Christianity and Creationism - some clarification

Vonhelmet said:
It's maustin.

It's easy to find these things out - use the "Find more posts" thing to get a list of all their posts, go back a fair old while, ideally all the way back, then look for someone quoting them. When you change your username, your old posts show the new username, but people's posts aren't updated where they quote you, so your old name shows up.
Click to expand...

Not even half an hour total for that particular guessing game... :p

I'm aware it's easy to find out what usernames are/were. As I said though it was more of a general point that some people prefer to change their name and leave the old one unassociated for whatever reason so sometimes it's nice to respect that. I couldn't say whether that's the case here or not.

Castiel said:
And that is fair enough, if that is their reply I will obviously respect that. I am just trying to maintain a modicum of continuity with regard peoples viewpoints....it helps to understand the motivations and thinking behind their points and ideas.....
Click to expand...

If they want to tell you then no problem of course, just suggesting that not everyone will when they choose to request a name change.
 
Vonhelmet said:
It's maustin.
Click to expand...

Sorry if I wasted your time there - no problems with people knowing. It's just I use that name with people I game with so makes sense when on here they see my by the same name or else they are like is that Xordium or not etc. Aint like I have reinvented myself still use lots of these ---- still use the word obfuscation a lot etc ... and grammar and spelling are still obfuscated in the real world by bad writing and glaringly obvious here :-)

And for Castiel no connotations there comes from a band I used to like when I was kid. However, the band's singer was quite a learned person in the matters of myth, occultism etc I have Iranian roots but the religion was most certainly not Islam more the naughty one according to the older family members.
 
Last edited:
RDM said:
Surely you can see though that the prohibition on women priests is pretty much open to interpretation? It isn't specifically stated in that passage of the bible after all.

I am not arguing on the origins of the prohibition, just on it's impact. If you prefer to say that the Catholic Church's interpretation of God is the origin of the Catholic Church's sexism I am fine with that.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it is sexist to recognise the differences between man and woman. The passage I linked shows where any teaching of the Catholic Church will be bound in heaven as it is on earth....I was just pointing out the legitimacy of the Church position.




RDM said:
When men can bear the child and suffer the sometimes significant medical impact of pregnancy I will possibly agree with you, until that point it is pretty much the woman that does the lion's share of "making a baby". The idea that some dusty old men interpreting a 2000 year old book having control over a woman's body does considerably less good than the idea that a woman should have control over her own body.
Click to expand...

This is something I really feel strongly over. The whole "it's my body" mindset really winds me up. Sex isn't something to be taken lightly and as soon as a woman becomes pregnant it most certainly is not all about her body and her rights.





RDM said:
You are going to have to define what you mean by normal to be honest. Is having red hair normal?
Click to expand...

Redheads are all going to burn in hell for all eternity. I thought everyone knew that?

;)

RDM said:
Is having blue eyes normal? Is being left handed normal? I have no problem with whatever consenting adults choose to do as long as it harms no one.

I read it, but was somewhat confused as you made anal sex as the focus of why homosexuality is "not normal" and yet are still happy to label all of homosexuality as "not normal".
Click to expand...

I believe Castiel has covered this point at this stage and I certainly bow to the far more suitable words from the Holy Father.



RDM said:
So despite the fact that homosexuality is considered a disorder and homosexuals and women are both forbidden from entering the higher echelons of the church you still stand by the fact that the Church is not discriminatory? What about when they were lobbying against homosexual marriage? What about when they are interfering with another Church when it is looking at the possibility of women bishops? What exactly would it take for you to consider the Catholic Chruch discriminatory?
Click to expand...

The church does not discriminate against homosexuals in any way whatsoever. I would be interested to know of one example where they are treated differently to anyone else. Homosexuals are not prohibited from anything within the Church.

We have covered the women point above and we seem to be going around in circles on that point.
 
Xordium said:
And for Castiel no connotations there comes from a band I used to like when I was kid. However, the band's singer was quite a learned person in the matters of myth, occultism etc I have Iranian roots but the religion was most certainly not Islam more the naughty one according to the older family members.
Click to expand...

:)

Which naughty one......the naughty Magi, or the naughty Baha'i.........I'm guessing the former?
 
Castiel said:
:)

Which naughty one......the naughty Magi, or the naughty Baha'i.........I'm guessing the former?
Click to expand...

I am not an expert on Zoroastrianism but isn't it the only religion that doesn't allow new followers not born into the faith? I know that it is shrinking globally.
..I am guessing this is one possible linked cause.
 
spudbynight said:
I am not an expert on Zoroastrianism but isn't it the only religion that doesn't allow new followers not born into the faith? I know that it is shrinking globally.
..I am guessing this is one possible linked cause.
Click to expand...

Nar, you can get converted from what I understand well the Persian view is you can - the decline is more likely due to them all being mad as hatters.
 
spudbynight said:
I am not an expert on Zoroastrianism but isn't it the only religion that doesn't allow new followers not born into the faith? I know that it is shrinking globally.
..I am guessing this is one possible linked cause.
Click to expand...

Officially you must be born of two Zoroastrian Parents, one is not enough....although Paternal lineage seems acceptable in practice at least in antiquity.

I don't know that much about how modern Zorostrianism is practiced tbh.....
 
Castiel said:
Officially you must be born of two Zoroastrian Parents, one is not enough....although Paternal lineage seems acceptable in practice at least in antiquity.

I don't know that much about how modern Zorostrianism is practiced tbh.....
Click to expand...

That's the Indian way Persian style is the better style. We rob Californians of all their gold with false promises! Ironic eh. Modern - you don't really want to know like I said - mad as hatters.

Edit: that could be just my family though ... so on that thought and I bid you goodnight and cause we mentioned Queen ...

 
Last edited:
spudbynight said:
I don't believe it is sexist to recognise the differences between man and woman.
Click to expand...

I recognise the differences too, however I am struggling to see what about being a woman makes them unsuitable to be priests, cardinals or popes. What is it about being a woman that makes them incapable.

spudbynight said:
The passage I linked shows where any teaching of the Catholic Church will be bound in heaven as it is on earth....I was just pointing out the legitimacy of the Church position.
Click to expand...

So the Catholic church is legitimately sexist. Not sure how that changes it being sexist.


spudbynight said:
This is something I really feel strongly over. The whole "it's my body" mindset really winds me up. Sex isn't something to be taken lightly and as soon as a woman becomes pregnant it most certainly is not all about her body and her rights.
Click to expand...

What about before a woman becomes pregnant? Considering we are talking about contraception and not abortion?

spudbynight said:
The church does not discriminate against homosexuals in any way whatsoever. I would be interested to know of one example where they are treated differently to anyone else. Homosexuals are not prohibited from anything within the Church.
Click to expand...

How about when the Catholic church was lobbying against homosexual marriage and homosexual adoption?

spudbynight said:
We have covered the women point above and we seem to be going around in circles on that point.
Click to expand...

The only circle seems to be you denying that not allowing a woman to be a priest, cardinal or pope is in someway not sexist.

Just to be perfectly clear I am not arguing against the right for the Catholic Church to be discriminatory towards homosexuals and women, I am just pointing out that they demonstrably are. My catholic wife would agree too and there are a fair number of movements within the Catholic church that would also agree, just google catholic women priests for example.
 
Castiel said:
That makes more sense....(not that the idea is sensible, just your explanation of his intent)
Click to expand...
I meant neither.

Religions historically & some recently have actively encouraged the butchering & murdering of those outside of the religion - It's not racism by colour but by belief.

Just because a few of the world religions have toned it down in the last 100 years it does not excuse the last 2000 years of blood in the name of the various religions.

You are both wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom