CFA - part three? (Page 4)

Fair enough, we can chalk it up to changing times, but it wasn't 20 years ago.. it was last election. And it is common knowledge Lincoln did not want to emancipate slaves... he wanted to preserve the Union... it was a compromise. I do not see the current topic as the same.

We know well enough there are passionate people on both sides... and those calling Cathy hateful can be very... well hateful. The same things are said on the subject every time it comes up. Cathy is just the current lightening rod getting the bolt.

As usual these people are portrait as backwards hateful people trying to kill everyone for exercising their legal rights on a subject that currently is the accepted law of the land... he does not want to have sex with 3 year olds... he is simply stating he agrees with the common law in many states in this Union. Sure that is changing, and people's attitudes are changing... but that is what it is going to... he is simply stating he believes what has always been... that's not left field stuff. That's the very stuff this country has operated under for 200+ years.

I don't think most politicians let on what their true convictions are most of the time. Which, if you think about it, is OK. We don't elect them to tell us what to think/do. We elect them to represent our views in the legistative or executive (or occasionally judicial) part of the government. I would HOPE that if the people's views about something changed, the politician's stance would as well. There is little to be gained by ideological thinking for its own sake.

Beauty is in the eye of the leather clad bear dominatrix... and to him I am delicious.

Thank you for the new word.

I guess it gets to a point of the rhetoric these days... hate speech. If you contend someone passing judgment is hate speech, then we are all guilty. In your example...live and let live, I disagree, but do as you like... or... I disagree, you are making a poor choice, you are a sinner, bad person, ect. see you later... I don't really see the different. Nobody has had any rights violated or taken from them. It's just a personal judgment that holds no weight except with the person holding it.

Even saying Cathy is passing judgment and saying it is hate speech.. is itself a judgment... he is taking in a way that is bad...therefore he is a bad person. So I don't get it. I think the term get's thrown around much too loosely.

Now hate groups... groups that want to beat you up because something about you they do not like, and take action on that belief... ya, hate crime... even though assault has always been a crime and that is a whole other discussion.... But Hitler calling for the death of all Jews, and Cathy affirming his belief of biblical marriage... ya... not seeing the hate there.

In an ideal world that would be great. Our current political system and politicians are far from it.

Ultimately there is only good, so no it is not true that in life there is good and bad.

Am I looking for truth? You could call it that I suppose. I am looking for a continually deepening understanding of myself and the universe in which I live. I do believe there is one truth, but as humans we are incapable of grasping it and we may not ever really know what it is, even after we shuffle off this mortal coil.

if only good exists, how do we know it is there?  is it a feeling?

You're on a roll today Tony... I'll be sure to tip my waiters and waitresses.

And there will certainly be disagreements when it comes to one persons belief system over another's.

I actually find it sad I am discussing a subject that is none of my business. I have no right to say who can marry who and it must really suck to listen to a bunch of people discuss whether or not I can do what I want. (If I was a gay man).

What I do understand is that this is not just a discussion with personal opinions...but people taking active measures to stop other people from living their life. Even if that life is a "choice"... what @#@# business is it of yours? So I understand this debate is more that ideas, and people are very passionate on both sides. For the OP... it isn't going to do anything to CFA...there are plenty of Christians in this country that love chicken, and plenty of others that don't care. CFA will be fine.

The tide is turning and things will change. A friend of mine will be going to NY to get married this month because it is not legal in my State. Silly.

Without getting into morals... there is bad simply because there is good. One can't exist without the other. It does not really matter what is "good"... just the mere existence of it proves the existence of "bad". Light can not exist without dark.

Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun.

First, it's "there" whether we know it or not. Of course the world would be a much better place if more of us did know it.

What I believe, what I put my faith in, is that I am (we are) capable of connecting on a spiritual level with the divine source of good, which is God, as I understand God to be. Much like the marriage question for so many, it's a matter of faith and belief for me. The difference is I don't try to use my faith or beliefs to legislate against human rights.

And then you take a nap.

It's not good if I see my Marianne walking away.

New American Standard uses mirror, but I've read it other ways too.

But is there really a dark or is it just an absence of light?

somebody just posted this on their FB page.  Made me laugh  (don't want to rehash the 1A argument, just thought it was funny)

Either way, you can't have one with out the other... you can have a pure void... but you can't have nothing without a something.

http://matthewpaulturner.net/blog/5-reasons-why-the-church-failed-yesterday/

posted on FB yesterday by a friend who is a minister.

Food > hate > tolerance.

A PERSON is smart, but PEOPLE are idiots...The great, obese sheople that are the population of the United States think more with their bellies than with any semblance of logic.

A perceived threat to some tasty treat has brought out the massive masses.  Loads of people got swept up in it for various reasons, but I suspect many of them simply wanted to protect a source of their snacks and didn't even think about the politics.  Once caught up in it, they defended the action by stating it is about free speech not hate. When in reality for most of them it was about food.

Some truly wanted to support a religious doctrine, some absolutely were there out of hate or spite, but how many more just succumbed to the draw of the hundreds of impressions of free advertising that the controversy generated?

The average religion doesn't teach hate on paper, but people get so blinded by what other PEOPLE teach them that they don't stop and think, they just do. Same thing goes for the messages sent by their bellies.

i think that's part of the problem.  you can't hear/see christians that feel that way, when your FB wall is full of "if you love jesus, buy chicken today!"

he makes a wonderful point about how christianity is about PEOPLE, not CAUSES, that explains what i've been thinking far better than i ever could.

all of my church friends that proudly stood in line for chicken on wednesday, while i love them, tend to be follower-types and not the most educated/well-informed, and i'm sure this point went over a lot of their heads.  (for example, one woman took her kids to CFA twice on wed, then reposted this article with a "great article!" comment......i'm still scratching my head)