Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

The point is, this makes you biased. I coined Theologists because they are people who do parttake actively in a religion, however, their religion is based on the idea that all other relgiions are right to an extent.

This is very similiar to the basis of my beliefs, only I lean towards paganism, possibly because there's so much more in it, and is considerably more bendable and tolerant.

Because of that, I'm relatively unbiased as opposed to most people who are either One religion(or a combination of two similiar ones) or Atheist.

I have nothing against the majority of the Christian Doctorines, and accept Jesus was probably someone very special. However, I also refuse to acknowledge anything in a religion which leads to not questioning anything around you, or blind prejudice. Though these usually are up to the person and not the religion itself.

Actually, if you have leanings towards one or the other, then you, too, are biased, not that it matters in the sake of this discussion. It's just that you seem to have a hard time realizing how close you are to the things you say you're not.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

The point is I'm less biased.

Remember, not black and white.

but you ARE biased, and your arguments against what Didymus has said all lie in the fact that, because he is biased, they don't count..

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Rosalie, I have to burst your bubble, but Didy is right. Not just here, but always.

What we have here is a real genius. He honestly knows everything there is to know about religions, not just christianity. His opinions are certainly just as valid, if not more, than anyone else's. You can't disregard his opinions because of his religion, that would be discrimination...

btw, The Black Crowes ROCK!!!

_________________

And he never forces his view of the world one anyone else. I look up to Didymus and I'm not afraid to say that.

Now that that's over, TOASTPAINT!

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor

Thanks, every peoples. I appreciate it. Really I do.

As for catechesis, Christian parents do have a responsibility to teach their children the Christian faith. Acts 2:38 says so, as does Deut 6:7. This is a command to us from God. Children, on the other hand, are completely dependent upon their parents for all of their needs in life, including food, shelter, clothing, etc. Any notion of respect must take into account the fact that children need guidance to make wise decisions, due to their lack of knowledge and experience. For one thing, children need to be taught not to kick ladies in the grocery store checkout, grap pots of hot oil, smoke crack, and all sorts of things like that. In the same way, they also need to be taught their need for God, and what it means to live under his caring provision.

That is why we Lutherans in particular (and all Christians SHOULD) baptizie our children and teach them the catechism. We want them to know our God and to live under his care. And if parents don't take that responsibility, or at the very least act like it is something important, then how in the world can you expect children to get it when they grow up?

So, yes, I do believe Christian parents have a responsibility to teach their children the Christian faith, to the effect that, if they do not, then they fail their children and are doing them a disservice.

As for questioning my faith, I dare you to say I haven't. Last year, I was in the LSS Chaplain's office hurling kleenex boxes at the cross in rage. I have indeed questioned my God, even as Job did. But he has shown himself faithful, even in my rage, and has restored me time and again. I object to having my faith called "blind prejudice" when you do not know the intense struggles I've been through. I would, in fact, say it is highly judgmental of you.

_________________

Swish...

And another point for Didymus.

Yay! I don't have to argue anymore!

_________________

You people worship this man to a scary degree.

And it's not discrimination. It's common sense. If you're strongly of one religion, it will change your world view in a manner than makes you view it according to your beliefs.

I am set in my beliefs, however, as a neat little trick, much of my beliefs are based on other religions being true, to a given value of truth. That inherently makes my religious opinions less biased than a full blown christian, however much he may claim to know.



This is exactly what I mean. Using religion to back something which is abstract from religion in this manner is like trying to fly by pulling your own feet up.

The point isn't whether or not it's Christian, it's whether or not it's right.

I can't believe you just said that...
I REALLY can't believe you just said that.
You basically just said you're opinions are better than his and that his opinions don't matter.. (I'm reading that the same way you'd read it if I posted something like that.)

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Where the Funk are you getting this? Are you only reading what you want to read, and not paying a damn ounce of attention to what I'm actually saying?

Or do you just read everything entirely and black and white?

I'll try to lay this out for you.. You dismiss Didymus arguments because they are biased, meaning that, to you, biased arguments are not valid.
You then say that your own arguments are less biased than those of a christian. This means that you're implying one of two things. Either a: Your arguments are also not valid or b: Your arguments are more valid than his.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I figured b (who would say that their own arguments are not valid, after all?)

That's about as good an explanation as I can give you. If this isn't your logic, please feel free to correct it. Feel free to read the rules (especially about language) too, while your at it.
I don't like them, either, but I follow them.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

According to my faith, it is not only right, it is necessary. And you really haven't presented any SOUND reasons why we shouldn't, other than vague references to your faulty belief that it somehow violates children's dignity.

Look, parents are responsible for teaching children everything else about life--things like manners, cooking, cleaning up their own messes, etc.--why should religion be any different?

BTW, in case you haven't noticed, religions all tend to contradict one another in their basic worldviews. It is ontologically impossible for them all to be true, and intellectual absurdity to try to say that they all are.

_________________

All we do is give Didy the respect that he (being an incredibly nice, intelligent, and awesome guy) deserves. If you know him as we do, yo uwould too

And yes, I'm afraid it is discrimination. It's like saying a gay person shouldn't be allowed to participate in a discussion (or their vote shouldn't count) on gay rights, because, technically, they are biased... That's silly. Didy's knowledge and opinions are just as valid as yours, regardless of his religion. You're being insane.

