Pope: Catholics should ask gay people for forgiveness

[kentonio]

Shall I post the list of no-go zones in France? in Sweden? In Germany. They exist.

No they don't. There are a few areas in most countries including the US which are heavily economically deprived and which the police treat as areas to be cautious in, but there are zero places in western Europe that are actually 'no-go zones' in the sense that you mean. It's just a scaremongering term the media pull out every so often.

Which is why they put to death anyone who leaves Islam?

Not in the west they don't. We're talking about western Muslims using parts of Sharia to mediate on issues where their religion has specific requirements. No Sharia 'court' in the west is handing down death sentences for apostasy, they would be arrested and imprisoned immediately.

They do it all the time with honor killings.

No, no they don't. There have been a few scattered instances of honor killings in the west, but then again there have been some scattered instances of christians murdering abortion doctors too.

Again, not so. It is not voluntary for Muslims and especially not so for ex-Muslims.

You're talking complete bull****. No sharia court in the west is mandatory for any of the participants, and there have been cases where someone feels the Sharia judgement wasn't fair and went on to press their case in a civil court.

Yes, because Orthodox Jews don't do honor killings.

There have been numerous instances of hardline Orthodox Jews commiting murders and acts of violence. What every sensible person recognizes however is just because obsessive fundamentalists of any religion can twist their beliefs into a justification for violence, doesn't mean every member of that religion is responsible.

Please stop trying to paint an entire community of people as potent killers, its divisive and deeply unpleasant. It's also somewhat ironic given your endless crying about the right to religious freedom.

[Ben Kenobi]

Nope... just hurting the discriminatory baker...

Uh, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. It has a chilling effect on all Christian businesses.

And NOBODY has been asked to ever do so... your point?

Freedom of association is an enumerated right in the constitution. It protects the baker and me. I have a right to turn down work that I do not want.

First... not even close. When did homosexuals ever hang christians from trees or burn down christian houses...

So you're arguing that some conscience rights are valid, while the Christian conscience rights are not. That is a violation of equal protection right there.

I'm sure you will find far more examples of christians hurting gays.

I've seen it up close and personal, fwiw. Seen them assault my friends, and then claim they were 'oppressed'. And for the most part get away with it.

if TRULY CONSENTING ADULTS are following their religion, it's their right to get married within the scope of their religion.

Wow. Most 'feminists' see that the four in one 'marriage' is inherently exploitative.

[Proteus_MST]

Uh, Christianity teaches that men and women are equal. See Ephesians 5.

Nope they aren't
Wifes must submit to their husbands:
Ephesians 5:22-24

²² Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. ²³ For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. ²⁴ Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

Even today, some christians interpret this passage, coupled with the bibles silence on spanking as an indication, that spanking is allowed in order to discipline the wife

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/21/christian-domestic-discipline-spanking-jesus-marriage_n_3479646.html

The fellow who successfully banned the slave trade in Britain was William Wilberforce. Who was a Christian.

Just as the slavers/slaveholders were christians.
AFAIK no high ranking church officials spoke out against slavery at this time

Ok, but that doesn't really answer my question. My question was an epistemological question - how do you know that the values of today are better?

Well, to define my answer more broadly:
The ability of people (in the western civilized world) to follow their dreams free from oppression (as long as their lifestyle doesn't directly hurt other people) has increased. Also justice and equal treatment in the western world have increased, while injustice has increased compared to former centuries.
Parts of the population that formerly had no major say in politics (women, coloured people) now have the same capabilities to elect and be elected as male whitesThis

This makes nowadays society with western society with its values profoundly better than the society in past centuries

[Ben Kenobi]

No they don't. There are a few areas in most countries including the US which are heavily economically deprived and which the police treat as areas to be cautious in, but there are zero places in western Europe that are actually 'no-go zones' in the sense that you mean. It's just a scaremongering term the media pull out every so often.

Uh, yeah, they do exist. We seem to have this argument quite a bit. I argue that something that does exist, exists while you argue that it's fearmongering. We can't both be right. Yes, no-go zones exist in Europe and have for some time now. I have maps, etc.

