Any thoughts on the Michael Sam Kiss on ESPN...

[drunkernhelldawg]

You cry about intolerance, bigotry, and hate speech and then spew this? Lol. Tell me, where do you stand on irony?

For the record, your thinly veiled insults don't make you look that smart. I have an IQ in the top 2% and have some masters level theoretical physics under my belt...and I still have faith. So don't fool yourself into thinking you're more intelligent than someone just because they're religious.

That's exactly how I read it too, except I can't truly call myself a person of faith. But the disrespect toward other people in that type statement makes my liberal behind angry. It's a terrific example of narrow mindedness across the political spectrum.

[jeremyrbrown]

I agree, it's wrong to assume someone is stupid just because they're religious. For me, however, it's always been about whether you follow a literal interpretation (yes, I keep saying this...) of the Biblical text that denotes intelligence. If you use the Bible for faith, spiritual enlightenment, and a model for altruism and helping others, I applaud you, but there are many who don't. They latch onto passages and concepts that make no sense, and thus, cause many people to question their intelligence. You for example, with all your knowledge of physics and science, if I heard you talking about how Genesis "proves" the Earth is 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs and man lived together (e.g., Ken Ham), I would obviously think you weren't very smart. It's the same as when people who spoke out against heliocentrism were labeled as heretics and put to death. Or people who thought the earth was flat.

What was the most altruistic act in the Bible and why was it performed?

[drunkernhelldawg]

I agree, it's wrong to assume someone is stupid just because they're religious. For me, however, it's always been about whether you follow a literal interpretation (yes, I keep saying this...) of the Biblical text that denotes intelligence. If you use the Bible for faith, spiritual enlightenment, and a model for altruism and helping others, I applaud you, but there are many who don't. They latch onto passages and concepts that make no sense, and thus, cause many people to question their intelligence. You for example, with all your knowledge of physics and science, if I heard you talking about how Genesis "proves" the Earth is 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs and man lived together (e.g., Ken Ham), I would obviously think you weren't very smart. It's the same as when people who spoke out against heliocentrism were labeled as heretics and put to death. Or people who thought the earth was flat.

I do despise literalism regarding the Bible, but I think it's important to respect people's beliefs because belief is central to experience and the idea of cutting somebody at the root does not seem right to me. Maybe I'm wrong; maybe we all need to hate one another.

[PMDawg]

I agree, it's wrong to assume someone is stupid just because they're religious. For me, however, it's always been about whether you follow a literal interpretation (yes, I keep saying this...) of the Biblical text that denotes intelligence. If you use the Bible for faith, spiritual enlightenment, and a model for altruism and helping others, I applaud you, but there are many who don't. They latch onto passages and concepts that make no sense, and thus, cause many people to question their intelligence. You for example, with all your knowledge of physics and science, if I heard you talking about how Genesis "proves" the Earth is 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs and man lived together (e.g., Ken Ham), I would obviously think you weren't very smart. It's the same as when people who spoke out against heliocentrism were labeled as heretics and put to death. Or people who thought the earth was flat.

Well, your interpretation doesn't matter either. You're just giving a tiny bit more leeway but you still assume some people are stupid bc they have faith. I often find you "open minded" fellows to be very close minded. A lot of you just think you're smarter than everyone else.

[BeardoMSU]

I do despise literalism regarding the Bible, but I think it's important to respect people's beliefs because belief is central to experience and the idea of cutting somebody at the root does not seem right to me. Maybe I'm wrong; maybe we all need to hate one another.

Who's cutting somebody at the root? And I never said anything about hating one another. From my experience, being a devout Christian, and ignoring not just science, but history, are not mutually exclusive.

[BeardoMSU]

Well, your interpretation doesn't matter either. You're just giving a tiny bit more leeway but you still assume some people are stupid bc they have faith. I often find you "open minded" fellows to be very close minded. A lot of you just think you're smarter than everyone else.

Not true. Did I say having "faith" makes you stupd? Please point to where I said that. Believing in Jesus and following his teachings has nothing to do with what I said.