If you disagree with him, refute it. Don't say his words don't count because of the god he chooses to follow.

_________________

Thanks DGS. Wow. Makes me blush to know people feel this way about me.

_________________

It's not. He judges right and wrong based on his religion, I don't. I didn't say he couldn't partake, just that he is more biased than me, which is technically true.

Religion makes people biased. It's not insane, it's logical. Nobody can claim to be completely abstract from religious bias, I have merely stated that the nature of my beliefs makes my view considerably less biasedi n these maters, which you have provided absolutely no trace of a valid counter to.

He said his religion tells him that he should attempt force his beliefs on his kids. But we're trying to look at this in principle, not what any one belief says.

Yes, he's entitled to that opinion, but it's still biased, and in this day and age we're not supposed to force our beliefs on others, or at least instill them in a manner that makes people uncomfortable, which is exactly what happens with many kids.

Though no doubt you'll find thousands of ways to turn those words against me, so whatever.



This makes you considerably more biased than me. I judge right and wrong from an atheistic point of view, despite not being atheist.

Unless you can argue without the "according to my faith", which you can't, no amount of people accusing me of being the persecuter will change the fact that my opinion is inherently less biased.

But I'm glad you feel so loved. Try being a pagan, socialist transgender in a society that barely recognises you as more than a joke. Then see how loved you feel.

Rosalie, you are every bit as biased as anyone else on this forum; you simply aren't honest with yourself or with us about your biases.

And you still have presented no sound reasons why Christians should not teach their kids to be Christian, and most certainly none that are beyond your own biases.

And yes, I do base my opinions about right and wrong on my religion. That is because I believe my God's authority far exceeds any human authority. "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so My thoughts are higher than your thoughts, and My ways higher than your ways."

And Rosalie, it seems to me, from what people are saying, that it has nothing to do with who I am that people like me, or that they dislike you. From what people have been saying, it's my demeanor they like, and yours that they dislike. Look, Jones and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum on most political/social issues. If Jones tells you to cool it, it's most certainly not based on political/social biases.

_________________

But you do. Several times in this thread, actually (Example: this post). You're just as biased as everyone you're pointing fingers at.

_________________

Why do people keep saying things without backing them up?

I just wrote about three paragraphs as to how you are more biased in this matter than I am. You can just saw one line, with absolutely no backing, and people will fall down and worship it?

Whatever you say, the evidence is there. I've put a heck of a lot more meat into my arguments than anyone else.



Because it's still indirectly attempting to force your beliefs on others. Would you do that to me, attempt to preach and convert me constantly? So why is it okay to do that to your kids?

Because they're young and don't have rights, therefore you can exploit them in any way you see fit?

At the end of they day, you can make your resources as a Christian available to them if they wish to pursue that fact. Making them go to church, or contuining after the first signs of discomfort causing life to become one big awkwad moment for your offspring.

There is my damn sound reason. Now, in a debate, you have to provide a retort to this that debunks it, or you cannot "win" the debate, so to speak.



I've heard enough about "Demeanors" and "attitudes". It's the fact that I'm challenging ideals that probably haven't been challenged here before far more so than me telling anyone to Funk off(Which I only do with good reason).



How was that judging right and wrong based on my religion?

I'm just as bad as everyone I'm pointing fingers at? That's a lovely little smart thing to say that I'm sure a lot of people who aren't really paying attention with "QUOTE" and applaud, but you have absolutely no backing and appear to be refusing to be proving or explaining a thing you're saying.

Every time you point a finger, you have three more pointing back at you...

Your opinions are just as biased as everyone else's. Everyone is biased, because our life experiences and personalities shape the way we think, and therefore our opinoins. You have reasons to belive what you belive, as does Didy, and you cannot discredit him because of this...

_________________

If you say they have the right to believe what they want, why are you saying they are young and have no rights?
And just judging from the atheist point of view doesn't make you unbiased, unless you somehow prove atheism is true.

_________________

Because your own biases are self-evident. Incidentally, you might want to answer TEF there. He cited one of your own posts to back up what he says.

I'd also say the fact that you're still trying to argue with almost everybody on this forum right now is proof that you're not nearly as tolerant or unbiased as you claim to be.


Last time I checked, there was a huge difference between reading the Bible with your kids and putting them on the rack. Last time I checked, there was a huge difference between taking your kids to Sunday School and burning them at the stake. I don't know. Maybe it's just me, but I think your term "force your beliefs" is just blowing smoke.


Ooh, making kids do something uncomfortable for them. Almost like making them go to school to get educated, or making them clean their room, or do chores around the house. Or not buying them every little toy they whine for. "Sound reasoning" indeed. It is sound reasoning if and only if you advocate never making children do anything, or never restricting their behavior in any way. In the end, you still have presented no sound reason why religion should be treated any different than other things children are expected to learn in childhood.

_________________

That's already been said twice and it wasn't particularily insightful either time. If someone is doing something wrong, you point a finger. Some things are more important than looking completely unjudgemental.



