• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Teen carries cross to White house

Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought America had the largest population of Christians in the world. I didn't realize that there was an issue of faithlessness when it oftentimes seems to be to the contrary.
 

Bombadil

Banned
I thought America had the largest population of Christians in the world. I didn't realize that there was an issue of faithlessness when it oftentimes seems to be to the contrary.

In our country, calling something a godless heathen is a popular insult. So when Obama talks about promoting a healthcare system that is accessible to everyone, all you gotta do is call him a Muslim atheist homosexual and that'll stir up the hive and delay progress for another few months.
 

Boss Doggie

all my loli wolf companions are so moe
What I don't like in protests, etc. is self injury to make a point. Case in point - farmers not eating to make a point.
 

Orayn

Member
This is with Assemblies of God, right? They can get a little fringe-y, so it's not surprising that they'd use this kind of stunt to draw attention to themselves.
 

kiunchbb

www.dictionary.com
So this is what Jesus would do when he is ressurected? Block my freeway, create traffic, and make t-shirts? Is that why there are traffic everyday when I go home from work? Jesus is already back?
 
Here's what I always pondered about Christianity. The cross is a major symbol in the religion, symbolizing Jesus' brutal sacrifice. But what if he died a different way? What if he was boiled alive? Would a boiling pot be the main symbol for Christianity? Would people wear necklaces with cauldrons on them? Or what if he was decapitated? Would Christians wear something that symbolizes a decapitated head?

This sounds like something George Carlin would ask about Christianity.

ARE YOU GEORGE CARLIN?
 

Bombadil

Banned
Here's what I always pondered about Christianity. The cross is a major symbol in the religion, symbolizing Jesus' brutal sacrifice. But what if he died a different way? What if he was boiled alive? Would a boiling pot be the main symbol for Christianity? Would people wear necklaces with cauldrons on them? Or what if he was decapitated? Would Christians wear something that symbolizes a decapitated head?

Do you know what an ichthys symbol is?

If he had been boiled alive I assume people would just wear the fish.
 

Agnostic

but believes in Chael
He is going to walk on highways?
The craziest thing about the story. It doesn't even matter if a car follows with flashing lights when you're dealing with the American highway driver.

I would never walk along a highway even if my car broke down. You wait for a friend or a police officer to give you a ride off of the meat grinder.
 

markot

Banned
Whys Fish the symbol anyway? He also multiplied bread! Also his body is bread.

cat_bread_4.jpg
 

dab0ne

Member
Ok I'm religious. I believe in God and the story of Jesus. But do you really have to walk on the Highways dude? Walk on the shoulder at least so people can get to where they need to go brother.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Tolerance does not rhyme well with off-topic Neogaf, especially when it has to do with religion.

"Tolerance"

gnNht.jpg


We tolerate the hell out of this guy. We aren't going to stop him. We don't think he's a bad person. He is not some hated "other". I would chill out with him if given the chance.

But like E3 press conferences, the Time Belt, and the movie Sucker Punch, GAF is going to ridicule the fuck out of him because he's hilarious.

All the religious whiners in this thread really give a lot of ammo to the Dawkins school of thought where you think this one area of life is immune to criticism. I always argue against strict Dawkins-like thought because I do want to "respect" religious people in the true meaning of the word "respect", but you really think we shouldn't be critical? Ha ha ha ha.
 
In our country, calling something a godless heathen is a popular insult. So when Obama talks about promoting a healthcare system that is accessible to everyone, all you gotta do is call him a Muslim atheist homosexual and that'll stir up the hive and delay progress for another few months.
Not with a Socialist Secret Muslim Baby Killer in the White House!
That's what I feared, and would also explain his destination... Maybe they can get Obama to denounce Islam with prayer.
 

markot

Banned
Man, if I was China I would pay Obama 1 trillion bucks to meet the kid dressed as a Roman emporer. With lions.
 

Dead Man

Member
"Tolerance"

gnNht.jpg


We tolerate the hell out of this guy. We aren't going to stop him. We don't think he's a bad person. He is not some hated "other". I would chill out with him if given the chance.

But like E3 press conferences, the Time Belt, and the movie Sucker Punch, GAF is going to ridicule the fuck out of him because he's hilarious.

All the religious whiners in this thread really give a lot of ammo to the Dawkins school of thought where you think this one area of life is immune to criticism. I always argue against strict Dawkins-like thought because I do want to "respect" religious people in the true meaning of the word "respect", but you really think we shouldn't be critical? Ha ha ha ha.

You just became my favourite poster.
 
D

Deleted member 1235

Unconfirmed Member
"Tolerance"

We tolerate the hell out of this guy. We aren't going to stop him. We don't think he's a bad person. He is not some hated "other". I would chill out with him if given the chance.

But like E3 press conferences, the Time Belt, and the movie Sucker Punch, GAF is going to ridicule the fuck out of him because he's hilarious.

All the religious whiners in this thread really give a lot of ammo to the Dawkins school of thought where you think this one area of life is immune to criticism. I always argue against strict Dawkins-like thought because I do want to "respect" religious people in the true meaning of the word "respect", but you really think we shouldn't be critical? Ha ha ha ha.

applause
 

jaxword

Member
I would disagree with this quite strongly.