[Rayburn8]

Not all christian denominations find it a sin. So saying it is against christian beliefs is false.

The bible clearly states it is a sin. So if your truly believe the bible is the holy inspired work of God, the yeas it is against Christian beliefs.

[drunkernhelldawg]

Who's cutting somebody at the root? And I never said anything about hating one another. From my experience, being a devout Christian, and ignoring not just science, but history, are not mutually exclusive.

I agree with about everything you've posted. I was talking about Enis and putting my anti-literalism in context. Enis made some very flippant anti-Christian comments, and I guess I was still responding to that when I commented on your post. You're my favorite lib. voice, besides myself, on this board.

[Rayburn8]

Divorce is a sin, correct? Why aren't Christian conservatives fighting to make divorce illegal? Why aren't Christian conservatives fighting to nullify 2nd and 3rd marriages and strip those spouses of their rights? That's the hypocrisy right there. The sins of one's personal life that are being fought against by Christian conservatives are cherry picked and then the bible is used as a shield against claims of bigotry. Now this is hugely different from crimes like murder and burglary and rape, because those are sins that have a material and immediate affect on other members of society.

And I know some denominations are more modern in their social views, and that's great, but for Internet MB posting, I'm not going to list out the denominations. We all know what's being referred to here.

Divorce without justification is a sin. If your wife cheats on you, that is considered justified. To top off I do think we need to make it more difficult to divorce and make marriage seem permanent as it is not seen that way.

[BeardoMSU]

I agree with about everything you've posted. I was talking about Enis's post that was quoted by the post I quoted. Not you. You're my favorite lib. voice, besides myself, on this board.

Ok, my bad, dude. Muchas gracias.

[BeardoMSU]

Divorce without justification is a sin. If your wife cheats on you, that is considered justified. To top off I do think we need to make it more difficult to divorce and make marriage seem permanent as it is not seen that way.

I think every couple should live together before they get married. Why? Because after you live with someone for a period of time, there are really no more secrets; you know who that person is. I'd bet that would decrease the number of divorces substantially.

[fishwater99]

Bc they dont think it is a sin goat.

There is negotiation on that as well. Hell, the pope just said atheist can go to heaven. Religion, like everything, evolves because it isnt fact. It will evolve until the end of time.

The Pope never said that Atheist will go to Heaven, but that Christ came to save all people even Atheists.

http://www.catholicvote.org/what-pop...bout-atheists/


The Pope is simply affirming certain truths that any somewhat knowledgable Catholic will uphold.

First, that Christ died to redeem the whole world. We can distinguish his redemptive work from the acceptance of salvation. He redeemed the whole world. However, many will reject that saving work. In affirming the universality of Christ?s redemptive work we are not universalists. To say that he redeemed the whole world is not to conclude that all will be saved.

Secondly, the Pope is also affirming that all humans are created in God?s image and are therefore created good. Yes, created good, but that goodness is wounded by original sin.

Thirdly, he is affirming that all men and women are obliged to pursue what is beautiful, good and true. Natural virtue is possible?even obligatory, but natural virtue on its own is not sufficient for salvation. Grace is necessary to advance beyond natural virtue to bring the soul to salvation. The Pope does not say atheists being good on their own will be saved. He says they, like all men, are redeemed by Christ?s death and their good works are the starting place where we can meet with them?the implication being ?meet with them in an encounter that leads eventually to faith in Christ.

[dickiedawg]

Many people view this as ethnocentric in nature; even the new Pope has expressed something similar. There are many non-Christians throughout the world who are amazing people, and I refuse to believe they aren't "as good as others" in the eyes of God. Hell, David Duke is a "Christian" (not saying he is an accurate representation of Christianity). Again, that's where the literal interpretation comes into play.

Here's the thing, though: None of us are "good" in the eyes of God. God loves us all equally in spite of our sin and He offers salvation to all.

[PMDawg]

Sure. Im not sure how they would know I was one or not.

Christians are awful. The reason is they are nothing like their Christ. In fact, they are opposite.

Unfortunately this is the most accurate thing you've said. It's a shame, but it's true.

