Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Religious crazies get the knives out for Norris' Presidency bid

Options
1…5681011…15

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    JonJoeDali
    Closed Accounts Posts: 537 ✭✭✭JonJoeDali


    ItsAWindUp wrote: »
    They're just angry hate filled ignorant people, who's own lives are so monotonous and crap, that they insist on focusing their anger on what they see is a weak target. I'd even vote for him if only to piss these bigots off.

    Ad hominem alert.

    Now, did you have anything rational to say that's not caught up in your knee-jerk emotions? Evidently the message is quite poignant given your annoyance. But don't let me stop you from blustering away and ignoring the facts.


  • Options
    #213
    Wertz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,909 ✭✭✭✭Wertz


    No-one said that.
    A healthy curiousity about death and what comes after could never be considered irrational. There comes a point where even the power of science can't answer all the questions.
    The only thing irrational about many religions are their apparent need to force the wills/values/morals of their respective members on to those of society at large...


  • Options
    #214
    JonJoeDali
    Closed Accounts Posts: 537 ✭✭✭JonJoeDali


    Wertz wrote: »
    No-one said that.
    A healthy curiousity about death and what comes after could never be considered irrational. There comes a point where even the power of science can't answer all the questions.
    The only thing irrational about many religions are their apparent need to force the wills/values/morals of their respective members on to those of society at large...

    The Catholic Church and other churches will continue to lobby and influence leaders (both overtly and covertly) for greater social justice, morals and the dignity of the human person (amongst many other things).

    Do you think the democratic system "forces" the wills/values/morals on their respective members?


  • Options
    #215
    thebullkf
    Registered Users Posts: 3,006 ✭✭✭thebullkf


    bluecatmorgana wrote: »
    I'd vote for him but I dont agree with him calling people who fought in the Easter Rising "terrorists".
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article7043719.ece



    mentioned already. but still valid. (he said it was the leaders);)


  • Options
    #216
    Wertz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,909 ✭✭✭✭Wertz


    JonJoeDali wrote: »
    Do you think the democratic system "forces" the wills/values/morals on their respective members?

    The democratic system isn't a belief system.
    Democracy and the legislative government it allows will attempt to "force" the will of the majority (or minority) on their respective members through the use of the legal and penal systems...much of that at least in Ireland is indeed lead by a catholic bias.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    JonJoeDali
    Closed Accounts Posts: 537 ✭✭✭JonJoeDali


    Wertz wrote: »
    The democratic system isn't a belief system.
    Democracy and the legislative government it allows will attempt to "force" the will of the majority (or minority) on their respective members through the use of the legal and penal systems...much of that at least in Ireland is indeed lead by a catholic bias.

    Hardly. There's much more British than Catholic influence in our legal system. Anyway, the notion of the State is not the only way of regulating morals in society and not everyone subscribes entirely to "nations" or "unions". They're convenient for many things, but not the be all and end all. It's not always worth sacraficing one's life for some abstract geographical entity called a "country". The Church exists happily alongside many different States all over the world and they're well used to dealing with issues as they arise and general abrasiveness towards it.


  • Options
    #218
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    JonJoeDali wrote: »
    The Catholic Church and other churches will continue to lobby and influence leaders (both overtly and covertly) for greater social justice, morals and the dignity of the human person (amongst many other things).

    Nobody is saying that the RCC can't speak about current and topical issues, or even give input in respect to what Government does. What I would be saying is that the RCC can no longer expect for their opinion to be automatically implemented by Government any more than any other religious, or philosophical group can.

    Ideas must be deliberated upon on merit, rather than decided upon on the basis of who said them. This is best for Christians as well as non-Christians. It means that Christians will have to take some initiative and explain why it is better that the Government consider policy X rather than merely say that "Our belief says so". This is crucially important.

    If what the RCC says about social justice, morals, dignity of human person is reasonable, then I'm all for the Government considering these things. On the same note if people from other groups happen to put across reasonable thinking on any of these areas, I'm quite happy to have the Government think about them more seriously.
    JonJoeDali wrote: »
    Do you think the democratic system "forces" the wills/values/morals on their respective members?

    It lends itself to majoritarianism. This is why I believe the Government should legislate only when it is crucial that they do so. Red tape everywhere makes society much more difficult to live in.


  • Options
    #219
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Ideas must be deliberated upon on merit, rather than decided upon on the basis of who said them.

    Leviticus 18:22.....


  • Options
    #220
    Johro
    Registered Users Posts: 4,705 ✭✭✭Johro


    zimovain wrote: »
    +1 to that, he's a national treasure in my eyes.
    He is. As is Michael D.


  • Options
    #221
    farna_boy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    So in summary, we have a bunch of morons on one website saying that Norris shouldn't be president because he his gay.

