Christians Please Stop Being Arrogant

[FreeThinkerNZ]

I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. In fact, it is my opinion that the New Testament clearly says that to do so is wrong, that each person is responsible for their own salvation and it can not be forced upon them.

 

It does not matter if the group in question is religious or secular (think various social activists.)

 

I see little difference at times between those who say you must teach creationism as science, and those who would ban lunchtime Bible study groups at school. Both are examples of the same intolerance and arrogance.

I would love to have that NT reference... I wonder if anyone here knows it?

 

I wouldn't ever advocate banning lunchtime Bible study groups at school.  I don't think many unbelievers would, either. 

[Roz]

 

Isn't imposing one's beliefs on another arrogance?  I think it is.  If there's an atheist bully saying to a christian classmate "stop praying or else I'll punch you" then he's both arrogant and violent, and must be called out as such as well as disciplined.

 

[ ... deletia ... ]

 

Why do the christians want to ban gay marriage?  It says so in the bible.  The bible tells them that the bible's true.  Their whole religion is set up so that they have the "truth" and they have to spread it to the whole world.  The religion tells them that their beliefs are better/superior. 

 

[ ... deletia ... ]

 

I was trying to avoid the hot-button of gay rights, but ...

 

I agree with what you said, but let's consider the recent case in Arizona involving a photographer who refused to provide service to a gay couple and suffered legal consequences for doing so. Where does one draw the line? Does that imply that a gay couple could sue a church for refusing to perform a marriage ceremony for them?

 

 

Should a photographer who refused to provide service to a gay couple suffered legal consequences for discrimination?  Yes.  Same thing for a photographer who refused to provide service to an interracial couple, a couple that's 20+ years apart, an Islamic couple, etc. 

 

Didn't the 60s deal with similar issues, except it's with blacks who were being discriminated against?

 

I believe that churches are exempt from that, I don't know the law, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's an exempt status for churches.  That's legal, which I freely admit I'm not professionally versed in.

 

Will I, as a private citizen, openly mock churches for refusing to wed gay couples?  Yes.  On the same basis as I would mock them and ridicule them for refusing to wed black/latino/interracial couples.  The westboro baptists have free exercise to organize rallies, I'm free to mock them with counter rallies.

 

Why do the christians discriminate against gay marriage in the first place?  Because their holy book told them to.  And they place that as superior over the lives of others.  That's why I'm against christian arrogance.

[boftx]

FreeTbhinkerNZ,

 

It is implied by the "Give unto Caesar ..." passage, and pretty much stated explicitly when Jesus sends the disciples out and tells them to "shake the dust from your feet .." in reference to towns that reject them. One can also infer the same principle from the Sodom and Gomorrah story in as much as Lot should have had the good sense to get out of there without waiting for a rescue.

 

It can also be reached (by a stretch) depending on how one views the admonition about slaves should remain slaves rather than insist on freedom if they convert to being believers.

 

There are others, but those are the ones that come to mind. The basic teaching is that each person is solely responsible for their decision as to whether or not they wish to believe in the salvation that Jesus preached.

[Roz]

Found what I was searching for:

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/28/1114517/-Black-couple-in-MS-barred-from-marrying-in-white-church#

 

Substitute gay for black in that story.  I don't know what legal recourse that couple took, if they took any, against the church.

Would I mock the church?  Yes. 

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Found what I was searching for:

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/28/1114517/-Black-couple-in-MS-barred-from-marrying-in-white-church#

 

Substitute gay for black in that story.  I don't know what legal recourse that couple took, if they took any, against the church.

Would I mock the church?  Yes. 

I would mock the church too.

 

As an aside, when same sex marriage was legalised in NZ last year, the House was careful to include an exemption for churches.

[Roz]

In hindsight, I should've worded the title like what boftx suggested.  "Christians don't impose your beliefs on us." 

However, from someone who is sometimes an arrogant sum-of-a-beach, it's still arrogance.

[boftx]

Roz,

 

I agree in general with you, but I have problem with saying that a person must provide service to anyone without any semblance of discrimination.

 

If we can agree that anyone who accepts employment can be thought of as selling a service, then I think it logically follows that you would say that an atheist must accept employment at a Christian firm, or a Democrat must accept an offer from a Republican, if that is the best offer they receive while collecting unemployment. If a person can pick and choose who they work for, then a professional should be given the same freedom.

 

Let me state now that at one time I specialized in working with gay websites even though I am straight because many others preferred not to and my clientele paid their bills on time. I no longer take on consulting work, but my attitude has not changed in that regard.

