2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Hypocrisy seems worse when one uses God as their shield, don't you think?

So now we're discussing variations of hypocrisy. Naturally, Atheist, socialist, Communist hypocrisy is better. And probably not hypocrisy at all, now that you think about it.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

We're all honored to be in your presence, I'm sure. Such modesty. The Atheist who reserves the right to decide who is and is not a Christian (who has also evidently missed the Reformation). All while yammering about tolerance. Tolerance for himself, of course, but not for others. "Judge not, lest ye be judged."

I find it amusing that since you can't refute the content of what I say, you rely instead on personal attacks against me. How Christian of you.

 

[joecct]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

I know it's hard to grasp, but it would seem that a "Christian" would try to follow the teachings of Christ.

Do you disagree?


I don't think that pointing out hypocrisy is "deciding who is and who is not a Christian."

Be as indignant as you want, but the fact of the matter is that many people who claim to follow Christianity are decidedly un-Christlike.

Which teaching?

Thou shall not commit adultery?
Thou shall not steal?
Thou shall not commit murder?
Keep holy the Sabbath?
etc.

If a "Christian" told you to do those things, would you? Would any of us? Or would some of us tell the Christian to go pee up a rope and mind his/her own business?

And don't forget while Christ did not condemn (except in the temple grounds), he did command "go and sin no more".

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

I find it amusing that since you can't refute the content of what I say, you rely instead on personal attacks against me. How Christian of you.

Amusing you is like watching an ape play the harpsichord. Your bottom line: anyone who doesn't measure up to your standards is a phony Christian. And you're an expert on Christianity because of the number of times you've seen The Robe and Ben Hur.

 

[burd]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Which teaching?

Thou shall not commit adultery?
Thou shall not steal?
Thou shall not commit murder?
Keep holy the Sabbath?etc.

If a "Christian" told you to do those things, would you? Would any of us? Or would some of us tell the Christian to go pee up a rope and mind his/her own business?

I know I probably missed your point, but those are not Christian teachings. Or was that your point?

 

[joecct]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

I know I probably missed your point, but those are not Christian teachings.

Well how about Judeo-Christian?

 

[burd]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Well how about Judeo-Christian?

Closer probably. I'm neither Christian nor very familiar with the bible, but did Jesus ever expressly endorse the Hebrew commandments.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Closer probably. I'm neither Christian nor very familiar with the bible, but did Jesus ever expressly endorse the Hebrew commandments.

I'm sure our resident Christians can tell you - without even resorting to a Google search.

 

[burd]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

I'm sure our resident Christians can tell you - without even resorting to a Google search.

I realize it's an unfair question, since what he "expressed" is two thousand-year-old double or triple hearsay translated two or more times. But it was a serious question.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

I realize it's an unfair question, since what he "expressed" is two thousand-year-old double or triple hearsay translated two or more times. But it was a serious question.

I have no doubt that it was a serious question.

 

[LynahFan]

I'm sure our resident Christians can tell you - without even resorting to a Google search.

How about a resident atheist who grew up in the church? "I did not come to replace the law, but to fulfill it." Matthew 5:17. I did have to look up the reference, though....

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

I'm sure our resident Christians can tell you - without even resorting to a Google search.

Yes. Jesus did endorse the ten commandments and therefore, they are considered Christian in nature. Jesus also set priorities.

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

So all the commandments are relevant...two clearly outweigh the others. This is the crux of Christianity. Yet the fact that many Christians don't believe this...is the source of the religions problems.

 

[walrus]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

It was a long time ago but I seem to remember the nuns talking about the 10 commandments at St Marys, maybe Catholics aren't Christians?
Have to love the think for yourself crap, I've come to realize if you agree you are a free thinker otherwise its talking points.

 

[unofan]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

And don't forget while Christ did not condemn (except in the temple grounds), he did command "go and sin no more".

I hope you don't eat shellfish, or wear clothes of multiple fabrics.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

You think this is obnoxious? You should see me when the Gophers and Badgers get together.


To your other point... When people spout untruths or show clear double standards, I will call them on it depending on the situation. I've had some pretty good rows with my pop and some of my ditto-head buddies.

All I ever ask is that they try thinking for themselves, but like many on the right, they struggle in that area.

I know it seems obnoxious when people call you on the silly things you say, but it's really just putting a counterpoint up against your interesting... um... ideas.

