Several Orthodox Christian crosses have been chopped down in different parts of Russia. The incidents come after the Femen movement attacked a cross in Kiev to protest the sentence of the punk band Pussy Riot, who received two years in prison.
The incidents occurred overnight. Crosses have been taken down in the Chelyabinsk region, Urals and Archangelsk region, northern Russia. By the time police arrived at the scenes the vandals had already left. Authorities have launched an investigation into both cases.
The imprisonment of individuals for expressing their opinions on the church and politics is even worse, but greater evils rarely forgive lesser evils.
I can't say that I would take part in this kind of protests, but they are somewhat inevitable outbursts when you deny people the proper channels to protest.
Regardless, I like that the punk-movement seems to be getting its teeth back. Giving a bigger finger to the man is always fun to see, especially in a country like Russia that needs a good dose of sense beaten into it.
Lanfire
This really shows that the Pussy Riot "hooliganism" and their feminism movement was indeed a hate crime against religion
No it doesn't.
Pussy Riot is in jail, so they cannot possibly have committed this act.
Or are you suggesting that the actions of others may be piled on them?
On August 27 2012 00:04 zalz wrote: I can't say that I would take part in this kind of protests, but they are somewhat inevitable outbursts when you deny people the proper channels to protest.
Exactly my thoughts.
People when oppressed will only scream louder to express themselves.
Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
On August 27 2012 00:08 - special tactics - wrote: is not even about religion but of thugs and other people who do not respect law
Well, it is clearly about religion.
Did you happen to notice they chopped down crosses? Generally thought of as religious icons.
People are angry about the Orthodox hands that were all over the very political trial of Pussy Riot. I won't say that this is a good form of protest, and if caught they should be prosecuted for destruction of private property (atleast I think the cross is private property) but I can somewhat understand their frustration.
If people don't have a legal outlet for their frustration, illegal one's will come up.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
The Orthodox church and Putin's government go hand in hand. The two can't be seperated as if they have no relationship when priests are driving down the streets of Moscow in multimillion dollar cars, killing people and getting off scott-free.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
Lmao. No one should be after nothing. It's up to individuals what they want to do with their priorities, you probably don't even realize most people in Russia would still vote for Putin lol.
Pussy Riot is in jail, so they cannot possibly have committed this act.
Or are you suggesting that the actions of others may be piled on them?
Two members of the controversial band Pussy Riot who are wanted by the authorities over their notorious “Punk Prayer” stunt have managed to slip from Russia and are planning to recruit more feminists for their future performances.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
Lmao. No one should be after nothing. It's up to individuals what they want to do with their priorities, you probably don't even realize most people in Russia would still vote for Putin lol.
He didn't say that people must think or behave in a certain fashion, just how he feels they should. You're leaping on semantics here, and that doesn't do the discussion a lot of good.
As for the fact that Putin could win a legit election, true, but that doesn't change the fact that the election wasn't rigged. This time it didn't matter that the election was rigged because the outcome was the same as a legit one.
What happens next time when people are bored of Putin? People are being denied their right to have a representative government.
Pussy Riot is in jail, so they cannot possibly have committed this act.
Or are you suggesting that the actions of others may be piled on them?
Two members of the controversial band Pussy Riot who are wanted by the authorities over their notorious “Punk Prayer” stunt have managed to slip from Russia and are planning to recruit more feminists for their future performances.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
The Orthodox church and Putin's government go hand in hand. The two can't be seperated as if they have no relationship when priests are driving down the streets of Moscow in multimillion dollar cars, killing people and getting off scott-free.
I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
The Orthodox church and Putin's government go hand in hand. The two can't be seperated as if they have no relationship when priests are driving down the streets of Moscow in multimillion dollar cars, killing people and getting off scott-free.
Sci-fi statement right here. Putin never gave a fuck about a specific religion, he only utilizes whatever he needs to gain more popularity. Muslims constitute up to 14% of population in Russia, many of them are successful. Orthodox priests driving away from an accident is a problem with corrupt local gvernment rather than Putin himself. I am willing to bet that particular priest will be punished.
Fans of this band should be careful. They may just be strengthening the case of hooliganism against PR. Vandalizing churches is a sure fire way to not get public support.
On August 27 2012 00:23 dUTtrOACh wrote: Fans of this band should be careful. They may just be strengthening the case of hooliganism against PR. Vandalizing churches is a sure fire way to not get public support.
Agreed. Vandalizing Church property as a political protest will not be seen as a political protest, but rather a war against religion.
On August 27 2012 00:19 Shiragaku wrote: I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
As for the other, I'll see if I can find the reddit post that had a ton of examples, but they were mostly Russian news stories too trivial to be translated. Consider it retracted if I can't find it.
ecstatica
Sci-fi statement right here. Putin never gave a fuck about a specific religion, he only utilizes whatever he needs to gain more popularity. Muslims constitute up to 14% of population in Russia, many of them are successful. Orthodox priests driving away from an accident is a problem with corrupt local gvernment rather than Putin himself. I am willing to bet that particular priest will be punished.
Putin has ties with the Orthodox church, this is no secret, let alone a statement of fiction.
I'm sure Russia has a lot of muslims, but I don't see how that keeps Putin from holding hands with the clergy, especially not when the facts clearly show that he is doing exactly that.
The Orthodox church and Putin's government go hand in hand. The two can't be seperated as if they have no relationship when priests are driving down the streets of Moscow in multimillion dollar cars, killing people and getting off scott-free.
Yes, and russian priest are flying around Russia on BMW brooms, killing people with a cackle.
On August 27 2012 00:23 dUTtrOACh wrote: Fans of this band should be careful. They may just be strengthening the case of hooliganism against PR. Vandalizing churches is a sure fire way to not get public support.
Agreed. Vandalizing Church property as a political protest will not be seen as a political protest, but rather a war against religion.
Sure, it might be viewed as such, but what can these people do?
You are looking at this from a western perspective, wondering why they can't just go and have a legitimate protest, but the problem is that they are increasingly losing legit channels to express their discontent.
If I tape your mouth shut, should I really be surprised when you punch me to express discontent?
Yes, in a perfect world people have respect for private property, but in that same world these people have the right to protest for their views and be safe from government persecution.
Well at least religion is falling out of popularity, even if it is little by little... Still I do disagree defacing private property should be a no no.
On August 27 2012 00:19 Shiragaku wrote: I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
As for the other, I'll see if I can find the reddit post that had a ton of examples, but they were mostly Russian news stories too trivial to be translated. Consider it retracted if I can't find it. .
Well from what I saw, it just shows the priests are rich corrupt bastards. I am more curious about the Putin-Church connection.
On August 27 2012 00:29 Lanfire wrote: Yes, and russian priest are flying around Russia on BMW brooms, killing people with a cackle.
Honestly....
How quickly you lose track of your own position.
You argued that these crimes were proof that Pussy Rioted had committed a hate crime.
I said no, because the members of Pussy Riot did not commit this crime, and you cannot pile the crimes of others onto other people. If I rob a store, the government can't lock you up instead as a placeholder, nor accuse you of having robbed when it is obvious that I did it.
Your reaction was linking that two members of Pussy Riot had gone on the run, thus hinting that they could be held responsible because they were still missing, so it would be possible for them to have chopped down the crosses.
Then I ridiculed you for suggesting something that is so silly it does not deserve a proper response.
Now you just quote me and rephrase what I said because you lost track of the red-line of the discussion.
Either return to it, or go off into the uncharted wilds of nonesense land.
On August 27 2012 00:19 Shiragaku wrote: I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
As for the other, I'll see if I can find the reddit post that had a ton of examples, but they were mostly Russian news stories too trivial to be translated. Consider it retracted if I can't find it. .
Well from what I saw, it just shows the priests are rich corrupt bastards. I am more curious about the Putin-Church connection.
The church backed Putin in his election. Not sure how that doesn't qualify as a connection.
I linked to it a few posts before. Orthodox ties to Putin are well known, and they aren't hitching their wagon to his because they think he looks so handsome in pictures. Qued pro quo.
On August 27 2012 00:23 dUTtrOACh wrote: Fans of this band should be careful. They may just be strengthening the case of hooliganism against PR. Vandalizing churches is a sure fire way to not get public support.
Agreed. Vandalizing Church property as a political protest will not be seen as a political protest, but rather a war against religion.
Sure, it might be viewed as such, but what can these people do?
You are looking at this from a western perspective, wondering why they can't just go and have a legitimate protest, but the problem is that they are increasingly losing legit channels to express their discontent.
If I tape your mouth shut, should I really be surprised when you punch me to express discontent?
Yes, in a perfect world people have respect for private property, but in that same world these people have the right to protest for their views and be safe from government persecution.
Yes, they have no voice in the state-run media where they are most likely demonized all the time. I am not always in support of legitimate protest and favor action at times, and the frustration is understandable, but they are still shooting themselves in the foot by vandalizing the property.
If I may use a hyperbole, the frustration of the Palestinians is understandable, but whenever they commit an act of terrorism to protest Israel's abuse of power and use of terror, they harm themselves in public relations with Israel and the world and the response by the Israeli government is to respond with more terror.