[Roz]

Is this the same case?  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/07/supreme-court-gay-wedding-photography_n_5104699.html

 

 

Elane Photography co-owner Elaine Huguenin said taking the photos for Vanessa Willock and her partner would violate her religious beliefs. She said she also has a right of artistic expression under the First Amendment that allows her to choose what pictures to take, or refrain from taking. She was ordered to pay more than $7,000 in attorneys' fees, which Willock waived.

The case has been cited as lawmakers in other states have proposed legislation exempting people from such lawsuits if doing business with same-sex couples violates their religious beliefs.

 

Seems to me that the photographer willingly said to the couple "I can't shoot for your wedding because it would violate my religious beliefs."

 

We all know what those "religious beliefs" are.

 

As far as I know, some employers refuse and terminate employee contracts for discriminatory reasons.  But they always give out "performance reasons" for why the employee was let go, or "we found a better candidate" and leave it at that if they didn't hire the person.

 

If a photographer said "I can't shoot for your wedding because it would violate my religious beliefs" and the couple were black, then I would mock that guy for being both a bigot AND a dumbass.

 

I'm no lawyer,  I don't know the ins and outs of refusing or accepting a service, but if you were a consultant, and you really didn't want to take on a case, then just on the basis of covering your ass, you'd come up with a reason that wouldn't get you in the spotlight, right?  Or just say no, I can't do it?

 

That photographer would've saved themselves a lot of shame if they just said "no, I can't do it."  and left it at that.

[boftx]

Like I said, for me, it is a gray area that opens a real can of worms even though I would not refuse business on that basis.

 

I think my basic point is that any laws applying to this should be equitable across the board, and not carve out exceptions such as a church can refuse service but a professional can't based on religious belief (or lack thereof.)

 

The First Amendment says this: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ..."

 

The problem is that many people today read "establishment" as meaning an organization. What it really means is more along these lines: "Congress shall make no law that establishes or favors a religion."

[DoubtingNate]

Churches can have any number of requirements to allow their sanctuary to be used for a wedding.  They can require you to be a member or even to go through counseling with their pastor.  They don't have to just rent their building out to anyone who wants to use it.  Churches that are especially pretty might have more requirements simply because they might be more demand.  

 

Have there been any good precedent-setting lawsuits for this issue?  I am not quite sure how I feel about this; my dad is a minister and I think I'd be pretty upset if he was somehow legally strongarmed into performing a ceremony that goes against his convictions.  I feel this is different from bakeries and wedding photographers, but I can't quite put my finger on why.

 

And I have to question someone's motive if they are pursuing legal action just so they can get the building they want.  At that point, is it even about the wedding anymore?

 

What if I, as a nonbeliever, want to marry my unbelieving fiance in a Mormon temple or a mosque?  Is there a difference, and if so, what?

[Roz]

Not insinuating anything against you man, if that came across as such, my mistake, I apologize.  Was only using examples   hope no hard feelings.

 

That photographer to me voluntarily coughed up the basis on why he was refusing to accept the job.  If I were a photographer and two white supremacists came to me and asked if I could do their wedding, I would just say "no, sorry, I can't."

 

They can take me to court all they like, but I'm not voluntarily giving out my reasons. 

[boftx]

And the very first question would be "Why not?" and if not answered they would still find a lawyer who would want to show that bias was the reason.

 

Just as i would fully defend your choice to not serve such clientele, I have to apply that position equally.

 

With regard to the MS church refusing to perform an interracial marriage at their location, I will only say that while I think they can not find anything in the Bible to justify it, no one has ever said that religion is justifiable to begin with.

[Roz]

As FreeThinkerNZ said, there's precedent on this.  Not in the US yet, I don't think, but she said that once gay marriage was legalized in NZ, there was an exception clause added for churches.

[Roz]

And the very first question would be "Why not?" and if not answered they would still find a lawyer who would want to show that bias was the reason.

 

Just as i would fully defend your choice to not serve such clientele, I have to apply that position equally.

 

With regard to the MS church refusing to perform an interracial marriage at their location, I will only say that while I think they can not find anything in the Bible to justify it, no one has ever said that religion is justifiable to begin with.

 

 

 

The onus is on them to prove what I didn't voluntarily give.  The defense is innocent until proven (proven) guilty. 

[Roz]

Let me just say this.  It was once legal in the US to just say "no sorry, I won't serve you" to non-whites in this country.  Before 1964 it would be OK for a racist barber to refuse to cut a black man's hair.

 

1964 happened, the Civil RIghts Act deemed it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race.

 

I hold to the opinion that sexual orientation is NOT a choice, much like skin color is not a choice. 

 

Being an open white supremacist, however, is very much a choice that person made.  If there came a law that said I can't refuse services based on the ideals of the customer, then I would move to another country because as much as it saddens me I'll have to respect the laws of this nation.