Yes, you are obnoxious, at least some of the time. You show little respect or tolerance for those whose views don't align with yours. That's why I've stopped trying to respond to you in a substantive way. Compared to Rover, where he does a lot of banter, but it isn't mean-spirited. Which is why I'll take the time to respond to him at least here and there. You spout more rubbish that most people around here. But what's so bad about you is you're so smug and sure that you are right about everything and people who don't see things as you do deserve little respect or courtesy. That's not how I operate, but I know it's pretty common, especially on an anonymous message board. Plus of course, your only troll on conservative posters, letting the most ridiculous things liberals say on here slide by without calling them out. If you went both ways, you'd have a lot more respect in my book, even if you did it in an obnoxious way. Now, you're just another partisan ranter.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

It's been in all the papers, oh delusional one.

I don't think Drudge is officially a paper, Opie.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Yes, you are obnoxious, at least some of the time. You show little respect or tolerance for those whose views don't align with yours. That's why I've stopped trying to respond to you in a substantive way. Compared to Rover, where he does a lot of banter, but it isn't mean-spirited. Which is why I'll take the time to respond to him at least here and there. You spout more rubbish that most people around here. But what's so bad about you is you're so smug and sure that you are right about everything and people who don't see things as you do deserve little respect or courtesy. That's not how I operate, but I know it's pretty common, especially on an anonymous message board. Plus of course, your only troll on conservative posters, letting the most ridiculous things liberals say on here slide by without calling them out. If you went both ways, you'd have a lot more respect in my book, even if you did it in an obnoxious way. Now, you're just another partisan ranter.

You are entitled to your view on anything you want, but your aren't entitled to your own facts.

I was responding to this quip that you made in response to another post:

I thought we went in to get rid of all of those weapons of mass destruction they had?

That was certainly part of the situation of course.

It most certainly wasn't "part of the situation." It was part of the trumped up case for war that we were fed and deceived with. There were no weapons of mass destruction, so therefore, it couldn't be "part of the situation."

The way you word things matters. It's right out of the right's playbook from the past decade and a half. Say something enough times - whether true or not - and it becomes the truth - especially amongst the folks who "can't think for themselves" and only follow "talking points."

Guess what? There weren't any ties to Al Qaeda either.


If you say things like this and I'm in the mood to bother with you, I'm gonna call you on it.

Go ahead and play the victim card though.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

You are entitled to your view on anything you want, but your aren't entitled to your own facts.

I was responding to this quip that you made in response to another post:






It most certainly wasn't "part of the situation." It was part of the trumped up case for war that we were fed and deceived with. There were no weapons of mass destruction, so therefore, it couldn't be "part of the situation."

The way you word things matters. It's right out of the right's playbook from the past decade and a half. Say something enough times - whether true or not - and it becomes the truth - especially amongst the folks who "can't think for themselves" and only follow "talking points."

Guess what? There weren't any ties to Al Qaeda either.


If you say things like this and I'm in the mood to bother with you, I'm gonna call you on it.

Go ahead and play the victim card though.

You are so looking for a fight, you are blinded. I was saying that the WMD issue was part of the Iraq situation, without saying more about it, as that wasn't what I was discussing. I purposely said something very vanilla, as my point was that I thought it didn't make sense to go nation building in Iraq regardless of WMDs. But you are so looking for a fight at every corner, you blow my mild acknowledgment totally out of proportion and read into it things I didn't say and wasn't addressing. It would really help you to chill a bit.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Republicans intended to get WMDs out of Iraq (they didn't) just as Democrats intend to reduce healthcare costs (they won't). Good intentions, bad results. Two perfect examples of "to err is human, to really f things up requires a bureaucracy."

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

You are so looking for a fight, you are blinded. I was saying that the WMD issue was part of the Iraq situation, without saying more about it, as that wasn't what I was discussing. I purposely said something very vanilla, as my point was that I thought it didn't make sense to go nation building in Iraq regardless of WMDs. But you are so looking for a fight at every corner, you blow my mild acknowledgment totally out of proportion and read into it things I didn't say and wasn't addressing. It would really help you to chill a bit.

I'm totally chill. I'm so used to the Faux News followers' perpetuation the right's made up reality that the vast majority of times I just let it go and ignore it.


WMD's were not part of the "Iraq situation." They were part of the case for war with Iraq.

There's a big difference in the meaning of those two things.


That's my issue with your "view" of things.