Reply #75

In the discussion thread: How can religious moderates be said to enable hateful fundamentalists? [View all]

Response to Goblinmonger (Reply #72)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 04:30 PM

tama (9,137 posts)

75. Faith in word games

And that all this thread is and Constitution as well.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

94 replies	Author	Time	Post
How can religious moderates be said to enable hateful fundamentalists? [View all]	trotsky	Apr 2012	OP
I think "enabling" is not the best choice of words	longship	Apr 2012	#1
I think "enable" is a word that puts a special focus on the problem.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#3
You have a point, but...	longship	Apr 2012	#6
I don't see it as meaning "tacit approval."	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#7
Faith is an important issue here	longship	Apr 2012	#10
No, they definitely are not actively supporting them.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#8
My bad!	longship	Apr 2012	#11
About IRS concerns? Or...? n/t	trotsky	Apr 2012	#19
About why moderates might not be standing up against religion in politics	longship	Apr 2012	#26
Oh, on that I really can't be sure.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#27
Perhaps not, but they are actively funding them...	Act_of_Reparation	Apr 2012	#83
I believe that religious moderates can enable hateful fundamentalists, but	rhett o rick	Apr 2012	#2
You say:	trotsky	Apr 2012	#4
Plus add to that the sister claim	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#5
Very important point.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#9
How does having faith enable bad behavior? nm	rhett o rick	Apr 2012	#14
It's not the act of having faith that enables bad behavior.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#17
Ermmm.. what?	dmallind	Apr 2012	#18
Faith can be used to justify bad behavior, I agree. But having faith	rhett o rick	Apr 2012	#66
I think we have a tail and dog issue here	dmallind	Apr 2012	#12
It's not just wrong, it's hate speech, and it's stupid.	bananas	Apr 2012	#13
Now, now, you're not supposed to call beliefs stupid.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#15
As I pointed out, you can replace "faith" with just about anything	bananas	Apr 2012	#29
You sure can. Just as you can substitute a pear for an apple in an apple pie.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#35
No, religious faith doesn't close that off. nt	bananas	Apr 2012	#37
OK, go convince Fred Phelps he's wrong.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#39
What piffle	dmallind	Apr 2012	#16
Wrong.	bananas	Apr 2012	#30
Modern eugenics, genetic engineering, and ethical re-evaluation	bananas	Apr 2012	#32
You either didn't read or didn't understand your own "rebuttal". It makes my point perfectly!	dmallind	Apr 2012	#34
Why do they believe genetic composition of a population can be improved?	bananas	Apr 2012	#41
........	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#45
Your coin came down on the wrong side I see. Bad luck.	dmallind	Apr 2012	#53
rofl - the concept of earth was around long before geography as a science. nt	bananas	Apr 2012	#59
Wow, really???	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#79
Thoroughgoing religious liberalism in no way enables fundamentalism.	E_Pluribus_Unitarian	Apr 2012	#20
Again, no one is equating the beliefs.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#23
This is a variation on the assertion in a recent thread that:	LTX	Apr 2012	#21
No one is saying that religious beliefs are identical.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#22
But faith is a valid justification for all beliefs, whether religious or not.	LTX	Apr 2012	#24
I don't think religious faith is a valid justification for any belief.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#25
Actually, yes.	LTX	Apr 2012	#31
Great post! Religion does indeed evolve, and believers evolve, too.	kwassa	Apr 2012	#33
and also use imaginary father figures as a symbol yes	dmallind	Apr 2012	#36
And I'll add that those made-up sources	LTX	Apr 2012	#42
That's a gigantic caveat you just tried to tack on innocuously at the end there!	trotsky	Apr 2012	#43
Not really.	LTX	Apr 2012	#49
Absolutely	dmallind	Apr 2012	#55
Of course, I never said they couldn't. So bully for the brilliant dispatch of that straw man.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#46
Actually, no.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#38
So give me your definition of faith.	LTX	Apr 2012	#44
Religious faith.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#47
It can be a justification for both.	LTX	Apr 2012	#52
There you go muddling the definitions again.	trotsky	Apr 2012	#56
Valid point, but taken too far I think	dmallind	Apr 2012	#57
I agree for the most part with your statement that:	LTX	Apr 2012	#68
I disagree with this also	kwassa	Apr 2012	#73
I think thete is a difference	rrneck	Apr 2012	#28
How you ask? Probably	humblebum	Apr 2012	#40
"Oh, do elaborate", he said as he put on his wading boots. nt	rrneck	Apr 2012	#48
What is there to elaborate on? I merely responded with	humblebum	Apr 2012	#50
Well, you could elaborate on your opinion.	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#51
Ah, good. Knee boots are more comfortable. nt	rrneck	Apr 2012	#54
So given the fact that groups of freethinkers/skeptics/atheists and individuals gave their open	humblebum	Apr 2012	#58
Except we have this thing called the Constitution.	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#60
I was not aware that the Constitution had any teeth outside of the Unites States, and	humblebum	Apr 2012	#61
I am talking about what we are doing here.	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#63
You are just kinda throwing out all sorts of straw men	humblebum	Apr 2012	#64
"limited separation"	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#67
I would certainly question your grasp of American history and in particular	humblebum	Apr 2012	#70
In short, because you've never heard of organizations like	LTX	Apr 2012	#84
I've heard about Americans United.	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#87
I see. You don't know the history of	LTX	Apr 2012	#88
pssst. There used to be and "O" in the acronym, too.	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#89
Right. Which just proves	LTX	Apr 2012	#91
You are misunderstanding a lot of arguments in this thread	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#92
Oh, I haven't missed the point of thread.	LTX	Apr 2012	#93
Faith in Constitution... nt	tama	Apr 2012	#71
Whatever.	Goblinmonger	Apr 2012	#72
Faith in word games	tama	Apr 2012	#75
Id didnt work	rrneck	Apr 2012	#62
Never said it did work. I said "attempted" eradication. nt	humblebum	Apr 2012	#65
Then don't worry about it. nt	rrneck	Apr 2012	#69
Christianity has been reforming for two thousand years and continues to reform	Leontius	Apr 2012	#74
The 1950s called.	2ndAmForComputers	Apr 2012	#77
And 20s 30s 40s 60s 70s 80s and today. nt	humblebum	Apr 2012	#80
Making heavy use of helicopters painted in the color black, I'm sure.	2ndAmForComputers	Apr 2012	#76
You called?	onager	Apr 2012	#78
And that is a vile and bigoted suggestion	LeftishBrit	Apr 2012	#82
OK, I think it is wrong and here's why.	LeftishBrit	Apr 2012	#81
I don't believe you understood what the point of the quote was.	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#85
+1 nt	mr blur	Apr 2012	#94
But is isn't that simple when there's money involved	Act_of_Reparation	Apr 2012	#86
Not exactly.	kwassa	Apr 2012	#90

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.