I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
I never said the members of Pussy Riot are directly responsible or should be convicted for cutting down these crosses, They give inspiration for other people for more of these actions, which was stated in the sources i gave.
On August 27 2012 00:23 dUTtrOACh wrote: Fans of this band should be careful. They may just be strengthening the case of hooliganism against PR. Vandalizing churches is a sure fire way to not get public support.
Agreed. Vandalizing Church property as a political protest will not be seen as a political protest, but rather a war against religion.
Sure, it might be viewed as such, but what can these people do?
You are looking at this from a western perspective, wondering why they can't just go and have a legitimate protest, but the problem is that they are increasingly losing legit channels to express their discontent.
If I tape your mouth shut, should I really be surprised when you punch me to express discontent?
Yes, in a perfect world people have respect for private property, but in that same world these people have the right to protest for their views and be safe from government persecution.
Yes, they have no voice in the state-run media where they are most likely demonized all the time. I am not always in support of legitimate protest and favor action at times, and the frustration is understandable, but they are still shooting themselves in the foot by vandalizing the property.
If I may use a hyperbole, the frustration of the Palestinians is understandable, but whenever they commit an act of terrorism to protest Israel's abuse of power and use of terror, they harm themselves in public relations with Israel and the world and the response by the Israeli government is to respond with more terror.
Maybe they are, but that doesn't change their situation.
You can't expect every group to have a PR-guy on hand that will draft the perfect PR-plan for them. These people are poltically active and want to fight the power, but they can't do it through legitimate channels, so they will drift towards illegal ones.
I already said that I don't agree with destroying private property, but I understand where they come from when they are marginalized in every other way.
If you keep people down, they will struggle. You can argue that they don't struggle perfectly, but that is just focussing on the wrong issue.
The problem isn't that they aren't protesting perfectly, it is that they can only do it through illegal channels.
On August 27 2012 00:44 Lanfire wrote: I never said the members of Pussy Riot are directly responsible or should be convicted for cutting down these crosses, They give inspiration for other people for more of these actions, which was stated in the sources i gave.
Your very first post in the topic:
This really shows that the Pussy Riot "hooliganism" and their feminism movement was indeed a hate crime against religion
You say exactly that.
A third party cuts down these crosses, and you claim that this proves that their acts of "hooliganism" (the church performance) is thus a hate crime.
You take the actions of other people and pile them onto Pussy Riot. You make them directly responsible for what happened to these crosses by claiming that it should be taken into consideration when viewing their church performance, and that it says anything about the performance.
We are individuals, we are responsible for what we do. You argue that PR should be held responsible for the acts of others, it is ridiculous.
In Russia the monarchy was corrupt, they exploited the people mercilessly and severly punished any kind of dissension on the part of the people... then the Communists arrived and under Lenin and Stalin were just as bad or worse. There are productive ways to fight the system apart from violence and vandalism. When I see people who resort to these measures to so call "make a point" I know that if they were in power they would be JUST as bad as the people who currently sit in power. That's why Occupy failed, is because Occupy didn't feel that they should be accountable for articulating a coherent message for their movement. They say it's enough that people get pissed off. No, it's not enough. The impulse behind Pussy Riot, and anarchist/punk movements in general don't make society a better place. At best, they simply replace one evil for another. Punk is best for the creation of good art/music, but in terms of transforming society... no, just no.
On August 27 2012 00:23 dUTtrOACh wrote: Fans of this band should be careful. They may just be strengthening the case of hooliganism against PR. Vandalizing churches is a sure fire way to not get public support.
Agreed. Vandalizing Church property as a political protest will not be seen as a political protest, but rather a war against religion.
Sure, it might be viewed as such, but what can these people do?
You are looking at this from a western perspective, wondering why they can't just go and have a legitimate protest, but the problem is that they are increasingly losing legit channels to express their discontent.
If I tape your mouth shut, should I really be surprised when you punch me to express discontent?
Yes, in a perfect world people have respect for private property, but in that same world these people have the right to protest for their views and be safe from government persecution.
Yes, they have no voice in the state-run media where they are most likely demonized all the time. I am not always in support of legitimate protest and favor action at times, and the frustration is understandable, but they are still shooting themselves in the foot by vandalizing the property.
If I may use a hyperbole, the frustration of the Palestinians is understandable, but whenever they commit an act of terrorism to protest Israel's abuse of power and use of terror, they harm themselves in public relations with Israel and the world and the response by the Israeli government is to respond with more terror.
I totally agree with you though I'm not going to take a stance between Palestine and Israel's conflict, I must say that destroying public property would have the opposite effect that their fans or believers want to make.
To bring religion into conflict just makes their statement more complex and to destroy a holy signatures like crosses's it shows the respect for religion is diminishing. Though the band is not responsible for these acts, it show how much influence this band's ideology has over the youth.
I am actually a fan of Putin because he was the leader that moved Russia forward, like how Clinton did to US before his impeachment. I know a bunch of countries are against him but maybe Russia does need him.
I approve of the action and the Femen movement. Burn churches, chop crosses and spraypaint governmental facilities. Show them you won't take the injustice lying down.
Get your fucking hands off of old sites, though. If you vandalize old history, you'll destroy any support you have in me.
On August 27 2012 00:55 plated.rawr wrote: I approve of the action and the Femen movement. Burn churches, chop crosses and spraypaint governmental facilities. Show them you won't take the injustice lying down.
Get your fucking hands off of old sites, though. If you vandalize old history, you'll destroy any support you have in me.
So you can burn churches down...unless they're old?
I remember when the recent Russian elections were over, that Putin wasn't the face that I saw that had won. I forget the other guys name, but I clearly remember it not being Putin. Next day, turns out Putin won... Did this happen to anyone else?
In Russia the monarchy was corrupt, they exploited the people mercilessly and severly punished any kind of dissension on the part of the people... then the Communists arrived and under Lenin and Stalin were just as bad or worse. There are productive ways to fight the system apart from violence and vandalism. When I see people who resort to these measures to so call "make a point" I know that if they were in power they would be JUST as bad as the people who currently sit in power. That's why Occupy failed, is because Occupy didn't feel that they should be accountable for articulating a coherent message for their movement. They say it's enough that people get pissed off. No, it's not enough. The impulse behind Pussy Riot, and anarchist/punk movements in general don't make society a better place. At best, they simply replace one evil for another. Punk is best for the creation of good art/music, but in terms of transforming society... no, just no.
Well, I don't think the FEMEN or PR movements are really aiming for serious political control.
Punk has always been about kicking against established power, not aiming to overtake it. It can transform society to some degree, but I don't think you should lose any sleep over the fear that there will be a Punk-takeover of government.
On August 27 2012 00:19 Shiragaku wrote: I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
As for the other, I'll see if I can find the reddit post that had a ton of examples, but they were mostly Russian news stories too trivial to be translated. Consider it retracted if I can't find it. .
Well from what I saw, it just shows the priests are rich corrupt bastards. I am more curious about the Putin-Church connection.
The church backed Putin in his election. Not sure how that doesn't qualify as a connection.
I linked to it a few posts before. Orthodox ties to Putin are well known, and they aren't hitching their wagon to his because they think he looks so handsome in pictures. Qued pro quo.
Church needs Putin, not the opposite. Church sees him as a long-term investment, therefore they publicly voiced support during the election. Putin will flirt with the church, since it's extra votes from zealots plus majority of population technically is orthodox, but he is not commiting anywhere in a big way.
As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont do these actions themself they are not responsible?
On August 27 2012 00:55 plated.rawr wrote: I approve of the action and the Femen movement. Burn churches, chop crosses and spraypaint governmental facilities. Show them you won't take the injustice lying down.
Get your fucking hands off of old sites, though. If you vandalize old history, you'll destroy any support you have in me.
So you can burn churches down...unless they're old?
Correct. Old buildings are monuments of history. New buildings are easilly replaced.
I don't give two tosses about its religious symbolic value. I care about history.
I don't know the situation too well, but perhaps we shouldn't be too quick to assume this is part of a particularly organized protest. Some people just do things, and it shouldn't necessarily reflect on the whole protest.
On August 27 2012 00:19 Shiragaku wrote: I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
As for the other, I'll see if I can find the reddit post that had a ton of examples, but they were mostly Russian news stories too trivial to be translated. Consider it retracted if I can't find it. .
Well from what I saw, it just shows the priests are rich corrupt bastards. I am more curious about the Putin-Church connection.
The church backed Putin in his election. Not sure how that doesn't qualify as a connection.
I linked to it a few posts before. Orthodox ties to Putin are well known, and they aren't hitching their wagon to his because they think he looks so handsome in pictures. Qued pro quo.
Church needs Putin, not the opposite. Church sees him as a long-term investment, therefore they publicly voiced support during the election. Putin will flirt with the church, since it's extra votes from zealots plus majority of population technically is orthodox, but he is not commiting anywhere in a big way.
So what do you define as "commiting in a big way"?