No, my opinion in this particular issue, bringing up your kids into a particular religion rather than presenting alternatives and letting them choose, is less biased, because I do not view it from a religious point of view.

If you can't understand this point of logic, I've no real way of communicating with you. Would you mind if I got someone more mild mannered and better at explaining onto the forum?



I was being sarcastic, I thought that was obvious. Though it is true that young people have almost no rights.

As for the atheist point of view, I mean that I don't believe according to any scripture or what any god tells me, and isntead believe in logic dictating whati s right and wrong.

And why should I trust an atheistic worldview to guide the way I handle religious instruction? That would be like saying, "I'm only going to go to a doctor who's never been to medical school. I don't want his medical practice to be influenced by his medical training."

_________________

Actually, that MIGHT close the gap a bit..
Calling people immature and such isn't the way to do it.
I don't claim to speak for anyone else, but I really think the problem I have with you is your approach.
If you'll read my posts in some of the R&P threads, you'll see that, while we do disagree on a lot of things, there are also a lot of things we agree on (or at least come close to agreeing on).

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Wrong. Everyone's arguments are going to be biased to their beliefs. You are saying his are more biased because of what his beliefs are. The only difference here is, he believes in the Bible, and you believe in something else. But you are just as biased to your beliefs as he is to his.

_________________

Because their evident isn't proof. You have to point out and explain how I'm biased like I did with you.

And almost everybody on this forum(that's talking, rather)is christian, conservative, or very close to one of the two on the forum. How many arguments have you gotten into online? Nearly all of them are pretty one sided, because people don't like to get involved for fear of loosing friends, etc. It's extrmely common to find arguments like this.

So should I give in because the majority is against me? Does that make me biased just because I think differently?

Logic does not follow.



But just becuase you aren't beating them for not going to church doesn't mean you're not forcing it on them.

What would you do if they turned around and told you they didn't want to be a christian?

Heck, would they even do that? YOu may not react to it badly, but why would they presume that if you've shown them nothing but christianity from Day 1? You're creating a world for them where !=Christian = bad, which makes it extremely uncomfortable for them if they disagree with your teachings. They'll never want to tell the truth, unless they have a rebellious streak.


You need to let them know that you would love them no matter what, otherwise, yes, you are being forecful with your beliefs.



I honestly can't believe you brought that up. Looking at it from a hypothetical point of view without any religious bias, going to school to get educated is extremely important for them to live a full and happy life.

While you may believe Christianity may be just as valuable, there is still no evidence to suggest it's *near* as important as a good school education. I understand it's your point of view that they'll burn in hell if they don't, but you have to understand that because of the fact that there are other points of views out there, you are inherently no more right, therefore no religion in particular should be seen as a "Neccessity".

or making them clean their room,

Logical behaviour as a parent.

or do chores around the house.

Logical behaviour as a parent.

Or not buying them every little toy they whine for.

Logical behaviour as a parent.

However, throwing them into a world they may feel uncomfortable in or learn to hate is NOT logical behaviour. If they decide one day to become interested in christianity, then feel free to raise them as a chrisitan. Otherwise, I firmly believe you have no right to use your children as a vessel for your beliefs.

I think you're afraid that Christianity would die out if it wasn't for it being instilled in people. Well, if it would, it wouldn't be a very valid religion, then, would it? And I seriously doubt that would happen. People are always looking for a path to follow, and always come to different conclusions. The way it should be. Do you even know how little sense raising someone as a christian makes? Beliefs are something very personal and close to the soul, and should entirely be the choice of the person. Even if they're young and believe in silly things, let them. Let them grow.



You've listed various things that parents make their kids do that are of value and use, yet failed to link them in any manner as to how instilling your religion in them is productive.



So you're not only raising them into christianity, you're using it to restrict their behaviour? Now you ARE most definitely getting into forceful territory.



Because religion is personal and something you should find searching for yourself. A belief is the most personal thing you can have.

School, cleaning up around the house, those things are life skills that almost everyone partakes in, and not something that is close to someone's heart, or define who they are.

There is no more sound reasoning than that.



He's doing something because he read it in a book, I'm doing it by using logic to extend things which are globally considered right and wrong.

People can be more biased than others in certain issues, it's entirely possible. You'll just have to live with it, I'm afraid.

"My book says so" isn't a valid argument, as it has no backing that everyone can relate to, regardless of belief. It's entirely self contained and recursive, thus my "trying to fly by pulling up your feet" analogy.

I don't believe your problem is with my approach, but rather the subject matter. Either way I approach it, I am presenting thngs that look to you, or at least you claim look to you, like I am somehow forcing beliefs on others(Which is quite ironic given the subject matter).
I think it may help explain a little, but I don't think it'll do much more than that.

Rosalie, you are assuming that Christanity isn't true... because if it is true, then we will be held accountable from God for not teaching our children His way.

_________________

Actually, if you'll pay attention, I'm assuming it's no more true than any other given religion or world view, including atheism. Didymus is doing the obvious.

Essentially, I'm assuming that nothing is true, but might be.