No Sharia 'court' in the west is handing down death sentences for apostasy, they would be arrested and imprisoned immediately.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/shafia-parents-and-son-convicted-in-honour-killing-of-four-family-members-seek-new-trial

Sadly, evidence is precipitating that honor killings have come to the west. Along with Islam.

but then again there have been some scattered instances of christians murdering abortion doctors too.

There's just been one in the past 20 years. Tiller.

There have been at least 20 honor killings PER YEAR, documented in Canada, and probably about 200, 300 per year in the United states. Nice try, but no dice.

No sharia court in the west is mandatory for any of the participants, and there have been cases where someone feels the Sharia judgement wasn't fair and went on to press their case in a civil court.

Did they survive? You might want to ask why Hirsaan Ali has protection, if you believe that it's not 'mandatory' for ex-muslims.

There have been numerous instances of hardline Orthodox Jews commiting murders and acts of violence. What every sensible person recognizes however is just because obsessive fundamentalists of any religion can twist their beliefs into a justification for violence, doesn't mean every member of that religion is responsible.

Special pleading is a beautiful thing. At least it roots out the anti-semites.

Please stop trying to paint an entire community of people as potent killers, its divisive and deeply unpleasant. It's also somewhat ironic given your endless crying about the right to religious freedom.

When Islamic sharia courts stop trying to kill ex-muslims, I'll happily report that as so.

[Ben Kenobi]

Nope they aren't
Wifes must submit to their husbands:
Ephesians 5:22-24

Ephesians 5 goes on to say:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church

Right there. You wouldn't beat yourself up, so why would you do the same to your wife?

Christianity has always rejected wife beating.

Even today, some christians interpret this passage, coupled with the bibles silence on spanking as an indication, that spanking is allowed in order to discipline the wife

Except that a casual reading of Ephesians 5 says just the opposite. And huffpo is not a reliable source on what Christians believe. If you're going to argue 'Christians believe', at least quote a denomination, not huffpo.

Just as the slavers/slaveholders were christians.

Sure, but again, Christians were the first to ban slavery, anywhere. For that, Christians get the credit.

AFAIK no high ranking church officials spoke out against slavery at this time

Many high ranking church officials were opposed to slavery, including priests of the Catholic church. I have documented evidence of such dating back to the 16th century. I doubt your secular education even told you about Wilberforce.

The ability of people (in the western civilized world) to follow their dreams free from oppression (as long as their lifestyle doesn't directly hurt other people) has increased. Also justice and equal treatment in the western world have increased, while injustice has increased compared to former centuries.

Who taught you what the concept of 'justice' means?

This makes nowadays society with western society with its values profoundly better than the society in past centuries

This will all go away when the west goes away, and when Christianity goes away. You are aware that Christianity teaches this?

[Proteus_MST]

If homeschooling leads to Nazism, why did Hitler ban it?

Before Hitler there was no Nazi movement ... this came only up after WW2, just as before Paulus there was no christianity

Yes, something is taken away. If you're a German, and the German state passes a bill saying that all Frenchmen are now considered to be citizens of Germany, what does it mean to be German?

It does mean, to be a citizen of Greater germany

But you can still distinguish between a German and a Frenchman. A bill stating that all Frenchmen are now Germans would claim that there is no difference between the two. You would also lose a definition of what it means to be German.

I don't see a problem with it ... actually what now is "german" was before a mix of german tribes who wouldn't call themselves germans but rather attain the cultural identity of the tribe they belonged to (actually part of my family is Sorbian&Wendian ... a tribe which still forms a distinct subgroup in a part of the former GDR ... with its own language and cultural customs)
Actually before the german unification after the middle of the 19th century the region now known as "germany" was splitted in smaller kingdoms. People who lived in Northrhine Westfalia for example would see themselves as members of the Kingdom of Prussia, people living at the north sea however would see themselves as citizens of the Kingdowm of Schleswig or kingdom of Hannover (depending on where they lived). And each kingdom had its border controls and toll booths.
The region of germany therefore had more in common with the EU than with germany what we now know.
So actually, a mere 1.5 centuries ago, the definition of "german" already underwent a redefinition (from someone living in a kingdom of a loose alliance of other kingdoms to an actual citizen of a german state)

Nazis did ban homeschooling. Homeschooling was not permitted in Nazi Germany.