That is a dangerous path to wander down.

If religion is not a choice, and not genetic, then indoctrination and brainwashing are equivalent to be being born with something.

Since there are multiple religions claiming the title as The Right Religion, that school of thought literally says you can be born right or you can be born wrong.
 

markot

Banned
This should be interesting.

So if religion is not a choice, then it must be something genetic that you are born with. No, indoctrination and brainwashing are not equivalent to be being born with something.

Since there are multiple religions claiming the title as The Right Religion, your school of thought literally says you can be born right or you can be born wrong. That is a dangerous path to wander down.
If society teaches you something is normal and natural from birth, then you are essentially born with it.
 

Suairyu

Banned
This should be interesting.

So if religion is not a choice, then it must be something genetic that you are born with. No, indoctrination and brainwashing are not equivalent to be being born with something.

Since there are multiple religions claiming the title as The Right Religion, your school of thought literally says you can be born right or you can be born wrong. That is a dangerous path to wander down.
Why must it be genetic? That's an odd base assumption. You then use it to discount indoctrination and brainwashing, which is the process of psychologically programming someone a certain why so they don't have a choice.

What you believe is the result of your environment, upbringing and life experience. Belief isn't something you control, it's something you feel. It isn't something you rationally think out (though it may result from rational thought if you work that way). "That's why it's called belief." etc. etc.

I don't choose to be an atheist. The I was raised causes me to look at the (lack of) evidence, total it all up, and declare I cannot believe in a god for there is no strong argument for the existence of one. For me it isn't a choice, but the only option for myself.

I could just have easily been brought up differently or had a different set of random life experiences that means I truly believe there is something 'out there'.

I don't. Believing in God might not be but your religion certainly is.
The two are very inter-twined. The God of a Catholic is different to that of a Protestant is different to that of an Evangelical is different to that of a Muslim is different to that of a Sikh and so on. You don't simply believe in a god, you believe in who the god is and what they do. Religions form around these beliefs.

Going by your argument, belief in God isn't a choice but belief in Jesus is. That's kind of unlikely. And what of religions that have gods rather than God?
 

Dead Man

Member
This should be interesting.

So if religion is not a choice, then it must be something genetic that you are born with. No, indoctrination and brainwashing are not equivalent to be being born with something.

Since there are multiple religions claiming the title as The Right Religion, your school of thought literally says you can be born right or you can be born wrong. That is a dangerous path to wander down.

I would suggest there are options other than it being a choice and being born with it. Indoctrination is not a choice and can make it very difficult to 'choose' anything else.
 

jaxword

Member
If society teaches you something is normal and natural from birth, then you are essentially born with it.

This is a reply to everyone above; this train of thought is incredibly dangerous, because it equalizes something that's not a choice with something that can be taught/ordered. I don't doubt that people FEEL like it should be as important, but that kind of thinking shouldn't be lauded.

It's the same argument that people use to scream racism when their religion is criticized.

If society just sits back and allows that kind of fallacious reasoning, where does the line get drawn on what's allowed to be criticized and judged? Who decides that? It automatically gives one group this immunity simply because it's important to the person since they were kids. That doesn't lead to critically thinking adults, and those adults then change the world as they see fit.

Dangerous thinking.
 

red731

Member
I don't care, but if it is what he want's.
Just, for the sake of my mine, don't tell me what will my child need.
 

CorvoSol

Member
You know what though? As silly as I honestly think this is, I can't help but give the kid the benefit of the doubt. People are always saying they don't think young people give a damn, and it strikes me that this kid decided to do something-- something which I grant is less effective than a great many others-- to make a difference/send a message. I wish that when I was a teenager, I had cared enough about something to give it this level of dedication.
 

Zekes!

Member
You know what though? As silly as I honestly think this is, I can't help but give the kid the benefit of the doubt. People are always saying they don't think young people give a damn, and it strikes me that this kid decided to do something-- something which I grant is less effective than a great many others-- to make a difference/send a message. I wish that when I was a teenager, I had cared enough about something to give it this level of dedication.

your avatar is amazing
 

Dead Man

Member
This is a reply to everyone above; this train of thought is incredibly dangerous, because it equalizes something that's not a choice with something that can be taught/ordered. I don't doubt that people FEEL like it should be as important, but that kind of thinking shouldn't be lauded.

It's the same argument that people use to scream racism when their religion is criticized.

If society just sits back and allows that kind of fallacious reasoning, where does the line get drawn on what's allowed to be criticized and judged? Who decides that? It automatically gives one group this immunity simply because it's important to the person since they were kids. That doesn't lead to critically thinking adults, and those adults then change the world as they see fit.

Dangerous thinking.

I don't think anyone is advocating giving immunity, at least not in the people that responded to your post. Just because something can be changed does not make it a choice to get it in the first place.
 

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
Most are born into it though and have it hammered into them, choice implies a reasoned decision.
Children born to religious parents aren't robbed of all ability to rationally think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom