China cracks down on house churches

[aneeshm]

Communist pigdogs from animal farm .

China .

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


People's Temple
Heaven's Gate
Branch Davidian
Solar Temple
Aum Shinrikyo

You want me to list more?

Yeah, but consider the Anglican Church, which is so wet and inoffensive that no-one really cares. I reckon that at least half the congregation don't believe in God; they just go to keep up appearances.

It's a waste of effort persecuting people like that. It will take them a couple of years to realize that they're being persecuted anyway.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


True, but then I do not equate God with the government.

There's a Baptist church in North Carolina which would take issue with you on that point.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Agathon


Yeah, but consider the Anglican Church, which is so wet and inoffensive that no-one really cares. I reckon that at least half the congregation don't believe in God; they just go to keep up appearances.

Bite me. Go make generalizations about a church you personally know something about and leave mine alone.

It's a waste of effort persecuting people like that. It will take them a couple of years to realize that they're being persecuted anyway.

No, I can see that I'm being persecuted right now.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


People's Temple
Heaven's Gate
Branch Davidian
Solar Temple
Aum Shinrikyo

You want me to list more?

Stopping them from breaking the law would have been and was prudent. Persecuting their religious practices as such would not have been. It might have been self defeating, in fact.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Bite me. Go make generalizations about a church you personally know something about and leave mine alone. No, I can see that I'm being persecuted right now.

Doc, Aggie thinks folks only believe in G-d if they believe in the G-d concept of some medieval scholastic philosopher, who he learned about in history of philosophy or wherever. The kind who wrote in syllogisms, that he can play with. What Franz Rosenzweig called the "old thinking" IIUC (and wrt Franz Im NOT sure IIUC) Any genuinely modern form of faith is to him, not faith. Its certainly less central to the history of Western philosophy, I'll grant that.

[Odin]

I may be an Atheist, but I do think religious freedom is a good thing. I don't care what your religion is as long as you don't impose you're religiously-based moral views on me. It is common for my fellow lefties to bash religion as the "opiate of the masses." That is not true, my relatives are quite left-wing BECAUSE of thier relgious convictions. Just because the Right often uses religion as a political tool doesn't mean religious people can't be lefties.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Odin
I may be an Atheist, but I do think religious freedom is a good thing.

Naturally. Atheists value religious freedom--both of it and from it--above most things.

[Ben Kenobi]

Since when does "right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" need explicit clarification? What part of that statement do you not understand?

My point is that even one could prove that sexual orientation is a choice, this would still not be justifiable grounds to deny gays their innate right to be happy. Every person is entitled to their pursuit of happiness when it does not deny other people's rights and is within the confines of justifiable, fair laws.

Thus, I was attacking the irrational notion that religious right-wing homophobes have, that if they can prove sexual orientation is a choice, they can legitimately deny gays their right to their pursuit of happiness.

Agreed. Although, how does restricting sexual practices from public places prevent gay people from their pursuit of happiness?

That is the jump you are making, and you need to do more work to establish the connection.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Naturally. Atheists value religious freedom--both of it and from it--above most things.

I ment that just because I am an Atheist doesn't I am anti-religioin like some other lefties are. I am an athiest because of my philosphical beliefs, not my political-economic beliefs; another one of my complaints against traditional Marxism.

[Ben Kenobi]

That's you agreeing with Scalia's dissent against repeal of the sodomy laws. You then go on for several pages arguing that the court was wrong to strike down the laws (displaying incredible ignorance about the American legal system in the process, too!). Nothing there about your "enforcement" claim.

You'd think after all that work, you'd come up with a better quote than:

Scalia

Hey, religious meetings in China are against the law. Since that's the law, don't you think it ought to be enforced?

Of course not.

I love how later in the same thread you say that women shouldn't be allowed to have birth control unless their husband consents. How very medieval of you!

It makes sense to me. Why should a husband be able to get a vasectomy without the consent of his wife? I'm not sure how this has anything to do with the content of this thread.

BTW, suppose laws against Sodomy were enforceable. What would you say, then?

You say it is an equivocation, but I also believe that any law against sodomy in private cannot be enforced.