On August 27 2012 00:19 Shiragaku wrote: I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
As for the other, I'll see if I can find the reddit post that had a ton of examples, but they were mostly Russian news stories too trivial to be translated. Consider it retracted if I can't find it. .
Well from what I saw, it just shows the priests are rich corrupt bastards. I am more curious about the Putin-Church connection.
Here's a nice article that summarizes the relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church and Putin:
TLDR: The vast majority of Church funding comes from the St. Andrew Foundation, a Russian nonprofit headed by Vladimir Yakunin, who, like Putin, is a veteran of the KGB First Chief Directorate (Foreign Intelligence). The money comes from Russian Railways, who Yakunin heads, and Gazprom which is a general piggy bank for the Russian government.
On August 27 2012 00:58 Lanfire wrote: As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont these actions themself they are not responsible?
I don't recall them directly calling on their followers to chop down crosses, nor recruiting people to make "new and similar" actions.
Perhaps you can provide a link that shows this? I'm sure everyone in this topic would like to see evidence for such explosive facts.
On August 27 2012 00:19 Shiragaku wrote: I trust your word, but can you give me a source? I tried Googling but what I am mostly getting is Fox News related stuff about PR
As for the other, I'll see if I can find the reddit post that had a ton of examples, but they were mostly Russian news stories too trivial to be translated. Consider it retracted if I can't find it. .
Well from what I saw, it just shows the priests are rich corrupt bastards. I am more curious about the Putin-Church connection.
The church backed Putin in his election. Not sure how that doesn't qualify as a connection.
I linked to it a few posts before. Orthodox ties to Putin are well known, and they aren't hitching their wagon to his because they think he looks so handsome in pictures. Qued pro quo.
Church needs Putin, not the opposite. Church sees him as a long-term investment, therefore they publicly voiced support during the election. Putin will flirt with the church, since it's extra votes from zealots plus majority of population technically is orthodox, but he is not commiting anywhere in a big way.
So what do you define as "commiting in a big way"?
Getting a cross tattoo on his forehead?
Maybe publicly admitting to being a christian? Going to church outside of major religious state events? I don't even think he ever mentioned believing in god.
On August 27 2012 00:58 Lanfire wrote: As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont these actions themself they are not responsible?
I don't recall them directly calling on their followers to chop down crosses, nor recruiting people to make "new and similar" actions.
Perhaps you can provide a link that shows this? I'm sure everyone in this topic would like to see evidence for such explosive facts.
"“In regard to the pursuit, two of our members have successfully fled the country! They are recruiting foreign feminists to prepare new actions!,” a Twitter account called Pussy Riot Group said."
On August 27 2012 00:58 Lanfire wrote: As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont these actions themself they are not responsible?
I don't recall them directly calling on their followers to chop down crosses, nor recruiting people to make "new and similar" actions.
Perhaps you can provide a link that shows this? I'm sure everyone in this topic would like to see evidence for such explosive facts.
"“In regard to the pursuit, two of our members have successfully fled the country! They are recruiting foreign feminists to prepare new actions!,” a Twitter account called Pussy Riot Group said."
if the chopping down crosses was part of the new actions cant say 100%, suspicious yes
Ooh, so now you think it is "suspecious" for them to try and garner support for their movement...
Suspecious political movements, always trying to get people to support them...
You want to file a police report to have the VVD and the PVDA arrested? Last week I saw them on TV, trying to gather followers, and I just walked through Leiden's shopping street and saw a VVD-supported political event, handing out leaflets and yelling party-slogans.
Straight to jail!
You seem awefully eager to accuse these women whilst nothing they did is outside the law. Just because you don't agree with a group doesn't mean you can claim they are responsible for actions they have no involvement in, or suggest that they are acting illegally whilst doing nothing illegal.
if the chopping down crosses was part of the new actions cant say 100%, suspicious yes
Ooh, and for this part, no, it isn't suspicious.
Just cause you made up a connection doesn't make it suspicious.
On August 27 2012 00:58 Lanfire wrote: As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont these actions themself they are not responsible?
I don't recall them directly calling on their followers to chop down crosses, nor recruiting people to make "new and similar" actions.
Perhaps you can provide a link that shows this? I'm sure everyone in this topic would like to see evidence for such explosive facts.
"“In regard to the pursuit, two of our members have successfully fled the country! They are recruiting foreign feminists to prepare new actions!,” a Twitter account called Pussy Riot Group said."
if the chopping down crosses was part of the new actions cant say 100%, suspicious yes
Ooh, so now you think it is "suspecious" for them to try and garner support for their movement...
Suspecious political movements, always trying to get people to support them...
You want to file a police report to have the VVD and the PVDA arrested? Last week I saw them on TV, trying to gather followers, and I just walked through Leiden's shopping street and saw a VVD-supported political event, handing out leaflets and yelling party-slogans.
Straight to jail!
You seem awefully eager to accuse these women whilst nothing they did is outside the law. Just because you don't agree with a group doesn't mean you can claim they are responsible for actions they have no involvement in, or suggest that they are acting illegally whilst doing nothing illegal.
Zalz, what do you think about my post on the link between Putin and the Church?
On August 27 2012 00:58 Lanfire wrote: As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont these actions themself they are not responsible?
I don't recall them directly calling on their followers to chop down crosses, nor recruiting people to make "new and similar" actions.
Perhaps you can provide a link that shows this? I'm sure everyone in this topic would like to see evidence for such explosive facts.
"“In regard to the pursuit, two of our members have successfully fled the country! They are recruiting foreign feminists to prepare new actions!,” a Twitter account called Pussy Riot Group said."
if the chopping down crosses was part of the new actions cant say 100%, suspicious yes
Ooh, so now you think it is "suspecious" for them to try and garner support for their movement...
Suspecious political movements, always trying to get people to support them...
You want to file a police report to have the VVD and the PVDA arrested? Last week I saw them on TV, trying to gather followers, and I just walked through Leiden's shopping street and saw a VVD-supported political event, handing out leaflets and yelling party-slogans.
Straight to jail!
You seem awefully eager to accuse these women whilst nothing they did is outside the law. Just because you don't agree with a group doesn't mean you can claim they are responsible for actions they have no involvement in, or suggest that they are acting illegally whilst doing nothing illegal.
Zalz, what do you think about my post on the link between Putin and the Church?
I think it is a good insight into the inner workings of the relationship between the Putin government and the Orthodox church, and I think everyone should read it, especially people that try to brush off the relationship that these two groups have.
WTF? they did nothing illegal how can they be arrested and trailed if they did nothing illegal? if your movement does illegal stuff and promote illegal activities to your members than yes im against that movement. As far as i know off VVD and PVDA doesnt promote illegal activities under their members
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
On August 27 2012 01:22 Lanfire wrote: WTF? they did nothing illegal how can they be arrested and trailed if they did nothing illegal? if your movement does illegal stuff and promote illegal activities to your members than yes im against that movement. As far as i know off VVD and PVDA doesnt promote illegal activities under their members
Leaving Russia, for now, is not illegal.
Trying to build up support for a movement, is not illegal.
Tell me what did these 2 girls of Pussy Riot that fled Russia do that was illegal? Other than your completely fabricated accusation that they ordered people to chop down private property.
Made-up crimes do not constitute illegal behaviour, and you only make a fool out of yourself by continueing your fanatical witch-hunt against crimes that you made up in the first place.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
Cynicism is on the rise.
People have trouble telling the difference between an intellectual comment and a cynical one, causing a race for the bottom where people act as if living in America and North-Korea is essentially the same.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
I didn't know that not believing in Christianity = Atheist. I also like how if someone who is an Atheist does a hate crime = all Atheists labeled by religious groups, but when you have groups like the Westboro Baptist Church, they don't count towards the other Christians.
On August 27 2012 00:55 plated.rawr wrote: I approve of the action and the Femen movement. Burn churches, chop crosses and spraypaint governmental facilities. Show them you won't take the injustice lying down.
Get your fucking hands off of old sites, though. If you vandalize old history, you'll destroy any support you have in me.
So you can burn churches down...unless they're old?
Correct. Old buildings are monuments of history. New buildings are easilly replaced.
I don't give two tosses about its religious symbolic value. I care about history.
Sorry, but I think that's a pretty dumb position to have.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
Cynicism is on the rise.
People have trouble telling the difference between an intellectual comment and a cynical one, causing a race for the bottom where people act as if living in America and North-Korea is essentially the same.
Well i supposed u have been in NK and in America otherwise you sound as cynical as you tell me to be, on a serious note i never said NK and America was the same. So yes cynicism is on the rise, and people who does not really know how to read too.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
I'd argue that having a false freedom of speech, being the most brainwashed people and having no values except private property as a very big sign of a shitty existence. I'd also say that every single one of those points isn't true. At least in my opinion.
Once again i never said or accused the two members for ordering people to cut down private property, Three Femen movement members are trialed for hooliganism in a church in Russia two of the members fled the country and announced new actions, ( remember the last action was illegal hence the trial and verdict). And its not me that made up the crime its the Russian law.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
Cynicism is on the rise.
People have trouble telling the difference between an intellectual comment and a cynical one, causing a race for the bottom where people act as if living in America and North-Korea is essentially the same.
Well i supposed u have been in NK and in America otherwise you sound as cynical as you tell me to be, on a serious note i never said NK and America was the same. So yes cynicism is on the rise, and people who does not really know how to read too.
Where did I say that you said that? I stated "people." If I had wanted to accuse you of saying that, I would have named you.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
I'd argue that having a false freedom of speech, being the most brainwashed people and having no values except private property as a very big sign of a shitty existence. I'd also say that every single one of those points isn't true. At least in my opinion.
Thats right, if you like living like that then what can I do? I am just stating what I think, thats all, you have your oppinion and I have mine.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
Cynicism is on the rise.
People have trouble telling the difference between an intellectual comment and a cynical one, causing a race for the bottom where people act as if living in America and North-Korea is essentially the same.
Well i supposed u have been in NK and in America otherwise you sound as cynical as you tell me to be, on a serious note i never said NK and America was the same. So yes cynicism is on the rise, and people who does not really know how to read too.
Where did I say that you said that? I stated "people." If I had wanted to accuse you of saying that, I would have named you.
Completely irrelevant to your post, but "greater evils rarely forgive lesser evils" is an amazing quote
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
Cynicism is on the rise.
People have trouble telling the difference between an intellectual comment and a cynical one, causing a race for the bottom where people act as if living in America and North-Korea is essentially the same.
Well i supposed u have been in NK and in America otherwise you sound as cynical as you tell me to be, on a serious note i never said NK and America was the same. So yes cynicism is on the rise, and people who does not really know how to read too.
Where did I say that you said that? I stated "people." If I had wanted to accuse you of saying that, I would have named you.
You are quoting a quote of mine, I though that was obvious... maybe my bad or just you not wanting to accept it.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
I'd argue that having a false freedom of speech, being the most brainwashed people and having no values except private property as a very big sign of a shitty existence. I'd also say that every single one of those points isn't true. At least in my opinion.
Thats right, if you like living like that then what can I do? I am just stating what I think, thats all, you have your oppinion and I have mine.
In a world with no freedom of speech, your original post wouldn't happen.
On August 27 2012 01:22 Lanfire wrote: WTF? they did nothing illegal how can they be arrested and trailed if they did nothing illegal? if your movement does illegal stuff and promote illegal activities to your members than yes im against that movement. As far as i know off VVD and PVDA doesnt promote illegal activities under their members
"If its illegal its bad!"
That logic will haunt you one day I hope you know that, one day you'll find out that laws don't always know whats right and wrong.
By the way, were you against the united states being formed or something? You know that was an entire rebellion that puts this pussy riots movement to utter shame right? Are you honestly saying that you follow the law to the dot and are against anyone that defies any law?
Reading your posts in this thread... I feel really bad for you honestly.
On August 27 2012 01:34 Lanfire wrote: Once again i never said or accused the two members for ordering people to cut down private property, Three Femen movement members are trialed for hooliganism in a church in Russia two of the members fled the country and announced new actions, ( remember the last action was illegal hence the trial and verdict). And its not me that made up the crime its the Russian law.
Second time you lose the red-line of the discussion. It is getting frustrating that I have to pull you back in line again.
I said this:
You seem awefully eager to accuse these women whilst nothing they did is outside the law.
This, given the context, cannot be mistaken for anyone other than the two women that fled, the women we were discussing.
You react:
WTF? they did nothing illegal how can they be arrested and trailed if they did nothing illegal? if your movement does illegal stuff and promote illegal activities to your members than yes im against that movement. As far as i know off VVD and PVDA doesnt promote illegal activities under their members
Suddenly reverting the discussion back to the three women in jail, whilst we were obviously discussing the two women abroad, who you were accusing of instigating these events, without evidence mind you.
You keep flipping back between the three in jail and the two abroad, entirely depending on which you find more suitable at the moment.
First you accused them of being responsible for the cross cutting.
I said that they can't be held responsible, because they were in jail so couldn't do it.
You clarify, stating that you mean the women that fled.
I say that they can't be held responsible because there is nothing illegal about gathering support.
You suddenly revert back to the three women in prison, saying that they did do something illegal, which has no relation to the two women abroad, who we were discussing.
I'm not sure whether your English is lacking, or whether you are intentionally distorting the debate, either way, I'm not going to let you get away with it.
Once again i never said or accused the two members for ordering people to cut down private property
This is what you said
As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont do these actions themself they are not responsible?
So yeah, you did say they were to be held responsible, going so far as to even call their involvement "suspicious," which is one grade below conspiracy people screaming "I'M JUST ASKING QUESTION!"
Ugh, all this effort just to keep you on track. This is beyond tiring. I shouldn't be held responsible for making sure you manage to stay on top of the ball.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
This. If you want to make a statement and change the way things are done you need friends not enemies. This is especially true in Russia. Riot not an anti-religious band? Show it by demonstrating your solidarity with others in and outside the church, not by making the people who already likely thought lowly of you even more angry.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
I'd argue that having a false freedom of speech, being the most brainwashed people and having no values except private property as a very big sign of a shitty existence. I'd also say that every single one of those points isn't true. At least in my opinion.
Thats right, if you like living like that then what can I do? I am just stating what I think, thats all, you have your oppinion and I have mine.
In a world with no freedom of speech, your original post wouldn't happen.
Why? is my post going to change anything? no it is not, the freedom of speech has been denied in form of murder in this system, only great men with great information is silenced, not a man in a forum being mr.captain obvious (me). I am a sheep as much as you are, It is just that I know I am a sheep. Edit: Wikileaks could be given as an example but I dont even know if thats true or just a bunch of bullshit that did not affect the USA in any way. Edit2: In the esential freedom of speech you get knocked when you say what you think in public (having some power) and get instant owned by the media, that did never happen... right?
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
I'd argue that having a false freedom of speech, being the most brainwashed people and having no values except private property as a very big sign of a shitty existence. I'd also say that every single one of those points isn't true. At least in my opinion.
Thats right, if you like living like that then what can I do? I am just stating what I think, thats all, you have your oppinion and I have mine.
In a world with no freedom of speech, your original post wouldn't happen.
Why? is my post going to change anything? no it is not, the freedom of speech has been denied in form of murder in this system, only great men with great information is silenced, not a man in a forum being mr.captain obvious (me). I am a sheep as much as you are, It is just that I know I am a sheep. Edit: Wikileaks could be given as an example but I dont even know if thats true or just a bunch of bullshit that did not affect the USA in any way.
The persecution of wikileaks is a crime against the freedom of speech. Afaik wikileaks is unique, and it only exists in the west. In any event, you did say you disagreed with me and I do respect that. The last I really want to say on this is really a comparison. Try comparing China's access to information and America's.
IF they ordered there members to cut down crosses than yes they are responsible. But being suspicous that they did order or not its not the same as accusation.
They are however part of an organisation that promotes illegal activtities so i do accuse the two that fled of promoting illegal activities under their members. If the cross cutting is part of that activitie i of course dont know.
This is indeed what i said;
As the head of a movement or organisation you are responsible of what your members do. The two un-arrested members are abroard recruiting new members for their movement for making new and simulair actions. But as long as they dont do these actions themself they are not responsible?
But i dont see where you read that they are responsible for the cross cutting. So dont say you clearly say that they are responsible when i say, That as the head of a movement you are responsible of what your members do that does not implicate that they did the cross cutting
On August 27 2012 01:56 Lanfire wrote: IF they ordered there members to cut down crosses than yes they are responsible. But being suspicous that they did order or not its not the same as accusation.
They are however part of an organisation that promotes illegal activtities so i do accuse the two that fled of promoting illegal activities under their members. If the cross cutting is part of that activitie i of course dont know.
You're just not getting it. Dude, you're going to wear Zalz fingers off from him trying to help you understand this.
Or maybe you do completely understand it and you're STILL just trying to justify your baseless hate against these people.
Sigh... people could really learn if they could learn to admit they're wrong in the first place...
On August 27 2012 00:04 zalz wrote: The destruction of private property is wrong.
The imprisonment of individuals for expressing their opinions on the church and politics is even worse, but greater evils rarely forgive lesser evils.
I can't say that I would take part in this kind of protests, but they are somewhat inevitable outbursts when you deny people the proper channels to protest.
Regardless, I like that the punk-movement seems to be getting its teeth back. Giving a bigger finger to the man is always fun to see, especially in a country like Russia that needs a good dose of sense beaten into it.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
I'd argue that having a false freedom of speech, being the most brainwashed people and having no values except private property as a very big sign of a shitty existence. I'd also say that every single one of those points isn't true. At least in my opinion.
Thats right, if you like living like that then what can I do? I am just stating what I think, thats all, you have your oppinion and I have mine.
In a world with no freedom of speech, your original post wouldn't happen.
Why? is my post going to change anything? no it is not, the freedom of speech has been denied in form of murder in this system, only great men with great information is silenced, not a man in a forum being mr.captain obvious (me). I am a sheep as much as you are, It is just that I know I am a sheep. Edit: Wikileaks could be given as an example but I dont even know if thats true or just a bunch of bullshit that did not affect the USA in any way.
