Your donations pay for the CIH Forum hosting and software.
Please help the CIH Forums by disabling AdBlock Plus on this page.
Forum Home Forum Home :: The Message Board :: Television Related Rants
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - TV Station refuses to air pro same-sex marraige ad
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

TV Station refuses to air pro same-sex marraige ad

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 56461
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 4:07am
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

^  Same with secularism and science.  As I mentioned, science justified the "inferiority" of the black race long after Christianity was abandoning it.  And don't forget how, at its root, Planned Parenthood was about eugenics.

Just without the massive amount of hypocrisy involved.

Secularists & scientists might have followed some misguided theories back in older, simpler, less sophisticated times, but they weren't doing so while telling the rest of us that God, the creator of the universe, favored them over everybody else because their belief system & morals were superior to all other humans & religions.

When a group of people behaves in such a self-righteous, morally superior manner, they are just setting themselves for an extra helping of scorn & derision when they step off the narrow line they've drawn for themselves.

It's a normal & to be expected reaction. People hate moral & religious hypocrisy worse than any other kind.



I was just saying that, when it came to slavery, much of Christianity was opposed to it many years before science was.  The science at the time supported the inferiority of the black race, while Christians believed they were humans, and therefore equal to the other races in God's eyes.

Granted, this wasn't based on fact, but once again, I was just refuting Papa L's comment that abolition was frowned upon by Christianity.  In reality, it was Christianity that pushed for the end of slavery.

And believe me, the secular world has its own brand of hypocrisy.  Al Gore---preaching environmentalism, but sporting his own huge carbon footprint.





Back to Top
Sponsored Links



Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 56461
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 4:12am
Originally posted by Papa Lazarou Papa Lazarou wrote:

The difference is that science admits when its wrong and alters its views with new information (Well, black people look more ape-ish than white men, so they must be inferior...oops, wait, we're all genetically identical minus about 0.00000008% of our DNA, guess we were wrong, there.)

Whereas the religions, on average, only change their mind when it means losing followers.



So, what you're saying is that one can't really trust science at any given moment to be correct.  Today's scientific fact could be tomorrow's science fiction.  Doesn't this make belief in scientific facts, somewhat faith-based?


Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 45582
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 4:38am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

I was just saying that, when it came to slavery, much of Christianity was opposed to it many years before science was. The science at the time supported the inferiority of the black race, while Christians believed they were humans, and therefore equal to the other races in God's eyes.

Granted, this wasn't based on fact, but once again, I was just refuting Papa L's comment that abolition was frowned upon by Christianity. In reality, it was Christianity that pushed for the end of slavery.

And believe me, the secular world has its own brand of hypocrisy. Al Gore---preaching environmentalism, but sporting his own huge carbon footprint.


Yes Thor, we realize that all avowed right-wingers are duty bound to denigrate science & environmentalism while waving the flag for Christians, etc, etc, etc.

Nothing new here.

But as for what science was supporting & Christianity was pushing for, your statements about it were made with the standard broad brush that conveniently paints over the details you all find it more advantageous to cover up rather than look at.

What you are calling "science" back in those days, barely qualified as such if at all, and if Christianity was pushing for the end of slavery, it was only the most LIBERAL of them who were doing so, while the CONSERVATIVE of the faith, which was most of it, was squarely behind keeping slavery alive & going.

Any attempt to drag science down to the level of religion relies solely upon using examples from the ancient past. Science has evolved & used what it has learned to increase it's knowledge & keep moving itself & the world forward. Christianity resists change & knowledge, seeking to cling to the past. When you attempt to compare the two in terms of the world we live in today, there is no comparison.

Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 45582
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 4:45am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

So, what you're saying is that one can't really trust science at any given moment to be correct.  Today's scientific fact could be tomorrow's science fiction.  Doesn't this make belief in scientific facts, somewhat faith-based?


Bash science, bash science, bash science, bash science, bash science....

The right just hates science, doesn't it?

Why? Because they gotta.

Otherwise they might be mistakenly seen as being in agreement with those who espouse that hated, anti-corporate climate change theory & we just couldn't have that, could we?

Noooooooooooo.

Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Papa Lazarou View Drop Down
Ad Exec
Ad Exec
Avatar
Formerly Codtaro

Joined: 18 Nov 2011
Location: New Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 7720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Papa Lazarou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2015 at 5:11am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:


Originally posted by Papa Lazarou Papa Lazarou wrote:

The difference is that science admits when its wrong and alters its views with new information (Well, black people look more ape-ish than white men, so they must be inferior...oops, wait, we're all genetically identical minus about 0.00000008% of our DNA, guess we were wrong, there.)

Whereas the religions, on average, only change their mind when it means losing followers.




So, what you're saying is that one can't really trust science at any given moment to be correct.  Today's scientific fact could be tomorrow's science fiction.  Doesn't this make belief in scientific facts, somewhat faith-based?


Except that science, especially modern and legitimate science, backs its opinions with facts, research, and re-doable experimentation so that others can re-create the experiment and report if they get the same or different results.

The largest number of things that change are incredibly minor and often involve extremely tiny things; for example the recent revolutionary discovery that the lymph system actually does go through the brain, an area of the body previously accepted as being immune-system resistant, due to the risk of potential swelling and such.

Whereas FACTS, such as evolution, gravity, germ-theory, etc. have mountains of evidence that back them, and when something does change, it's usually the most tiny minor element, not the entire theory or law itself.

Faith requires no proof or evidence, and is often anti-fact, and has to survive in spite of them.

The best example is the Ken Ham Vs. Bill Nye "Debate". The final question showed the key difference (and deficit) faith has to science. Ken Ham said nothing would ever change his mind. Nye simply said, "Evidence."

Give science evidence and it'll evaluate it, understand it, and accept, refute, or apply more research to it.
Banana!
BANANA!!
BANANA!!!
BANANA!!
Banana!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.



"CANDIE!"