is not designed to protect the state form Churhc controle, but the opposite.
      The seperation was designed to protect religion, and religiosu freedom.

      Your presentaiton is thus a lie. A popular myth toted as fact.

    I will repeat.

    The seperation of Chruch and sttae was nto inacted ot prevent the Church form takign over and beign tyranival as it had in the past, rather, the seperation was designed to prevent the state form controling the religon and to insure religiosu freedom.

    Its been perverted into protectign the state form religion by modern political parties, who themselve sare antireligioys. Its a lie, and thus easily dismissed.

  25. My, we sure are feeling chatty today. Let’s get to slogging through it.

    {Having explained my Dyslexia already, I am shown your open mindedness and tolerence.}

    OK, so you’re dyslexic. This prevents you from using a spell checker in what way? If anything, being dyslexic is just another reason why you should use a spell checker. I’m not dyslexic and I use a spell checker every time I post an entry because I want to make sure my points aren’t overlooked because I misspelled a couple of words. There’s even a spell checker you can use in Internet Explorer if that’s the browser you’re using. If it is, I suggest downloading ieSpell and installing it as it will allow you to spell check any web form like the one on this page. If you’re using a different browser then type your response up in a word processor and then copying and pasting it into the web page.

    Your insistence on using your dyslexia as a crutch is much like your insistence on using your religion like a crutch. If someone says anything critical of either one of them you start whining about how intolerant and closed minded they are. I’m beginning to suspect you’d whine in such a manner over any criticism you may receive. I sympathize with you on having dyslexia, but I won’t cut you any slack over it. You’re supposedly a journalist. Does your editor let you slide by just because you’re dyslexic? Or does he insist you use a spell checker?

    {

  26. Quit your whining Zarove. If you want to spew narrow minded beliefs and voice ill educated opinions you deserve to hear other

  27. Once again I started writing my piece before you posted yours Les, so I unknowingly repeated some of your points. My fault because I don’t refresh the page after I write my stuff and before I post it. Sorry about that. Still I’ll swear (on a bible if necessary) that we didn’t tell each other what to say.

  28. Sheez.  I get here, and Les has already posted a 400 pager.  Oh well, I’m just going to post me response, then read Les’s, so if mine sounds completely insane, and out of context, that’s because. . .

    it is.

    L:  Dude, you really need to start using a spell checker or something. This is just getting silly. It makes it very hard to take anything you say seriously.
    Z:  {Having explained my Dyslexia already, I am shown your open mindedness and tolerence.}

    [Dyslexia is one thing, and I

  29. Not a problem, Brock. I spent a couple of hours working on that today so chances were high that someone would end up posting at the same time I was. grin

  30. I read your post Brock, as well as Les’, and I can see certain consistencies in the way that we all approached Z’s posting.  Having seen what you guys posted, I now realize that I could have just taken the last hour off, and been perfectly happy with the responses.

    Oh well.  I’m quite sure our posting will have no discernible impact on Z, but I, at least, feel better knowing that I am not completely isolated, philosophically, from my fellow humans.  It’s reading your guys’ postings on SEB that makes it easier for me to just sigh and go “whatever” when I am confronted, sometimes daily, with some of the more heinous examples of fanatacism.

    So thanks.  Your postings are not falling on deaf ears, even if you are just preachin’ to the choir.

  31. I’m glad you and Les both took the time to deal with some of the facts Zarove graces us with. (I’m beginning to think I’ve had farts with greater intellects than his.)Besides, you both covered the bases much more completely and sensibly than I did. I only read “homosexuality should be prevented” and thought “must destroy backward boy”. Sorry, insensitive remark there.

    I think I can begin to understand how you have felt about homosexuality in the past. When I consider a man and woman doing it I have to remind myself that even though it’s not natural, they have every right to do whatever they want with their own bodies. I can even overlook, to some extent, the female gushing and prostrating and the “yeah your gonna see god tonight baby” braggadocio and cock of the walk posturing of the male.

    I also have a distaste for a mincing effeminate male and take no flak toughness of some lesbians, although I realize they are simply personifying what society expects to see in order to lessen the discontinuity. If others in society can put us in a box and easily define us they are more at ease and that allows all concerned to be more at ease. Still, I was never a big fan of all that reverse role playing, or role playing in general, and I hate to put idiots at ease

    To repeat – great responses made by you and Les. Reading your posts left me feeling a little farklempt. So I cried, dried my eyes and smiled a big ass smile for the mentshes of the world. No big whoop. It was like butta, like a bigggg stick of butta.
    (Ok, I didn’t really cry. Real men don’t cry, not even gay real men)

  32. Thank you all for jumping in there…I had to take a break from Zarove. I at first approached him as possibly wanting to debate his points but soon came to understand that he is pushing his agenda and will NOT make any concessions even in the face of researched examples. I cannot argue for long when I lose respect for the person I am engaged in a supposed dialog with.

    Thanks for your points, several of which I wish I had thought of myself.

  33. Incidentally, typing in “Zarove” into Google returns some very interesting results. Our little buddy here seems to have been pretty active on various religion and sci-fi message boards. Seems he’s been banned for being generally clueless on quite a few of them as well. I hadn’t bothered to look before as I had assumed he was a one-trick pony and it took awhile before he showed up again, but after reading his responses here and at various other sites I’m starting to think that he can’t be much older than maybe 15 or so.