The persecution of wikileaks is a crime against the freedom of speech. Afaik wikileaks is unique, and it only exists in the west. In any event, you did say you disagreed with me and I do respect that. The last I really want to say on this is really a comparison. Try comparing China's access to information and America's.
Having more information is important, but that does not mean you gonna have more freedom for having more information neither your people is going to be more educated, even more when it is useless information, anyways I am not defending the Chinise position on the internet censure becouse It is a shame.
The western is always talking about how much information we have and how usefull It is but the fact is that we are not more educated people than 15 or 20 years ago, when we did not even have 30% of that information to our disposition, an example on this can be found at the "education ranking" countrys like Cuba, Armenia, Barbados, Slovenia and 16 other countrys are higher ranked than the bench mark of the west (USA), what is the reason for such a country to have the best military by far a very strong political and economy power and not even top20 in the worlds educated countrys?
In my honest oppinon its hard to belive that this country has no mechanism to change that and give a better education.
I am going to stop posting this already if we feel to reply each other lets just talk on pm because this is offtopic already :S sorry to the OP.
Even if I'm not a true orthodox christian (more like having a neutral stance regarding religion, tho I was born and christened under orthodox religion ) I do not agree with such acts, defiling monuments no matter what they represent is an act of hooliganism. On the other hand we have the convicted Pussy Riots that criticized current Russian president, doesn't matter how or where, but they did it and got punished. I guess Russia is hundreds of years behind the rest of the world when speaking about democracy (speaking for myself, where I live, things aren't so beautiful , yet we do not throw in jail everyone that expresses their opinion against current power)
You're just not getting it. Dude, you're going to wear Zalz fingers off from him trying to help you understand this.
Or maybe you do completely understand it and you're STILL just trying to justify your baseless hate against these people.
Sigh... people could really learn if they could learn to admit they're wrong in the first place...
I dont hate PR i dont even know them and never heard any song of them, i just dont agree with their political ideas. And when there political ideas involves illegal activities like hooliganism in a church i think they should get punished just as the law describes. And thankfully they did get punished.
I really dont care if someones political few is to burn down churches but the difference between a few and actually doing it is something else for that matter.
On August 27 2012 00:38 arChieSC2 wrote: I hate everyone saying people oppresed this, in that type of countrys that, and most of the comments come from people from europe and america. We are the most brain washed people in the planet (well maybe nk..), we defend private property before life, we do nothing when our govenments join in wars we dont want them to go, we get constantly lied and when we realize that all we say is "well i dont really care, i knew that, or in other countrys that is worse" the fact is that the media and afine governments are just telling you how evil the rest of the world is and how good "our" system is. All in all "democraZy" i love you.
Why on earth do so many people believe the west is such a bad place to live in? It makes very little sense to me.
I am not saying it is a bad place to "live" if you stay where they want you to stay, I am saying we the people in the west accepting everything "we do for democracy" is false retarded and is facking up the world.
I'd argue that having a false freedom of speech, being the most brainwashed people and having no values except private property as a very big sign of a shitty existence. I'd also say that every single one of those points isn't true. At least in my opinion.
Thats right, if you like living like that then what can I do? I am just stating what I think, thats all, you have your oppinion and I have mine.
In a world with no freedom of speech, your original post wouldn't happen.
Why? is my post going to change anything? no it is not, the freedom of speech has been denied in form of murder in this system, only great men with great information is silenced, not a man in a forum being mr.captain obvious (me). I am a sheep as much as you are, It is just that I know I am a sheep. Edit: Wikileaks could be given as an example but I dont even know if thats true or just a bunch of bullshit that did not affect the USA in any way.
The persecution of wikileaks is a crime against the freedom of speech. Afaik wikileaks is unique, and it only exists in the west. In any event, you did say you disagreed with me and I do respect that. The last I really want to say on this is really a comparison. Try comparing China's access to information and America's.
Having more information is important, but that does not mean you gonna have more freedom for having more information neither your people is going to be more educated, even more when it is useless information, anyways I am not defending the Chinise position on the internet censure becouse It is a shame, the western is always talking about how much information we have and how usefull It is but the fact is that we are not more educated people than 15 or 20 years ago, when we did not even have 30% of that information to our disposition, an example on this can be found at the "education ranking" countrys like Cuba, Armenia, Barbados, Slovenia and 16 other countrys are higher ranked than the bench mark of the west (USA), what is the reason for such a country to have the best military by far a very strong political and economy power and not even top20 in the worlds educated countrys? In my honest oppinon its hard to belive that this country has no mechanism to change that and give a better education. I am going to stop posting this already if we feel to reply each other lets just talk on pm because this is offtopic already :S sorry to the OP.
I wouldn't feel too bad, the op is somehow posting from North Korea. That said coming from Australia the only thing that seems to be missing from society is good internet system :p. It's actually quite impressive that america is quite low on the list in education (relative to how powerful they are). But your right this is the last I'm going to post about this matter.
On August 27 2012 00:04 zalz wrote: The destruction of private property is wrong.
The imprisonment of individuals for expressing their opinions on the church and politics is even worse, but greater evils rarely forgive lesser evils.
I can't say that I would take part in this kind of protests, but they are somewhat inevitable outbursts when you deny people the proper channels to protest.
Regardless, I like that the punk-movement seems to be getting its teeth back. Giving a bigger finger to the man is always fun to see, especially in a country like Russia that needs a good dose of sense beaten into it.
Lanfire
This really shows that the Pussy Riot "hooliganism" and their feminism movement was indeed a hate crime against religion
No it doesn't.
Pussy Riot is in jail, so they cannot possibly have committed this act.
Or are you suggesting that the actions of others may be piled on them?
Hence why he said their movement?
The Pussy Riot hooliganism and their feminism movement.
And makes the distinction between the two, the word hooliganism is used to refer to going on stage.
But at this point it is obvious that he is either intentionally distrupting the discussion, or he has so entirely lost track that it will take a dozen posts just to make him understand where he went off the deep-end.
Either way, the discussion is dead, as so often the case on TL, a result of childish semantics.
Twice I had to point out where he tried to steer the discussion off the cliff. I'm not going to do it a third time, and he seems intent on steering it off the cliff. It isn't my job to baby sit both sides of the discussion.
Well, some people have decided to escalate things a bit. Wonder if the pressure will keep rising or if we'll see a drop down again. It really depends on how strict the government backlash against the hooligans is.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
Except for the fact that the Orthodox Church in Russia is extremely cozy with the Putin regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Putin and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the Orthodox Church there.
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the church there.
As much as I dislike religion, and their public expressions, and as much as I think that its evils should be fought, I do not approve of vanadalizing private property in this manner. Fortunately only a couple of relatively unimportant crosses have been destroyed, I hope this will not escalate.
Maybe some good can come of this if this sparks some debate about reform in Russia.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
Except for the fact that the Orthodox Church in Russia is extremely cozy with the Putin regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Putin and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the Orthodox Church there.
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the church there.
BREAKING: Four Google offices are vandalised after stating support for gays. Comments from the news piece reads: "Except for the fact that the lgbt movement in US is extremely cozy with the Obama regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Obama and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the lgbt movement there
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the gays there."
On August 27 2012 00:04 zalz wrote: The destruction of private property is wrong.
The imprisonment of individuals for expressing their opinions on the church and politics is even worse, but greater evils rarely forgive lesser evils.
I can't say that I would take part in this kind of protests, but they are somewhat inevitable outbursts when you deny people the proper channels to protest.
Regardless, I like that the punk-movement seems to be getting its teeth back. Giving a bigger finger to the man is always fun to see, especially in a country like Russia that needs a good dose of sense beaten into it.
Femen is a very misled movement making money off feminist activism(which in my opinion should be against capital, as consumerism is a tool used to maintain women in a certain way) but Pussy Riot needs to be free so the voices of the oppressed are heard. The riots must continue. And there is no such thing as a legitimate protest or a unlegitimate protest just because they've wrecked some shit, suffering has gone unnoticed too long for some people and they will wreck shit until they are heard.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
Except for the fact that the Orthodox Church in Russia is extremely cozy with the Putin regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Putin and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the Orthodox Church there.
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the church there.
BREAKING: Four Google offices are vandalised after stating support for gays. Comments from the news piece reads: "Except for the fact that the lgbt movement in US is extremely cozy with the Obama regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Obama and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the lgbt movement there
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the gays there."
This makes no sense whatsoever. I can guarantee you this: the kind of activism from Pussy Riot would never support an economical neoliberalist like Obama.
Religion shouldn't exist The only religion that should exist is Buddhism because it is (one of) the only religion(s) where you actually work to promote happiness & prosperity. Religions like Christianity just try to create a model society by shunning away people they consider to be unfit for said model society. I don't understand how Christians don't realize by now that they are straying further and further every day from what 'God' supposedly would want. Religion just spreads hatred. It doesn't ultimately spread peace, happiness, or well-being. As someone who was born Christian, I gave up my religion after seeing the abomination that Christianity has become today. I don't understand how Christians spread god's word by ostracizing homosexuals, shitting on other religions, protecting priests from prosecution after molesting boys, and a bunch of other retarded shit.
Also, the shit Christians say... I could write a book on it...
trustfund kids feel obligated to change the world through futile means. i'll admit that they shouldn't be jailed for 2 years, but the idea that you are going to protest in russia... it's not a good one. nor a particularly effective one throughout history, assuming your goal is to not be shot without justification.
the problem with things like this is that powerless people feel obligated to act before they can formulate an effective response to injustice. they then try to milk public sympathy to make up for their poor foresight.
i have no doubt a perticular group of angsty teenagers will try to make this into a holy war, when it is not. some kids ran into a church and started acting like kids... the reaction was overblown... in russia...
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
On August 27 2012 03:21 gnatinator wrote: I think we need to remember that it's 4 crosses. Inanimate objects. Nobody was hurt.
Lets not throw away our sensibilities in the name of religion and turn into islamist-style extremists.
I think ew need to remember that it's just a one day ban on Jewish stores, not even on all of them, nobody was hurt.
The fact that no one got hurt, doesn't mean that it won't escelate.
Please get out with this "argument". Did you really just pull a Nazi Germany on 4 crosses being chopped down? "God, one day, people in Russia will want a more free society, and before you know it we will be gassing Jews." Honestly, its one big slippery slope argument got there, 4 crosses being vandalised will not result in Christians being lined up in the streets and shot.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
In Soviet Russia, Putin has more power than God.
even I have more power than "God"
Speaking of semantics derailing threads, what a ridiculous statement. Whether or not "God" exists, a debate that is irrelevant to the topic at hand, it's undeniable how much power the idea holds. In fact, one of the main points of antitheism is the irrational delegation of authority that religion allows for.
Regarding the original topic, vandalising crosses is not only exercising censorship but also constitutes hate crime.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
In Soviet Russia, Putin has more power than God.
even I have more power than "God"
Regarding the original topic, vandalising crosses is not only exercising censorship but also constitutes hate crime.
I don't understand how the government can consider destruction of a Cross a hate crime, but consider stripping the equality from homosexuals to not be a hate crime. Granted, it's not a 'physical crime', but it's a crime against basic human rights.
The only reason homosexuals aren't allowed to marry is because the government, which apparently exists in a 'separation between church and state' believes that same-sex marriage is a debacle in the eyes of 'God'
On August 27 2012 00:01 Lanfire wrote: This really shows that the Pussy Riot "hooliganism" and their feminism movement was indeed a hate crime against religion
Religion is an instrument of state power in modern Russia. With that in mind I don't think it shows any such thing.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
In Soviet Russia, Putin has more power than God.
even I have more power than "God"
Regarding the original topic, vandalising crosses is not only exercising censorship but also constitutes hate crime.
I don't understand how the government can consider destruction of a Cross a hate crime, but consider stripping the equality from homosexuals to not be a hate crime. Granted, it's not a 'physical crime', but it's a crime against basic human rights.
The only reason homosexuals aren't allowed to marry is because the government, which apparently exists in a 'separation between church and state' believes that same-sex marriage is a debacle in the eyes of 'God'
we're talking about Russia here, right? it's hardly a "separation between church and state".
Pussy Riot is in jail, so they cannot possibly have committed this act.
Or are you suggesting that the actions of others may be piled on them?
Two members of the controversial band Pussy Riot who are wanted by the authorities over their notorious “Punk Prayer” stunt have managed to slip from Russia and are planning to recruit more feminists for their future performances.
looking for recruits for art performances, must have own axe.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
Except for the fact that the Orthodox Church in Russia is extremely cozy with the Putin regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Putin and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the Orthodox Church there.
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the church there.
BREAKING: Four Google offices are vandalised after stating support for gays. Comments from the news piece reads: "Except for the fact that the lgbt movement in US is extremely cozy with the Obama regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Obama and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the lgbt movement there
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the gays there."
haha, nice try.
A few differences:
*The "Obama regime" isn't an autocratic government that locks up (or assassinates) everyone who speaks out against them. *The LGBT communities are hardly a pillar of legitimacy for Obama's government in the US. If you wanted to stand up to Obama for... something, then conflicts with the LGBT communities aren't something you should be overly concerned with.
On August 27 2012 00:01 Lanfire wrote: This really shows that the Pussy Riot "hooliganism" and their feminism movement was indeed a hate crime against religion
Religion is an instrument of state power in modern Russia. With that in mind I don't think it shows any such thing.
Actually I don't think it's wrong to hate such a thing.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
In Soviet Russia, Putin has more power than God.
even I have more power than "God"
Alright, how many people can you get to die in your name? Assuming god doesn't even do anything tangible, or even doesn't exist, he still has billions of followers who have more power than you. Arrogant much?
Freedom of Speech/Religion/Opinion isn't as strong in Russia as the US. Makes me glad to be an American where I don't have to deal with that type of hatred.
Sure US has it's own Anti Religion/FreeSpeach/Opinion groups- but never at the magnatude of what the OP was talking about.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
It is a shame that these crimes happen... I hope they find the people committing this crime.
On August 27 2012 00:01 Lanfire wrote: This really shows that the Pussy Riot "hooliganism" and their feminism movement was indeed a hate crime against religion
Ehh.. not exactly. It more or less shows that there are people stupid enough to think that this is a proper way to protest.
On August 27 2012 04:45 Taesica wrote: Religion shouldn't exist The only religion that should exist is Buddhism because it is (one of) the only religion(s) where you actually work to promote happiness & prosperity. Religions like Christianity just try to create a model society by shunning away people they consider to be unfit for said model society. I don't understand how Christians don't realize by now that they are straying further and further every day from what 'God' supposedly would want. Religion just spreads hatred. It doesn't ultimately spread peace, happiness, or well-being. As someone who was born Christian, I gave up my religion after seeing the abomination that Christianity has become today. I don't understand how Christians spread god's word by ostracizing homosexuals, shitting on other religions, protecting priests from prosecution after molesting boys, and a bunch of other retarded shit.
Also, the shit Christians say... I could write a book on it...
Sorry, but religion does exist. (It is going to exist forever btw...) And your post reeks of bias. I think your argument about the purpose of religions is flawed. I am sure that Buddhism has caused violence before (however, this doesn't mean it is a violent religion). I just googled it and found this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/buddhism/buddhistethics/war.shtml
Buddhism and violence
But Buddhism, like the other great faiths, has not always lived up to its principles - there are numerous examples of Buddhists engaging in violence and even war.
in the 14th century Buddhist fighters led the uprising that evicted the Mongols from China in Japan, Buddhist monks trained Samurai warriors in meditation that made them better fighters
In following your line of reasoning, Buddhism should not exist either.
I also think your analysis of Christianity is a bit lacking as well in two different ways that I feel like pointing out. First, in my opinion the teachings of Jesus are quite pacifistic. Those teachings are what most of the Christian churches today follow (although some don't). Second, religion does not always spread hatred. There is a lot of good done by religion. I know that where I live religious people help at soup kitchens, donate money to clothe people during winter, build houses for the homeless, etc. Would you consider that always spreading hate? I just think your post is a bit hateful... towards Christians... (perhaps you should blame your Christian upbringing)
Edit:
On August 27 2012 08:24 SayGen wrote: Freedom of Speech/Religion/Opinion isn't as strong in Russia as the US. Makes me glad to be an American where I don't have to deal with that type of hatred.
Sure US has it's own Anti Religion/FreeSpeach/Opinion groups- but never at the magnatude of what the OP was talking about.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
Suppose that I love something (or someone ) so much that it causes me to commit an act of intolerance...
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
The real thing here that people don't seem to understand is that the original purpose of the separation of Church and State was not to protect the State, but to protect the Church.
Whenever spiritual authority ends up being combined with temporal authority, you end up corrupting the original visions of both...
Kind of sad really. I was under the impression that a representative of the Orthodox church said that they forgave Pussy Riot. So why vent frustration against them for something the government did, conspiracy theories aside?
Personally I'd blame angsty teens as I would hope that any other group would be smart enough to realize that these actions go against their cause.
On August 27 2012 08:45 Shady Sands wrote: The real thing here that people don't seem to understand is that the original purpose of the separation of Church and State was not to protect the State, but to protect the Church.
Whenever spiritual authority ends up being combined with temporal authority, you end up corrupting the original visions of both...
I agree, but we are talking about Russia here. Although I think their constitution states this separation, I doubt it will be enforced...
On August 27 2012 08:24 SayGen wrote: Freedom of Speech/Religion/Opinion isn't as strong in Russia as the US. Makes me glad to be an American where I don't have to deal with that type of hatred.
Sure US has it's own Anti Religion/FreeSpeach/Opinion groups- but never at the magnatude of what the OP was talking about.
Tolerance is all too often a 1 way street.
Really? Some Muslim US citizens might disagree with you.
This isn't a thread where we pretend like US is a multicultural utopia.
The Bible never says HATE gay people, it says don't be gay. People who make life shitty for gays in the name of God arn't one of his followers.
Don't blame Christains for things that Christains don't believe.
Anyone can claim the name of God/Christ.
Remember last year when a bunch of Liberals went to a Tea PArty rally and acted like a bunch of KKK supporting idiots to make the Tea Party look Racist? Same thing.
On August 27 2012 08:24 SayGen wrote: Freedom of Speech/Religion/Opinion isn't as strong in Russia as the US. Makes me glad to be an American where I don't have to deal with that type of hatred.
Sure US has it's own Anti Religion/FreeSpeach/Opinion groups- but never at the magnatude of what the OP was talking about.
Tolerance is all too often a 1 way street.
Really? Some Muslim US citizens might disagree with you.
This isn't a thread where we pretend like US is a multicultural utopia.
Sigh lets try this again.
Freedom of Speech/Religion/Opinion isn't as strong in Russia as the US. Makes me glad to be an American where I don't have to deal with that type of hatred.
Sure US has it's own Anti Religion/FreeSpeach/Opinion groups- but never at the magnatude of what the OP was talking about.
On August 27 2012 00:12 Shiragaku wrote: Wow...their priorities are not straight. It is Putin, not Christianity that they should be after. Pussy Riot protested in a church, but it was not the Church that ruined the election.
And regardless of what you may think of religion in general, this will definitely rally Christians in Russia against atheists.
Except for the fact that the Orthodox Church in Russia is extremely cozy with the Putin regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Putin and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the Orthodox Church there.
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the church there.
BREAKING: Four Google offices are vandalised after stating support for gays. Comments from the news piece reads: "Except for the fact that the lgbt movement in US is extremely cozy with the Obama regime, and validates it. If you're gonna oppose Obama and his government, you're sooner or later going to have to run into the lgbt movement there
While the means are questionable, I definitely approve of the underlying intention of communicating people's dissatisfaction with the gays there."
haha, nice try.
A few differences:
*The "Obama regime" isn't an autocratic government that locks up (or assassinates) everyone who speaks out against them. *The LGBT communities are hardly a pillar of legitimacy for Obama's government in the US. If you wanted to stand up to Obama for... something, then conflicts with the LGBT communities aren't something you should be overly concerned with.
Your analogy is nothing more than dumb ridicule.
" locks up (or assassinates) everyone who speaks out against "
There is a lot wrong with that statement, I do believe you have no idea what you're talking about ^^ The only difference is that they usually add a different tag which then gives them cause to lock up etc. There is a reason Assange is shitting his pants about extradition.
On August 27 2012 08:50 SayGen wrote: The Bible never says HATE gay people, it says don't be gay. People who make life shitty for gays in the name of God arn't one of his followers.
Don't blame Christains for things that Christains don't believe.
Anyone can claim the name of God/Christ.
Remember last year when a bunch of Liberals went to a Tea PArty rally and acted like a bunch of KKK supporting idiots to make the Tea Party look Racist? Same thing.
Don't blame Christ for the way gays are treated.
Whom is it we shouldn't blame? Christians or Christ? The two clearly have very little in common.
On August 27 2012 08:24 SayGen wrote: Freedom of Speech/Religion/Opinion isn't as strong in Russia as the US. Makes me glad to be an American where I don't have to deal with that type of hatred.
Sure US has it's own Anti Religion/FreeSpeach/Opinion groups- but never at the magnatude of what the OP was talking about.
Tolerance is all too often a 1 way street.
Really? Some Muslim US citizens might disagree with you.
This isn't a thread where we pretend like US is a multicultural utopia.
Sigh lets try this again.
Freedom of Speech/Religion/Opinion isn't as strong in Russia as the US. Makes me glad to be an American where I don't have to deal with that type of hatred.
Sure US has it's own Anti Religion/FreeSpeach/Opinion groups- but never at the magnatude of what the OP was talking about.
Tolerance is all too often a 1 way street.
Never at the magnitude of what the OP was talking about? You mean 4 crosses getting chopped down? No, there are plenty of examples of far more severe cases of hate crime in the USA. Don't bring up such poor comparisons, we are talking about Russia's problems, not USA's apparent lack of.
On August 27 2012 08:50 SayGen wrote: The Bible never says HATE gay people, it says don't be gay. People who make life shitty for gays in the name of God arn't one of his followers.
Don't blame Christains for things that Christains don't believe.
Anyone can claim the name of God/Christ.
Remember last year when a bunch of Liberals went to a Tea PArty rally and acted like a bunch of KKK supporting idiots to make the Tea Party look Racist? Same thing.
Don't blame Christ for the way gays are treated.
Whom is it we shouldn't blame? Christians or Christ? The two clearly have very little in common.
Either really, from what I can tell this has almost nothing to do with the church, it just happened to take place inside of one. This isnt about what was being protested, it's about the extreme punishment for what should of really been a misdemeanor.
Again, I don't see why people are mad at the church, it's the government that should be being protested against
On August 27 2012 08:50 SayGen wrote: The Bible never says HATE gay people, it says don't be gay. People who make life shitty for gays in the name of God arn't one of his followers.
Don't blame Christains for things that Christains don't believe.
Anyone can claim the name of God/Christ.
Remember last year when a bunch of Liberals went to a Tea PArty rally and acted like a bunch of KKK supporting idiots to make the Tea Party look Racist? Same thing.
Don't blame Christ for the way gays are treated.
Whom is it we shouldn't blame? Christians or Christ? The two clearly have very little in common.
Show me one group of people (religious or not) who act in full accordince with the vlaues of their proclaimed leader?
Muslims don't act like Muhammad instructed. Jews don't act in accordance with the Old Testament law (Torrah) Christains, Liberals, Conservatives, INSERT ANY GROUP HERE.
On August 27 2012 08:50 SayGen wrote: The Bible never says HATE gay people, it says don't be gay. People who make life shitty for gays in the name of God arn't one of his followers.
Don't blame Christains for things that Christains don't believe.
Anyone can claim the name of God/Christ.
Remember last year when a bunch of Liberals went to a Tea PArty rally and acted like a bunch of KKK supporting idiots to make the Tea Party look Racist? Same thing.
Don't blame Christ for the way gays are treated.
Whom is it we shouldn't blame? Christians or Christ? The two clearly have very little in common.
Show me one group of people (religious or not) who act in full accordince with the vlaues of their proclaimed leader?
Muslims don't act like Muhammad instructed. Jews don't act in accordance with the Old Testament law (Torrah) Christains, Liberals, Conservatives, INSERT ANY GROUP HERE.
I think his entire point was that religious people don't act like the "savior" they so wish to be like at all, most are extremely off the "love everyone" teachings. He wasn't specifically targeting christian's but all of religion (this story is specifically about Christians though so it fit)
On August 27 2012 08:50 SayGen wrote: The Bible never says HATE gay people, it says don't be gay. People who make life shitty for gays in the name of God arn't one of his followers.
Don't blame Christains for things that Christains don't believe.
Anyone can claim the name of God/Christ.
Remember last year when a bunch of Liberals went to a Tea PArty rally and acted like a bunch of KKK supporting idiots to make the Tea Party look Racist? Same thing.
Don't blame Christ for the way gays are treated.
Whom is it we shouldn't blame? Christians or Christ? The two clearly have very little in common.
Show me one group of people (religious or not) who act in full accordince with the vlaues of their proclaimed leader?
Muslims don't act like Muhammad instructed. Jews don't act in accordance with the Old Testament law (Torrah) Christains, Liberals, Conservatives, INSERT ANY GROUP HERE.
There's a difference between not acting in full accordance and acting largely in opposition, though. Besides, the major Christian churches are all very different from the original cult of Christ in the first place, so even if Christians were better about adhering to their own dogma, it is still a dogma that is derived from, but very different from, the teachings of Christ.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
On August 27 2012 08:50 SayGen wrote: The Bible never says HATE gay people, it says don't be gay. People who make life shitty for gays in the name of God arn't one of his followers.
Don't blame Christains for things that Christains don't believe.
Anyone can claim the name of God/Christ.
Remember last year when a bunch of Liberals went to a Tea PArty rally and acted like a bunch of KKK supporting idiots to make the Tea Party look Racist? Same thing.
Don't blame Christ for the way gays are treated.
Whom is it we shouldn't blame? Christians or Christ? The two clearly have very little in common.
Show me one group of people (religious or not) who act in full accordince with the vlaues of their proclaimed leader?
Muslims don't act like Muhammad instructed. Jews don't act in accordance with the Old Testament law (Torrah) Christains, Liberals, Conservatives, INSERT ANY GROUP HERE.
There's a difference between not acting in full accordance and acting largely in opposition, though. Besides, the major Christian churches are all very different from the original cult of Christ in the first place, so even if Christians were better about adhering to their own dogma, it is still a dogma that is derived from, but very different from, the teachings of Christ.
I'm not sure what your saying, can you reword it and add a few nouns; opposition to what? Which Christian churches? There is only one. Antioch was the 1st place Christains came into being.
22 Then news of these things came to the ears of the church in Jerusalem, and they sent out Barnabas to go as far as Antioch. 23 When he came and had seen the grace of God, he was glad, and encouraged them all that with purpose of heart they should continue with the Lord. 24 For he was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith. And a great many people were added to the Lord.
25 Then Barnabas departed for Tarsus to seek Saul. 26 And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for a whole year they assembled with the church and taught a great many people. And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
Sin is sin. Only man puts value on sin. What is a 'worse' sin. The Bible only mention a few sins that stand out.
So yes your right, Non Christians do have alot of incorrect perseptions on the religion.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
Sin is sin. Only man puts value on sin. What is a 'worse' sin. The Bible only mention a few sins that stand out.
So yes your right, Non Christians do have alot of incorrect perseptions on the religion.
I think we are saying the same thing
It is ironic that religion even mentions homosexuality as a bad thing seeing as when Christ was around, Rome was rampid with homosexuality... It was completely normal to be bisexual, gay, straight and no one saw an issue with it. It is rather ironic how religion can really turn around progress. (best episode of family guy is the one where they go to the year 2000 if religion never existed and people are on space ships and shit flying around like Star Wars ^^)
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
Sin is sin. Only man puts value on sin. What is a 'worse' sin. The Bible only mention a few sins that stand out.
So yes your right, Non Christians do have alot of incorrect perseptions on the religion.
I think we are saying the same thing
It is ironic that religion even mentions homosexuality as a bad thing seeing as when Christ was around, Rome was rampid with homosexuality... It was completely normal to be bisexual, gay, straight and no one saw an issue with it. It is rather ironic how religion can really turn around progress. (best episode of family guy is the one where they go to the year 2000 if religion never existed and people are on space ships and shit flying around like Star Wars ^^)
Well, for one, I understand that the Jewish community would want to distance themselves from practices embraced by their successive oppressors (even though the law is older than that). Secondly, Roman and Greek cultures may have had some homosexual tendencies, but with two important caveats :
1) It was reserved for men. Similar attitudes with women were dealt with harshly, due to the fact that
2) Both societies were intensely misogynistic, which puts a dent in their image of sexual tolerance.
Thirdly, people need to grow out of the idea that the Middle Ages were some kind of dark age, where religion was rampant and technologic advances grinded to a halt. Monastic schools were centers of learning since the sixth century and were the direct ancestors of universities.
On the topic at hand, I personally condemn actions of retaliation against religious communities for the actions of others. It's essentially vandalism, rendered easier by the fact that the targets often can't fight back.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
Sin is sin. Only man puts value on sin. What is a 'worse' sin. The Bible only mention a few sins that stand out.
So yes your right, Non Christians do have alot of incorrect perseptions on the religion.
I think we are saying the same thing
It is ironic that religion even mentions homosexuality as a bad thing seeing as when Christ was around, Rome was rampid with homosexuality... It was completely normal to be bisexual, gay, straight and no one saw an issue with it. It is rather ironic how religion can really turn around progress. (best episode of family guy is the one where they go to the year 2000 if religion never existed and people are on space ships and shit flying around like Star Wars ^^)
Well, for one, I understand that the Jewish community would want to distance themselves from practices embraced by their successive oppressors (even though the law is older than that). Secondly, Roman and Greek cultures may have had some homosexual tendencies, but with two important caveats :
1) It was reserved for men. Similar attitudes with women were dealt with harshly, due to the fact that
2) Both societies were intensely misogynistic, which puts a dent in their image of sexual tolerance.
Thirdly, people need to grow out of the idea that the Middle Ages were some kind of dark age, where religion was rampant and technologic advances grinded to a halt. Monastic schools were centers of learning since the sixth century and were the direct ancestors of universities.
One of the most brilliant people on earth disagrees with that statement.
On August 27 2012 08:30 Jockmcplop wrote: And after the church acted with such forgiveness in accordance with Jesus' teachings with regards to Pussy Riot.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
Sin is sin. Only man puts value on sin. What is a 'worse' sin. The Bible only mention a few sins that stand out.
So yes your right, Non Christians do have alot of incorrect perseptions on the religion.
I think we are saying the same thing
It is ironic that religion even mentions homosexuality as a bad thing seeing as when Christ was around, Rome was rampid with homosexuality... It was completely normal to be bisexual, gay, straight and no one saw an issue with it. It is rather ironic how religion can really turn around progress. (best episode of family guy is the one where they go to the year 2000 if religion never existed and people are on space ships and shit flying around like Star Wars ^^)
The old law was Pre Rome. Rome was founded between 753 BC and 728 BC. Please get your facts straight before spewing mindless intolerantism.
What you consider progress isn't the same as me I suppose.
The fact your referenceing a trashy TV show whos idea of comedy is people puking and a fat man fighting a guy in a chicken suit speaks volumes to me.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
Sin is sin. Only man puts value on sin. What is a 'worse' sin. The Bible only mention a few sins that stand out.
So yes your right, Non Christians do have alot of incorrect perseptions on the religion.
I think we are saying the same thing
It is ironic that religion even mentions homosexuality as a bad thing seeing as when Christ was around, Rome was rampid with homosexuality... It was completely normal to be bisexual, gay, straight and no one saw an issue with it. It is rather ironic how religion can really turn around progress. (best episode of family guy is the one where they go to the year 2000 if religion never existed and people are on space ships and shit flying around like Star Wars ^^)
Well, for one, I understand that the Jewish community would want to distance themselves from practices embraced by their successive oppressors (even though the law is older than that). Secondly, Roman and Greek cultures may have had some homosexual tendencies, but with two important caveats :
1) It was reserved for men. Similar attitudes with women were dealt with harshly, due to the fact that
2) Both societies were intensely misogynistic, which puts a dent in their image of sexual tolerance.
Thirdly, people need to grow out of the idea that the Middle Ages were some kind of dark age, where religion was rampant and technologic advances grinded to a halt. Monastic schools were centers of learning since the sixth century and were the direct ancestors of universities.
One of the most brilliant people on earth disagrees with that statement.
Your criteria of Brilliant may be lacking.... Also there is counter evidence to what he is saying. He is more of a politican pampering to his audience imho.
Religion is a pro science force much more often than it was ever anti science. We only want to remember when the Church was oppressive. We only teach our children the times when the Church was bad. Religion and science go together, we only choose to try and make them contrast.
Violence hate will always trumph love and forgiveness.
A man holds a gun to your head and is about to pull the trigger. You can try to love and forgive him all you want but at the end of the day your going to die.
The Bible talks just as much about disipline as it does love. The Bible never taught alot of tolerance, that's modern religion.
How is love not tolerant?
It's limited to the people you're not supposed to hate (for being gay for instance).
You wont find a single reference in the new testament about hating gays. Gays are hardly even mentioned throughout the bible as a whole, really. Nor are there any modern day churches that teach that. You basically just pulled it out of your ass.
There is no such thing as a love that physically beats you into submission. Christianity inherently calls for tolerance [not acceptance], and fortunately most Christians now act in accordance to their own teachings.
While I agree with your premesis and conclusion the one statement you made was wrong. The bible tlaks in-depth about homosexuality. Here's a few:
The bible says Homosexuality is wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6 –10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
IIRC Cornithians and timothy both actually say something closer to "fornicators" than homosexuals, though modern translations use homosexual in order to make explicit that it is morally impermissible [due to liberal Christianity etc]. Explicitly you only have about two verses against homosexuality, and then a few which are implied. Which isnt too much. Non Christians always have this perspective that the bible rails on and on against homosexuality wherein in reality its mentioned just as any other sin, not given any particularly great focus, thats all I meant.
Sin is sin. Only man puts value on sin. What is a 'worse' sin. The Bible only mention a few sins that stand out.
So yes your right, Non Christians do have alot of incorrect perseptions on the religion.
I think we are saying the same thing
It is ironic that religion even mentions homosexuality as a bad thing seeing as when Christ was around, Rome was rampid with homosexuality... It was completely normal to be bisexual, gay, straight and no one saw an issue with it. It is rather ironic how religion can really turn around progress. (best episode of family guy is the one where they go to the year 2000 if religion never existed and people are on space ships and shit flying around like Star Wars ^^)
Well, for one, I understand that the Jewish community would want to distance themselves from practices embraced by their successive oppressors (even though the law is older than that). Secondly, Roman and Greek cultures may have had some homosexual tendencies, but with two important caveats :
1) It was reserved for men. Similar attitudes with women were dealt with harshly, due to the fact that
2) Both societies were intensely misogynistic, which puts a dent in their image of sexual tolerance.
Thirdly, people need to grow out of the idea that the Middle Ages were some kind of dark age, where religion was rampant and technologic advances grinded to a halt. Monastic schools were centers of learning since the sixth century and were the direct ancestors of universities.
EPT![[image loading]](https://rt.com/files/news/cross-arkhangelsk-564/ie07d749d9d68eb0ede1a2c96247660a6_cross-arkhangelsk1.jpg)
–10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11
