Religion
In reply to the discussion: Top Ten Q&As About God, Jesus, the Bible & LGBT People [View all]AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It's amazing what some people get away with here.
Tacking on context after specifying something that is either true or false, is a unhelpful practice. It leads to things like me objecting to your grasp of a definition (in the context of that post, it was, in fact, broken, and needed repair).
It doesn't help the conversation along, and causes needless 'clarification' posts, and on and on.
Here's what I would like to see, rather than the trainwreck of useless sentiments in the OP. (The content, not cbayer, I shouldn't have to specify that, but umbrage was taken on my VERY FIRST post in this thread, so I feel I have to.)
I'd like to see the top-tier leader of a Christian sect in the US that does not define homosexuality as a sin take on his or her counter-part in one of the major sects that does hold it to be a sin. Let's see this go down. No more of these soft, fluffy 'q&a' lists that are really just assertions, and so badly written that even a non-hostile observer like myself can drive a truck through it.
I ask, because I haven't seen it yet. I've seen three major religious leaders from very different traditions sit down to debate anti-theists on the merits of religion, but I see very little effort to reconcile differences in doctrine between faiths that are, fairly similar in nature.
I see no value in the list in the OP. Totally toothless. Like I told cbayer earlier, I can't use it. What we could really use, is a point by point takedown, not of one religion by another, but one religious doctrine, by experts from a similar field.