    He seems to have a largely undeveloped and somewhat half-assed grasp of logic and it’s use in debating an issue, but from what I can tell he gets almost all of his information on history and reality from fundamentalist Christian websites. He has a highly developed sense of credulity as is evidenced by some of the discussions he’s gotten into on the Sci-Fi message boards he’s been on. He questioned why, for example, the show Psi Factor was classified as science fiction at one site when it’s supposed to be recreating true events. The idea that he could believe something as ridiculous as Psi Factor explains a lot about his religious convictions and parroting of the standard nonsense found at most fundy sites. The more outrageous something is the more likely he seems willing to buy into it. Still, I’ll give him points for a twisted form of youthful idealism.

  34. I think I can begin to understand how you have felt about homosexuality in the past. When I consider a man and woman doing it I have to remind myself that even though it

  35. Yes stress is most certainly a result of persecution.

    { Nopt really. Yhi sis the easy put for thre debate. But its not really the truth. As I said, even in nations hat have acdpete dHomosexuality for yasrs and have little to no persecution the stress levels ar ethere, and often higher. But l;ets pretend its ll about persecution…}

    I

  36. Sorry misread a part.

    The thrid rich i better than christsainity was what you said. Which itsself is idiocy. The third riech wn tout of its wsy to kill anyoje oppsoed to it.You will say Chrisyainity did worse, but again wont prove it.

  37. Just when I thought he was gone for good he shows back up with a 26 page (by Microsoft Word’s count) missive split over three responses that I’m sure is just chock full of accurate statements and supporting references. Granted, a lot of that is text he’s trying to quote from someone else, but it’s still a lot to slog through. Welcome back Zarove. It’ll be awhile before I’ll have a response ready I’m sure.

  38. Wow.  26 pages without spell check or the use of the quote function.  I predict that Zarove’s posts will eventually degenerate into random letter jumbles that we will be “responsible” for decoding.  :dohtwo:

    If we choose to spend our time in more fruitful endeavors (like teaching sign language to a monkey) Zarove will see that as a vindication of his “rightness.” rolleyes

    I’d like to see the study on anal cancer, though.  That’s gotta be worth a giggle or two. :chuckle:

    Does this mean that if I pick my nose a lot I’ll get nose cancer?  And I’m always digging at the lint in my belly button, so that might put me at serious risk of belly button cancer!  What if I scratch my ass a lot, but it’s just surface abrasion of my ‘roids, and there’s no penetration?  Does that put me at risk?  :worry:

    Wait a minute.  If this is a friction related phenomenon, then it might not just be my ass and my nose that are at risk.  I mean, having to shave my palms gets tiresome, but it’s not actually dangerous to my health. . .  😮

    Welcome back Z.  I missed you so. . .

  39. I’ll put it down for you, why Christianity is dangerous and not use a single debatable event in history. Christianity’s hard-driven, principle tool is fear of eternal torture. Add to that the push to convert every non-Christian, and the arrogance which your god commands – he most certainly does command it because anyone who does not believe as you will suffer eternal torture and it is YOUR job, NOT HIS, to convert the otherwise damned. The only symbol of peace and healing in the Christian religion was murdered and nailed to a cross, and THAT is what you hang in your homes. A dead man nailed to a cross – a symbol of sacrifice for sure, seeing it is the death of peace, love, and tolerance hanging on that cross. You give people a book of your rules which are contradictory, have changed many times to suit the desires of Kings, and then tell them if they screw up according to the rules, they will burn forever in an eternal flame. Oh, and let’s not forget, you also tell them they are programmed FROM BIRTH to screw up – born sinners. They are scared and screwed from verse one and you don’t think this is dangerous?
    Your god sacrificed a goat… no wait, wrong god. YOUR god sacrificed his own SON, left you horrible instructions for getting through a mess of a world, and left YOU – that is, a big group of you who cannot even agree on how to interpret those instructions – to make believers out of your fellow humans. When do you ask yourself what the hell kind of god you are worshipping?
    Those Christians who are ” Christ-like ” are all the better for it. But the push is ” Church-like ” and that is dangerous.

    As for the bashing of Pagans. . . well, any system of belief that teaches a person to be responsible for their own actions and to respect everyone including the ONLY tangible life force which sustains us ( Earth ) is a lot better than one that would have itself ruling the world.

    In my humble opinion.

  40. Very well said, Covie. I agree with you on what makes Pagans preferable to Christians which is why I posted the original article about how Scotland is once again becoming more of a Pagan country in the first place.

    Nowiser, you know me, I’ll probably make an attempt at responding though I don’t think I’ll bother backing up as many of my statements with citations and references this time around seeing as Zarove has yet to provide the same courtesy. That alone should knock a couple of hours off of the process of formulating a response. It looks like most of his latest effort is just more whining about how I use bad language and tend to be rude instead of actually addressing or refuting any of the points raised anyway. He seems desperate to try and force me to respect him and hasn’t clue in on the fact that no amount of whining is going to make a difference in how I address him.

  41. P.S. (Zarove) You have accused just about everyone who disagrees with you as “imposing” their beliefs. You came here. You don’t see anyone of us knocking on your door trying to spread the Heathen Word.

  42. All of the points that you were responding to were from Les and Brock. (I feel so neglected!)

    Don’t envy me nowiser. Zarove did a pitiful job of responsibly addressing anything I said. For example, I was quoted by him as saying (about AIDS):

    heterosexuals still consider it an exotic example of God

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.