[fishwater99]

Serious question: What translation of 1 Corinthians doesn't sound like this?

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Cor 6:9-11

There are three kinds of laws in the Bible.

Civil laws.
These were specifically given for the culture of the Israelites, which includes everything from murder to restitution and dietary restrictions.

Ceremonial laws.
This literally stands for the customs of a nation. These would have included sacrifices of perfectly good animals, and rejection of food sources such as pork and rabbits. These laws were specific only toward the Jews.

God's moral laws.
These relate to justice and judgment. They are based on God's own holy nature.
As such, these ordinates are holy, just and unchanging.
Moral laws encompass regulations on justice, respect and sexual conduct. All people will be held accountable to these laws.

Just because someone is a Christian, and believes in the Bible, that does not make them haters, homophobics or heretics.
It just makes them a person who believes in God?s word and that Jesus came to die on the cross for our sins.

[Ralph]

This is way off topic, but I'm very interested in what you've said here.
I've heard people mention things to this end, and it breaks my heart on a couple of levels.
1. It's a crying shame that Christianity in general has this bad reputation of being disingenuous and hypocritical, to the point that would-be church members are turned away.
2. Reading your Bible and doing your best to follow the 10 commandments, despite your good intentions, won't save you. The only thing that will is a relationship with Jesus Christ. Since you appear to believe in God and the Bible, that saddens me even more than some in this thread who apparently have no such belief.

I don't say any of this to be judgmental. Just expressing my beliefs since it was brought up.

It saddens me too. To be clear, I have a very close relationship with Jesus; I find reading the Bible and applying the concepts and tales to what's happening in my life as a great tactic to strengthening that relationship. When I go to church, I see everyone trying to outdo everyone else.

And not to be critical to you or others that have made similar remarks, I would hesitate to encourage people to believe that going to church is the only way to achieve a relationship with God. It wasn't until I changed my approach that I finally was able to have that relationship that I was unable to achieve through church. Just how it works for me; not right or wrong.

I would also be hesitant to critique someones ability to go to heaven or be saved. Im not sure telling people that reading the Bible and following the 10 commandments won't get you to heaven. Other folks "relationship with God" may occur through ways that are unlike yours. This is a minor example of why I choose not to go to church.

[PMDawg]

Here's my stance on the matter:

1. Homosexuality is sinful. In my mind, that's not up for debate. It's also not relevant to any discussion about the legality of gay marriage.

2. These particular sinners should ABSOLUTELY have the same rights as all the other sinners out there (myself and every other Christian included) in the eyes of the state.

I agree with this and I'll go one more. It's none of the governments business. Legally, they deserve their rights. But this is still a democracy (barely) and it has to run its course. My original point remains. I'm tired of "look at me I'm gay! (But don't notice I'm gay)".

[dawgoneyall]

You are wrong.

[Esmerelda Villalobos]

You're giving liberalism a bad name. Why do you want to just indiscriminately attack people's deepest beliefs with this shit? Does it make you feel smarter than people who have emotion? I feel like you only know the intellectual content of what you are talking about without any idea of the feelings behind it. Feelings matter.

Well I dont really care because Im not a liberal....at all

[dawgs]

I think every couple should live together before they get married. Why? Because after you live with someone for a period of time, there are really no more secrets; you know who that person is. I'd bet that would decrease the number of divorces substantially.

It actually is true. States with a higher avg age of 1st marriage and higher rates of cohabitating unmarried couples have much lower divorce rates than states with lower avg age of 1st marriage and lower rates of cohabitating unmarried couples.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4639430

(I realize some of y'all with dismiss the article because of the source, but it's the 1st one that popped up in google and it's citing to and quoting statistics from a study not associated with huff post)

I've been with my now fiance for almost 5.5 years, living together for almost 4.5 years of that time. Her mom and sister asked why we weren't getting married instead of moving in together and I told them that when we get married it'll be because we are ready and not just because we were wanting to live together. Couldn't be happier, I believe in my heart I'm a good person, and never once felt like I was a "sinner".