Originally Posted by -Cyri-
Picking and choosing is a good choice of words considering that's what most christians do.
Which undermines the legitimacy of the religion.
You aren't /supposed/ to pick and choose.
<Faint> the rules have been stated quite clearly 3 times now from high staff
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
You aren't trying to convince him homosexuality is fine, you are trying to convince him that his religion is wrong.
No, those two are not identical. One, I could argue that there is no such thing as a "right" religion, because religion is based on faith, and faith requires that there is no right or wrong answers, only faith that the answer you chose is right, but that's defeating the purpose of both not being identical.
Two, because one passage from a book is no longer considered "right" does not mean that the entire religion based on that book is wrong unless that passage is a core tenement of that religion. Which it isn't.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
I'm not sure the rest of the world has this concept. Everyone's used to USA firing some guy over a twitter comment, despite him being able to fulfill his job because "it doesn't fit the company image". But be aware that to everyone else this is insane.
I like that it was fairly implicit that a southern Christian wouldn't approve of homosexuality, yet when he actually said "It doesn't appeal to me, but I still respect them" they got all up in arms.
If your job is to stand around a look pretty, and you go and gorge yourself on Twinkies and become a 400 pound slob, you lose your job. If your job is to bring advertisement revenue to the channel by attracting as large a following as possible, and you go and risk alienating a large enough portion of it, you risk losing your job. And that IS his job. His job is not to go around and make goofy episodes for the heck of it. His job is to go and make goofy episodes to attract viewers to the channel so that the company can sell advertisement time at increased prices because of increased traffic. If he is not capable of doing his job, he WILL get dropped by the network.
And it's not the fact he said "It doesn't appeal to me, but I still respect them". It's the fact that, while saying that, he still goes on to say that homosexuality is a sin. It sounds like he's trying to weasel out of the topic by saying he's ok with it, but it's still wrong.
Every question asked does not require an answer. He had his chance to say "I won't talk about that," or even stop at "It doesn't appeal to me, but I still respect them." But he didn't. He went on to still address homosexuality as a sin. He goes on to address it as a decision, not genetics, despite overwhelming evidence that genetics are a major contributor to sexual orientation. He goes on to say that homosexuality is a slippery slope to beastiality and infidelity, despite all evidence showing that there is no correlation between increases in beastiality and homosexuality, and despite gay marriages resulting in less divorces and more marital fidelity than heterosexual relationships. So when you say he wasn't insulting, bullshit. He was insulting in several ways, and they were not all small slights.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
I don't see why Phil did get suspended for A&E, also the part about the Bible, a sin is a sin no matter how big or small, also The Bible is what happened what is going to happen and how it is going to end. Nobody get offended about this but I believe that humanity has strayed so far away from God and Jesus, that even mentioning about you religious beliefs you get punished. Tell me how that is right when you can talk all about worshiping false gods and satan. This world has gone whack with religious beliefs. Also no man should judge another man, which Immortal Pig is correct it is God's job. People make a big deal out of nothing. No I do not believe in homosexuality, but I will still love you, and I will still protect you but what Phil said didn't mean he is completely against homosexuals, he said "I do not prefer homosexuality" don't get all mad about this post I respect your opinions and people should respect mine.
Thanks for your time,
Cyber
Thanks for your time,
Cyber
Originally Posted by Oracle
No, those two are not identical. One, I could argue that there is no such thing as a "right" religion, because religion is based on faith, and faith requires that there is no right or wrong answers, only faith that the answer you chose is right, but that's defeating the purpose of both not being identical.
Two, because one passage from a book is no longer considered "right" does not mean that the entire religion based on that book is wrong unless that passage is a core tenement of that religion. Which it isn't.
He didn't form the opinion that homosexuality is a sin on his own - the tell would be that he specifically referred to the bible and called it a 'sin', not 'wrong'. He doesn't think homosexuality is wrong as such, he is just aware that anyone who commits this sin will be at the mercy of God. His opinion is "I believe in my religion", the religion's opinion is "homosexuality is a sin".
If you try to tell him "your religion is fine, just change it" it's just not going to work. For any religious person, you can't convince them that one aspect is wrong, because that undermines the infallibility of religion. How ridiculous would it sound for an all knowing being to be wrong on anything?
Originally Posted by Oracle
If your job is
This line of logic I agree with.
And it's not the fact he said "It doesn't appeal to me, but I still respect them". It's the fact that, while saying that, he still goes on to say that homosexuality is a sin. It sounds like he's trying to weasel out of the topic by saying he's ok with it, but it's still wrong.[/QUOTE]
He's not saying he's ok with it, he's saying it's a sin. But he respects /people/.
This is kind of a core tenant of Christianity, 'judge not lest ye be judged', 'turn the other cheek', their religion asserts that a good person will try their best to follow the rules, and if others break the rules they will be non-confrontational and continue to respect them, and let God be the judge.
He is saying that regardless if he disagrees with you (either because he believes you are committing a sin or if he just doesn't find male ass attractive) he will still show respect. To me, he is a paragon of tolerance.
Originally Posted by Oracle
Every question asked does not require an answer. He had his chance to say "I won't talk about that," or even stop at "It doesn't appeal to me, but I still respect them." But he didn't. He went on to still address homosexuality as a sin.
I think it's unfair to have to hide your opinion, pro-X should not be allowed to persecute anti-X, and vice versa. And certainly both sides should show respect. If someone says "I respectfully disagree" I don't think they should be ostracized.
Originally Posted by Oracle
He goes on to address it as a decision, not genetics, despite overwhelming evidence that genetics are a major contributor to sexual orientation. He goes on to say that homosexuality is a slippery slope to beastiality and infidelity, despite all evidence showing that there is no correlation between increases in beastiality and homosexuality, and despite gay marriages resulting in less divorces and more marital fidelity than heterosexual relationships. So when you say he wasn't insulting, bullshit. He was insulting in several ways, and they were not all small slights.
I think you misinterpreted his language, he is saying "let's start by talking about homosexuality, and these other topics which are also sins". He definitely isn't saying homosexuality is a gateway to bestiality or homosexuals are likely to cheat. That's absolutely absurd.
And again, sin is sin regardless of genetics. I don't think it's necessary to discuss what God and Christians think of people who sin by genetics, since it's not a very nice topic... I mean, most base human emotions are sins... It's more of a 'do your best with what you've got' situation.
<Faint> the rules have been stated quite clearly 3 times now from high staff
if he has got an opinion based on his religious beliefs, no matter how bigoted they may be, he should be allowed to express them without being dumped off a programme otherwise they're saying there's no such thing as 'free speech'.