Nope, the Weimar republic banned homeschooling.
It remained banned during Nazi regime (and got criminal penalties added to it) ... but it already was forbidden before the Nazis rose to power

Ephesians 5 explicitly says that a husband laying a hand on a wife is wrong.

Please quote the passage, because other christians obviously think that the bible doesn't contain passages which forbid laying hand on your wife

Great. That's word for word my argument as to why Germany should ban sharia.

German doesn't allow Sharia.
And actually what was mentioned about Sharia courts isn't legal in germany ...
while there seem to exist Sharia courts inb some muslim neighborhoods that, as Kentonio said, mediate in disputes in some neighborhoods, this is more or less underground.

And that's part of my point. When the argument is over Islam and not over Nazism, I don't see how arguing that the ban on Nazism covers Islam. Germany treats the two differently.

Not really ...
muslims are allowed to follow their faith as long as they don't come into conflict with german laws.
Even Neonazis are allowed to hold demonstrations, as long as they don't surpass the limits of what free speech allows in germany.

And just as certain Neonazi groups are under opbservation of our Federal office for the protection of the constitution, there are also certain mosques in germany, as well as certain preachers, under observation.

[Proteus_MST]

...

Who taught you what the concept of 'justice' means?

The codex Hammurabi ... and after that the greek who, I guess, are the ones who were the greatest influence in forming the civilization of the roman empire ... which in turn influenced the society in the european states that came after that

[Proteus_MST]

...


Sure, but again, Christians were the first to ban slavery, anywhere. For that, Christians get the credit.

...

Actually according to this Wikipedia timeline, the indians were the first to ban slave trade ... 3 centuries before Jesus was born
And the chinese banned slavery itselffor 2 decades, 2 centuries before Jesus was born

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline#Ancient_times

But I agree that most of the later entries are from christian countries (which on the other hand isn't surprising ... our most detailed history knowledge is about the christian european world ... whereas our knowledge about, for example, the american high cultures and the african cultures is sketchy at most, due to the lack of surviving decipherable scriptures ... therefore we don't know the extent of slavery in these cultures and whether there were passages of time without slavery)

[Kidlicious]

Ming thinks there aren't any violent, bigoted gays. How precious.

[Ben Kenobi]

according to this Wikipedia timeline

Now there's a reliable source!

[Ben Kenobi]

The codex Hammurabi ... and after that the greek who, I guess, are the ones who were the greatest influence in forming the civilization of the roman empire ... which in turn influenced the society in the european states that came after that

Code of Hammurabi - discovered 1901. Pretty hard to influence the Roman code (which wasn't based on the Babylonian code at all).

I find it amusing that you bring up Hammurabi but not Justinian. What exactly do they teach in European school these days?

[Aeson]

Now there's a reliable source!

Says the least reliable source ever ...

[Ben Kenobi]

Before Hitler there was no Nazi movement

If homeschooling breeds Nazis why didn't Hitler permit homeschooling?

It does mean, to be a citizen of Greater germany

After you've changed it so that Frenchmen are equally German, then it no longer means what it does. That is my point here.

I don't see a problem with it ... actually what now is "german" was before a mix of german tribes who wouldn't call themselves germans but rather attain the cultural identity of the tribe they belonged to (actually part of my family is Sorbian&Wendian ... a tribe which still forms a distinct subgroup in a part of the former GDR ... with its own language and cultural customs)

You 'might not have a problem with it', but that was not the question. The argument is that what is German would change and would no longer mean what it used to mean.

Actually before the german unification after the middle of the 19th century the region now known as "germany" was splitted in smaller kingdoms. People who lived in Northrhine Westfalia for example would see themselves as members of the Kingdom of Prussia, people living at the north sea however would see themselves as citizens of the Kingdowm of Schleswig or kingdom of Hannover (depending on where they lived). And each kingdom had its border controls and toll booths.

