Tired of liberal intolerance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We get it. You people hate Christians especially Catholics. In your ideal world you would have a country with no Christianity. This is sort of typical of the modern liberal, profess to be very tolerant and open minded except about things they disagree with. So go ahead and enjoy putting people of faith down and trying to force your view of morality down our throats while screaming tolerance.

Christians and Catholics are not the same thing. I am a Christian and proudly so. I also have no issues in general with the Catholic Church and, in fact, was married in one. But "The Church" should be more concerned about its own moral failings, which are not insignificant these days. Instead, "The Church" is pushing its own power hungry agenda onto others. Lets be real. The Obama Administration has substantially increased funding to "The Church." "The Church" is actively recruiting other Christians to its fold, even allowing married priests. 'The Church" opposes abortion (an understandable position that I happen to disagree with), but ignores the death penalty (which has no justification other than revenge). "The Church" wants substantial USG money, does not want to comply with laws that other USG grantees comply with, and wants to make its dogma the law in the US. One would think that, given the recent scandals, the Bishops' Conference would spend substantial effort cleaning house and getting back on the moral high ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IF you're not going to offer contraception coverage to your employees because of your beliefs, that's fine. But in that case you have to give up your government subsidies.

Thats stupid so if the government mandates something that is against your religon and is not a mandatory part of the law or conflicts with another the law don't question it?

I don't understand. If the government issues a "mandate" or a rule or a law or whatever,
the isn't it MANDATORY?

The govt interferes with people's religious beliefs all the time. See mormons and polygamy. Part of their faith, no longer allowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ha!!! YOU are tired??? Yooooooooooou are tired?!

I am tired, exhausted even, from fighting to have my relationship recognized by my government. It has real consequences in my life- retirement, custody, insurance, etc. There is no secular argument against recognizing my marriage, only a religious one.

Tired. Pshaw. I'll show you tired.

This is where many conservative religious leaders miss the point. No one is suggesting that a particular church must give blessings to same sex couples. The argument is that the state, not a church, should recognize these relationships. Fundamental difference. Religious conservatives want to impose their views on others. No one is requiring churches to recognize same sex couples, or requiring others to enter such relationships.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We get it. You people hate Christians especially Catholics. In your ideal world you would have a country with no Christianity. This is sort of typical of the modern liberal, profess to be very tolerant and open minded except about things they disagree with. So go ahead and enjoy putting people of faith down and trying to force your view of morality down our throats while screaming tolerance.

Christians and Catholics are not the same thing. I am a Christian and proudly so. .

What do you mean by that? You don't think Catholics are Christian? Or were you distinguishing between Catholics and Protestants?

If you don't think Catholics are Christian, is there a specific denomination that's teaching you this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We get it. You people hate Christians especially Catholics. In your ideal world you would have a country with no Christianity. This is sort of typical of the modern liberal, profess to be very tolerant and open minded except about things they disagree with. So go ahead and enjoy putting people of faith down and trying to force your view of morality down our throats while screaming tolerance.

Christians and Catholics are not the same thing. I am a Christian and proudly so. .

What do you mean by that? You don't think Catholics are Christian? Or were you distinguishing between Catholics and Protestants?

If you don't think Catholics are Christian, is there a specific denomination that's teaching you this?

Don't be obtuse. She's saying that that it's not automatic that a Christian is a Catholic. She is not saying that Catholics are NOT Christian.

[RantingAtheist]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha!!! YOU are tired??? Yooooooooooou are tired?!

I am tired, exhausted even, from fighting to have my relationship recognized by my government. It has real consequences in my life- retirement, custody, insurance, etc. There is no secular argument against recognizing my marriage, only a religious one.

Tired. Pshaw. I'll show you tired.

This is where many conservative religious leaders miss the point. No one is suggesting that a particular church must give blessings to same sex couples. The argument is that the state, not a church, should recognize these relationships. Fundamental difference. Religious conservatives want to impose their views on others. No one is requiring churches to recognize same sex couples, or requiring others to enter such relationships.