    One person see's this and posts it on another website with a bigger audience because not enough people are paying it enough attention. THe bigger audience is revolted and decides to vote for Norris out of spite. To be honest it just sounds like great advertising.

    The cynical side of me is asking a few questions:

    1. How do we know that it actually was Enoch who set up this website?
    2. How do we know that it isn't just 5 people with multiple usernames posting on it?
    3. Is the agenda of the website as advertised?

    From these questions, you can probably guess what the cynical me is actually asking. ;)

    Would I actually vote for Norris though? I don't know. Who is running against him? Would they actually be more qualified or a better person for the job? What does he intend to do as part of the presidency?

    Ok he may be more eloquent than other politicians, but all that means is that the BS sounds softer on the ears and its harder to interpret as BS. Of course this may be to our advantage when dealing with other countries, but only if his agenda is the same as the majority/mine.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    strobe wrote: »
    Leviticus 18:22.....

    What about it?


  • Options
    #223
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Jakkass wrote: »
    What about it?

    Should it have been deliberated upon on merit rather than on the basis of who said it?


  • Options
    #224
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    strobe wrote: »
    Should it have been deliberated upon on merit rather than on the basis of who said it?

    I believe personally, that this is an issue of morality not of legislation. Personally I would believe that marriage is the only place for sexual relations, and this teaching should be encouraged in Christian churches.

    There is a key difference between Torah based Israel and Ireland. Ireland's not a theocratic state. Israel was. You can see what I said about Israel above:
    JoeJoeDali - Not at all. I personally believe there is an absolute morality, what I don't believe in is that human government can adequately serve God, it never has and it never will, in fact more often than not it doesn't serve God. Even when Moses received divine decrees from God, Israel wasn't able to rule itself, it could only inadequately implement these decrees.

    It was inadequate to implement God's decrees given to Moses. This is why Jesus came to bring us into willful obedience to Him and to take the penalty of our sin away.

    Our sin, being between us and God, and having more severe consequences than breaking any law in this State or any other State.

    Personally, I don't think the death penalty is all that compatible with Christianity in the same way that it is with Judaism.


  • Options
    #225
    thebullkf
    Registered Users Posts: 3,006 ✭✭✭thebullkf


    Jakkass wrote: »
    What about it?



    dunno if the poster is trolling or whether they genuinely believe
    that male homosexuality is an "abomination".
    just because its abnormal doesn't make it ^^






    "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination"


  • Options
    #226
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    thebullkf wrote: »
    dunno if the poster is trolling or whether they genuinely believe
    that male homosexuality is an "abomination".
    just because its abnormal doesn't make it ^^






    "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination"

    Nah I wasn't trolling. Being a bit of a smart arse maybe. What I was trying to get at was Jakkass saying an idea should be deliberated upon on merit not on who said it while holding the belief that whatever god says goes without the need to deliberate it's merit. Like I say, being a bit of a smart arse.


  • Options
    #227
    JonJoeDali
    Closed Accounts Posts: 537 ✭✭✭JonJoeDali


    I don't know any Christians who interpret the Old Testament literally. I've heard of crazy American Protestant offshoots of offshoots, but I can't say I know any of 'em.


  • Options
    #228
    Interceptor
    Registered Users Posts: 3,180 ✭✭✭Interceptor


    thebullkf wrote: »
    "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination"

    You're doing it wrong.


  • Options
    #229
    plein de force
    Registered Users Posts: 1,148 ✭✭✭plein de force


    david75 wrote: »
    This site is actually quite alarming.
    These people are really crazy and have it in for David Norris in a big way. A lot of it is quite libelous too.

    http://www.davidnorris4president.com/index.html

    But this place is even worse. Talk about misinformed willfull ignorance
    http://www.campaignforconscience.org/

    Those two sites are so full of fail, even my firefox stopped responding


  • Options
    #230
    scientific1982
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭scientific1982


    JonJoeDali wrote: »
    I don't know any Christians who interpret the Old Testament literally. I've heard of crazy American Protestant offshoots of offshoots, but I can't say I know any of 'em.
    So its all just a metaphor. The Jews are morons then.


  • Options
    #231
    danger mouse
    Registered Users Posts: 559 ✭✭✭danger mouse


    God I hate people that put so much effort into hating others. David Norris for president for life...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    Superlativeman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 61 ✭✭Superlativeman


    I'm all for his right to run, but he's a charlatan and a horrible little man who has no business being in this country.

    He would love nothing more than to be the Groom of the Stool for the Saxe Coberg Gotha's.


  • Options
    #233
    danger mouse
    Registered Users Posts: 559 ✭✭✭danger mouse


    Superlativeman wrote: »
    I'm all for his right to run, but he's a charlatan and a horrible little man who has no business being in this country.

    He would love nothing more than to be the Groom of the Stool for the Saxe Coberg Gotha's.




    Oh dear. How did you work that one out...?


  • Options
    #234
    Keith186
    Registered Users Posts: 3,203 ✭✭✭Keith186


    david75 wrote: »
    This site is actually quite alarming.
    These people are really crazy and have it in for David Norris in a big way. A lot of it is quite libelous too.

    http://www.davidnorris4president.com/index.html

    But this place is even worse. Talk about misinformed willfull ignorance
    http://www.campaignforconscience.org/

    Can someone explain these religious nuts to me please? they always bang on about Leviticus and God being anti-gay but the same book has this in it.
    Leviticus 19:18, "'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD."

    Are they just crazy angry people who need a target?
    Mr. Norris, is that you?


  • Options
    #235
    Superlativeman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 61 ✭✭Superlativeman


    danger mouse wrote: »
    Oh dear. How did you work that one out...?

    Call it a hunch......


  • Options
    #236
    geespot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 257 ✭✭geespot


    wouldnt vote for david norris not on the basis of him being a fag couldnt care less what he does but purely on the basis that i would hate visiting dignateries to be welcomed by this squeaky voiced sh.t talking leprechaun or we not a big enough joke already


  • Options
    #237
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    JonJoeDali wrote: »
    I don't know any Christians who interpret the Old Testament literally. I've heard of crazy American Protestant offshoots of offshoots, but I can't say I know any of 'em.

    It's not about taking the Old Testament literally or figuratively, it's about unpacking the correct context. Once you learn what the Bible is, and how it fits together it becomes a whole lot easier.

    The Jewish law, was revealed by God to Moses. When Christ came on earth, it was the result of people failing to follow the Law. Therefore Christ fulfilled the Law. He took the punishment we deserved by sin, because we were unable to be obedient to God on our own standing. This is why as I would see it the death penalty is no more.

    Therefore, Christians having the experience, and learning from Jesus while He was on earth effectively read the Old Testament as Jesus would. This makes our understanding different to that of Orthodox Jews for example who wouldn't believe that the Messiah has come.

    Most mainline denominations as far as I know would teach that homosexual acts are immoral, indeed or that any sexual act outside of marriage is immoral. What is wrong with the OP, and the people listed in the OP is that they emphasise visible sin over sins which are not visible. The invisible sins that nobody else sees are just as important as the visible ones.

    Personally, I don't see the sins listed on their website as being any worse than the sins I have committed. The sad thing is that the Christian church has become so preoccupied with sexuality when it actually could be making real change in the world, from looking after those less fortunate, to challenging the Government on their handling of the economy, to looking out for widows and immigrants. I believe that Jesus would have spent a lot of time and effort in bettering society at large as well as challenging people to live lives holy to God.

    Long post, but meh that's what happens when you talk about things you moderately care about.


  • Options
    #238
    rational
    Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭rational


    geespot wrote: »
    wouldnt vote for david norris not on the basis of him being a fag couldnt care less what he does but purely on the basis that i would hate visiting dignateries to be welcomed by this squeaky voiced sh.t talking leprechaun or we not a big enough joke already

    The man is an English scholor. I had the pleasure of meeting him (no remarks pls) a few times. Hes a genuinely nice guy. He will be getting my number 1.


  • Options
    #239
    Ulysses Gaze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,570 ✭✭✭Ulysses Gaze


    The irony that these people set up a website to denounce homosexuality and buggery when the church they espouse to believe in hid the fact that it's members were buggering young kids for decades.

    “Hypocrisy and distortion are passing currents under the name of religion”


  • Options
    #240
    JonJoeDali
    Closed Accounts Posts: 537 ✭✭✭JonJoeDali


    scientific1982 wrote: »
    So its all just a metaphor. The Jews are morons then.

    Stick to the science mate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    JonJoeDali
    Closed Accounts Posts: 537 ✭✭✭JonJoeDali


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Personally, I don't see the sins listed on their website as being any worse than the sins I have committed. The sad thing is that the Christian church has become so preoccupied with sexuality when it actually could be making real change in the world, from looking after those less fortunate, to challenging the Government on their handling of the economy, to looking out for widows and immigrants. I believe that Jesus would have spent a lot of time and effort in bettering society at large as well as challenging people to live lives holy to God.

    I love the way on the one hand people crib and moan about the Catholic Church from the outside, and on the other they feel themselves qualified to opine about how it should be run from the inside. The fact is that unless you study for seven years in a Catholic seminary, your hands will be kept well away from the levers.


Advertisement