 

Regarding the laws concerning churches, don't we already shield churches from a lot?  Taxes being one of the big ones?  They can discriminate all they want and not provide services to gays, there's no law yet.  However, that's a far cry from what they're wanting to do, which is ban all gay marriage in the whole nation.

 

This is something I feel I have to repeat:  I do not view refusing to sell my services to a racist and refusing to sell my services to a gay person equal.  One is a choice, the other is not.

 

EDIT:  Didn't MLK say that people shouldn't be judged by the color of their skin, but by their words and deeds?

[Roz]

To everyone who's responded so far, especially Nate and Boftx.  Thanks for responding and I honestly saw your points.  Not pickin a fight or preach from a soapbox but it seems I did that a bit, sorry.  Just expressing how I feel.  Cheers guys.

[DoubtingNate]

No worries; I actually wasn't clear which one of us you were responding to.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Churches can have any number of requirements to allow their sanctuary to be used for a wedding.  They can require you to be a member or even to go through counseling with their pastor.  They don't have to just rent their building out to anyone who wants to use it.  Churches that are especially pretty might have more requirements simply because they might be more demand.  

 

Have there been any good precedent-setting lawsuits for this issue?

 

Just to clarify the NZ law on this (in case you guys want to copy it, or not), the nature of the exemption is based on the person conducting the ceremony, they are called a marriage celebrant here.  So it's not about the building.  It's treating it as a professional issue for the celebrant, most of whom are clergy.  There are some great secular celebrants and they have been laughing all the way to the bank ;-)

[buffettphan]

In my experience, there is little or no correlation between arrogance and religious faith (of any kind.) If anything, I would speculate that arrogance becomes more likely (or noticeable) as one increases one's body of knowledge of any given subject.

 

That said, arrogance can become tempered if one comes to understand that increasing one's knowledge also illuminates the fact that there is even more to learn.

 

In my experience, absolutely beyond any doubt, (most) bornagainers are the most arrogant people I know.  Perhaps it's because they believe they have all the superior knowledge on the god/buybull subject -- not that they actually have that knowledge.

 

I do agree 100% with your second paragraph.  

[ironhorse]

 

-Because of this, anyone who accepts Jesus and places their

faith in Him have eternal life in the Kingdom of God.

 

 

That is what I believe are the central messages of the Bible. I do not understand

everything about God, but I understand this narrative.

 

There are many mysteries about God that I do not comprehend. I believe that even in

the Kingdom of God there will be things about God that will remain a mystery.

 

This is from the hippie christie Ironhorse.

This can be used by all christians as their get-out-of-trying-to-explain-their-faith-with-reason.

 

There are many many doctrinal differences fundies will have with IH, and even liberal christians will disagree with him on more than a few points (IE: the different interpretations of Rev. 20).  Regardless, virtually all christians will use their 100% sure bet on christianity to affect the rest of our lives.

 

Please stop being arrogant and use your 100%-sure-yet-totally-not-sure leaps of blind faith to:

• exclude 2 consenting adults from the legal privileges of marriage
• ensure that your particular faith based special creation myth be given government-endorsed status by being taught alongside real science
• give enormous amounts of aid to Israel and approve of them acting like assholes
• enshrine your 10 commandments (version 1.0 of course, ver. 2.0 is totally different yet it's the biblically endorsed 10) in courthouses and other public property
• influence our entire system of government voting for who's the more faithful and not who's got the better ideas for governance (btw, nothing against Republicans, but man that party's locked alongside the fucking immoral majority.)

Stop it christians, I for one am sick and tired you using your blind obedience instead of reason. 

 

 

The definition first to remind myself: Arrogant - 1. Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance.

2. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others

 

 

OK, can we discuss this statement first?

 

"give enormous amounts of aid to Israel and approve of them acting like assholes

 

 

Is this one of the reasons you think Israel acts badly?

 

"There are 1.4 million Arabs living in Israel with civil rights that are the envy of the Arab world. Israeli Arabs vote in Israel’s elections, have representatives in the Israeli Parliament, sit on Israeli courts and on the Israeli Supreme Court, and serve as tenured professors teaching in Israeli colleges and universities. The Arab citizens of Israel have more rights, and enjoy more freedom, education, and economic opportunity than the inhabitants of any Arab or Muslim state."~Wall of Truth

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Damn, it's late in NZ and I have to go to sleep, so I'm not going to get to watch this live.  Will be fun to read in the morning though.  I'm expecting to see a lot of facts about the Arab-Israeli conflict, for starters. 

[Roz]

To the christian who has shown that he will dodge questions over and over again in this board:

 

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/countries/middle-east-and-north-africa/israel-and-occupied-palestinian-territories

 

Human rights violations by Israeli forces in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) have included, but are not limited to:

• home demolitions and the forced eviction of Palestinian families
• punitive arrests
• unfair trials
• ill-treatment and torture of detainees
• use of excessive or lethal force to subdue nonviolent demonstrations
• use of restrictive legal means
• In contravention of international law, Israel continues to build parts of the wall/fence in the OPT
• expand settlements
• use draconian restrictions on the movement of Palestinians with some 600 roadblocks and checkpoints
• Amnesty International is also concerned about discriminatory policies affecting access to water for Palestinians

Not that Ironhorse will read it, but perhaps some guests will:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/annual-report-israel-and-the-occupied-palestinian-territories-2013

 

Also, about the military blockade the Israelis put on Gaza:

http://blog.amnestyusa.org/middle-east/top-ten-reasons-for-lifting-the-blockade-of-gaza/

 

10. 80% of the population is dependent on international aid
9. 61% of the population is food insecure
8. Unemployment rate is around 39%, one of the highest in the world
7. Power outages usually last 4-6 hours a day and often longer
6. 60% of Gaza’s population receives running water only once every 4 or 5 days, for 6-8 hours
5. 50 to 80 million liters of untreated or partially treated sewage are released into the sea every day
4. About 90% of water supplied to Gaza residents is not suitable for drinking and is contaminated with salt and nitrates
3. 78% of homes with major damages from Operation Cast Lead have not been rebuilt

2. The blockade is collectively punishing the entire civilian population, and is thus illegal under international law
1. You tell me (because god wills it, duh)

 

Because of 'end time prophecy' they interpreted from a 2000 year old collection of scripts, Protestant America uses government actions to send about 3 billion annually without questions asked to Israel. 

 

That's arrogance. 

 

For the record, what the Israelis suffered in WW2 was horrific, but humans are humans.  I'm calling abuse when I see it, and what they're doing to Palestinians en masse right now is abuse.  We keep sending them the largest amounts of government aid for religious reasons and they in turn act like bullies.

[ironhorse]

Amnesty International has a very biased view against Israel.

I've read their reports on Israel.

 

Before we go further in this discussion, what you said reminded

of a Dylan song.

 

You said, "We keep sending them the largest amounts of government aid for religious reasons and they in turn act like bullies."

http://www.popmodal.com/video/17195/Neighborhood-Bully-Bob-Dylan-Regarding-Israel--30th-Anniversary

 

Well, the neighborhood bully, he’s just one man
His enemies say he’s on their land
They got him outnumbered about a million to one
He got no place to escape to, no place to run
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

The neighborhood bully just lives to survive
He’s criticized and condemned for being alive
He’s not supposed to fight back, he’s supposed to have thick skin
He’s supposed to lay down and die when his door is kicked in
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

The neighborhood bully been driven out of every land
He’s wandered the earth an exiled man
Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn
He’s always on trial for just being born
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

Well, he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized
Old women condemned him, said he should apologize.
Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad
The bombs were meant for him. He was supposed to feel bad
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

Well, the chances are against it and the odds are slim
That he’ll live by the rules that the world makes for him
’Cause there’s a noose at his neck and a gun at his back
And a license to kill him is given out to every maniac
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

He got no allies to really speak of
What he gets he must pay for, he don’t get it out of love
He buys obsolete weapons and he won’t be denied
But no one sends flesh and blood to fight by his side
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

Well, he’s surrounded by pacifists who all want peace
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease
Now, they wouldn’t hurt a fly. To hurt one they would weep
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

Every empire that’s enslaved him is gone
Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon
He’s made a garden of paradise in the desert sand
In bed with nobody, under no one’s command
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

Now his holiest books have been trampled upon
No contract he signed was worth what it was written on
He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth
Took sickness and disease and he turned it into health
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

What’s anybody indebted to him for?
Nothin’, they say. He just likes to cause war
Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed
They wait for this bully like a dog waits to feed
He’s the neighborhood bully

 

What has he done to wear so many scars?
Does he change the course of rivers? Does he pollute the moon and stars?
Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill
Running out the clock, time standing still
Neighborhood bully

 

~Bob Dylan

 

[Roz]

Dismisses anything he doesn't want to hear, good job you loyal and faithful servant.  Does your father look like this, per chance?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMdrG25JiHI

[ironhorse]

Dismisses anything he doesn't want to hear, good job you loyal and faithful servant.  Does your father look like this, per chance?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMdrG25JiHI

 

John Hagee? 

 

You think that's better than the Dylan video?