Indeed. But if you asked the members of smaller states if they were German, what would they say? They would say the same as you do, word for word.

The region of germany therefore had more in common with the EU than with germany what we now know.

I would challenge that. Are you arguing that the differences between France and Germany today are less than the differences between the Kingdom of Prussia and, say, Mainz prior to unification? I would argue that even though they were divided, the Prussians and those of Mainz would see themselves as sharing a common language.

Please quote the passage, because other christians obviously think that the bible doesn't contain passages which forbid laying hand on your wife

Huffpo is not a Christian source, Proteus.

German doesn't allow Sharia.

And yet it exists.

And actually what was mentioned about Sharia courts isn't legal in germany ...

And yet these things are happening in Germany.

while there seem to exist Sharia courts inb some muslim neighborhoods that, as Kentonio said, mediate in disputes in some neighborhoods, this is more or less underground.

What is happening is what I said is happening. They believe their law supercedes yours and that they are not subject to German law.

And just as certain Neonazi groups are under opbservation of our Federal office for the protection of the constitution, there are also certain mosques in germany, as well as certain preachers, under observation.

As well you should.

[Proteus_MST]

Code of Hammurabi - discovered 1901. Pretty hard to influence the Roman code (which wasn't based on the Babylonian code at all).

I find it amusing that you bring up Hammurabi but not Justinian. What exactly do they teach in European school these days?

Considering that the (later) persian empire was a neighbor of the greek culture and then was conquered by Megas Alexandros, they might have very well influenced the greek states after Alexander.
And that it was them who influenced the roman empire is out of doubt

As for Justinian:
While he surely did an important work with his codex of civil rights, this was just a compilation of the civil jurisdiction that already existed in the roman empire.
He didn't invent the roman legal practice (which existed already before christianity) but rather did a compilation of it.

Therefore IMHO it is sufficient enough to say that the romans are the basis of modern jurisdiction (as this also encompasses the works of later romans like Justinian)

[Proteus_MST]

If homeschooling breeds Nazis why didn't Hitler permit homeschooling?

Homeschooling couldn't breed Nazis when the Nazi movement wasn't yet firmly established before the Nazis came to power

After you've changed it so that Frenchmen are equally German, then it no longer means what it does. That is my point here.

You 'might not have a problem with it', but that was not the question. The argument is that what is German would change and would no longer mean what it used to mean.
Indeed. But if you asked the members of smaller states if they were German, what would they say? They would say the same as you do, word for word.


I would challenge that. Are you arguing that the differences between France and Germany today are less than the differences between the Kingdom of Prussia and, say, Mainz prior to unification? I would argue that even though they were divided, the Prussians and those of Mainz would see themselves as sharing a common language.

"German germans" and "French germans" would still be able to differentiate themselves by the primary language they speak and the location they live in.

And, to bring the topic back to gay marriages:
Heterosexual couples would still be distinct from homosexual couples in, that the former have the right to be married in a catholic church, whereas the latter cannot ... and can only be married by the state

Huffpo is not a Christian source, Proteus.

Well, I guess there are also christians working for Huffpost

And yet it exists.

And yet these things are happening in Germany.

Thieves also aren't legal and yet they exist ... murderers also aren't leghal and they exist ... pedophiles who rape underage boys and girls also aren't legal and they exist, in german society, in US society and also within the catholic church

What is happening is what I said is happening. They believe their law supercedes yours and that they are not subject to German law.

Sure, there are some muslims who would like the Sharia to replace the german one ... most however are happy with the german law.

There are also people in germany (so called "Reichsbürger") who believe that the Federal Republic of Germany ins invalid (because in their eyes the german Reich never was formally disbanded) and who always getr into conflict with the law because they try to form their own police, issue their own driving licenses and so on.

And I am sure that there are also numerous groups in the USA, who don't accept the US government as "their government" and who think, some other rules supersede the jurisdiction of the USA