Right. To take it a step further, the problem all started when religious institutions agreed to be co-opted into secular affairs. "Marriage" confers a certain set of privileges upon couples. Inheritance rights, visitation rights, insurance coverage, to name just a few. Religious institutions claimed the right to "create" these unions, which then had secular ramifications. If the state had no finger in "marriage" whatsoever, and all couples (whatever the sexual orientation) simply registered for a "civil union", we wouldn't have any of these deeper issues. And religious institutions could either endorse such civil unions via "marriage" if they chose, or not.

It's pretty rich, though, that certain religious organizations fight tooth and nail against same-sex marriage based on the far-fetched possibility they might be required to perform a SS ceremony. Meanwhile, religious institutions that condone same-sex marriage are expressly forbidden by the state from doing so.

Religious freedom for me, but not for thee.

[Anonymous]

Do liberals not understand they are trying to force their views and their morality on conservatives just as much as conservatives are pushing their views. The only difference is whether or not you agree with the position taken.

[Anonymous]

I a glad that we are seeing such open-mindedness from the left on this thread. Is this same closed-minded attack mentality what you accuse the right of?

[RantingAtheist]

Anonymous wrote:Do liberals not understand they are trying to force their views and their morality on conservatives just as much as conservatives are pushing their views. The only difference is whether or not you agree with the position taken.

In general, the liberal position is the one that increases individual freedom of choice/conscience. The outliers here are "freedom from paying taxes", and "freedom to own as many firearms as you can afford". Even in the case of environmental laws, or say, CAFE standards, "liberal" legislation is not a curtailment of freedom so much as a belief that negative externalities should be paid for.

[RantingAtheist]

Anonymous wrote:I a glad that we are seeing such open-mindedness from the left on this thread. Is this same closed-minded attack mentality what you accuse the right of?

You'll have to be more specific. By "closed-minded attack mentality" do you mean "valid and realitively moderate criticism"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do liberals not understand they are trying to force their views and their morality on conservatives just as much as conservatives are pushing their views. The only difference is whether or not you agree with the position taken.

And liberals act like because they are basing their opinions not from religion that it is somehow better or correct.

[RantingAtheist]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do liberals not understand they are trying to force their views and their morality on conservatives just as much as conservatives are pushing their views. The only difference is whether or not you agree with the position taken.

And liberals act like because they are basing their opinions not from religion that it is somehow better or correct.

Since liberals base their opinions on reason--rather than received moral instruction from a leader, or an arbitrary book--then yes, in a pluralist society founded on secular Enlightenment values the process (if not the outcome) is better, and likely to be more correct. That's not to say that conservatives, working backwards from their desired conclusion, can't induct some rational argument. And when they're successful at reverse-engineering a rational argument, that's likely to be respected, even if we don't agree.

But, no, "Pastor Bob says so" or "it's right here in this book" is no way to run a railroad.

[Anonymous]

RantingAtheist wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do liberals not understand they are trying to force their views and their morality on conservatives just as much as conservatives are pushing their views. The only difference is whether or not you agree with the position taken.

And liberals act like because they are basing their opinions not from religion that it is somehow better or correct.

Since liberals base their opinions on reason--rather than received moral instruction from a leader, or an arbitrary book--then yes, in a pluralist society founded on secular Enlightenment values the process (if not the outcome) is better, and likely to be more correct. That's not to say that conservatives, working backwards from their desired conclusion, can't induct some rational argument. And when they're successful at reverse-engineering a rational argument, that's likely to be respected, even if we don't agree.

But, no, "Pastor Bob says so" or "it's right here in this book" is no way to run a railroad.

What do you base your morality on, CNN or MSNBC? Granted religion isn't perfect it does lay a solid moral backing to raise a family.

[Anonymous]

Non-religious does not mean amoral and you know it.

[Anonymous]

What do you base your morality on, CNN or MSNBC? Granted religion isn't perfect it does lay a solid moral backing to raise a family.

Absolutely. But that's very different from serving as the basis for government policy.