I've been to a half dozen, and in places like NYC, no less. Never saw a single sexual act being performed in public during that time. So your unfounded stereotype based on your sole experience just doesn't hold water next to my expertise.

First off, neither the one I went to is the only source of my experience, nor did I say that is where the sexual acts occurred.

However I have heard newspaper reports that have cited incidents at some of the pride parades where they have occurred, which you acknowledge, even as you dismiss them.

Clearly if you agree with regulations against public sex acts, then you won't dismiss the incidents as you have earlier in the thread, but I am not sure you agree with me here that the folks who have done this were wrong to do so.

The vast majority of participants in gay pride parades could be marching in any parade. Marching bands, people in shorts and t-shirts, politicians, groups like firemen, police, etc. OH BUT TEH FOX NEWS SHOWED THE ONE DOOD IN NOTHING BUT A FEATHER BOA AND SPEEDOS, THAT MUST BE WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT! Please.

I don't deny that Boris, but all the same, they ought to respect the laws against public indecency that apply regardless of your preferences.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Agreed. Although, how does restricting sexual practices from public places prevent gay people from their pursuit of happiness?

That is the jump you are making, and you need to do more work to establish the connection.

You're a ****ing twit, you know that? I already explained that my point is not about praticing sex in public.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


You'd think after all that work, you'd come up with a better quote than:

First, not much work needed to look in the archive under "Supreme." 5 minutes. OOOOOOH.

And second, it's precisely what the issue was. I said you seemed to dissaprove of the SCOTUS ruling. In that thread, starting with that post, you agree with Scalia's dissent from said ruling. You can dissemble all you want, but it's all right there in writing.

Of course not.

Ah. So why do you agree with the "upholding of the law" in one case, and not the other? Smells of hypocrisy to me...

It makes sense to me. Why should a husband be able to get a vasectomy without the consent of his wife? I'm not sure how this has anything to do with the content of this thread.

Why? How about because the guy has a right to do what he wants with his body? If his wife doesn't like it, she can divorce his ass. But give her veto power? What kind of fascist are you?

And no, it's not relevant to this thread...but neither is anything else we're discussing, really. So what?

You say it is an equivocation, but I also believe that any law against sodomy in private cannot be enforced.

Yup, that's an equivocation. It's not really true, either. Take the famous sodomy case in Texas, where the gay couple was successfully prosecuted under the law. Seems to have been enforced then, now doesn't it?

Why not just answer the question? It's simple: were sodomy laws to be enforceable, would you support them? I can't fathom why you wouldn't answer that, unless it's just to hide your true opinion on the matter.

First off, neither the one I went to is the only source of my experience, nor did I say that is where the sexual acts occurred.

Then why the hell bring up pride parades as an example of where sex acts occur and then cite your attendance at one as some sort of evidence? Holy hell, you make no sense.

However I have heard newspaper reports that have cited incidents at some of the pride parades where they have occurred, which you acknowledge, even as you dismiss them.

Clearly if you agree with regulations against public sex acts, then you won't dismiss the incidents as you have earlier in the thread, but I am not sure you agree with me here that the folks who have done this were wrong to do so.

I don't "dismiss" anything, I said that overwhelmingly, that's not what the parades are about and any such occurences at them are rare exceptions that are not sanctioned by the organizers. How is this so hard to get?

If the police see two guys ****ing in the street and it's against the law, by all means, they should take action. And they do--people get cited/arrested for illegal public displays at parades:

http://tntmen.abuzar.net/tnt/news/f31.html

But overwhelmingly, these things do not happen at Pride Parades. The fact is that not only to the parades have extremely low incidences of arrests, they have extremely low incidences of complaints.

I don't deny that Boris, but all the same, they ought to respect the laws against public indecency that apply regardless of your preferences.

How are they not respecting the laws when they're walking down the street in t-shirts and shorts as part of a PFLAG group? Huh?

The bottom line here is that you were making the claim that the parades were "sexual freedom parades." They aren't, though, so your claim is utter BS.

[MrFun]

Boris, why do you and I keep getting sucked into arguments with Ben?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by MrFun



You're a ****ing twit, you know that? I already explained that my point is not about praticing sex in public.

Shame. It would be more fun if it was.