These must not be "real" Christians, Jews, etc. ....

[PassingFair]

:large

Governor Mike Pence ✔ @GovPenceIN
Follow

I signed SEA 101 today to ensure religious liberty is fully protected under IN law

[cbayer]

1. They are very real, but they are not the whole deal.

As noted elsewhere, other religious groups are pushing back.

They are just as "real" but very different.

It's important to be able to distinguish that.

[PassingFair]

4. Which "groups"?...I've seen mention of 1....

Last edited Thu Mar 26, 2015, 02:15 PM - Edit history (1)

who say they will not have their convention there.

Where is the Catholic Church on this?

Where are the Mormons on this?

?

[cbayer]

12. I don't know. Why don't you contact them and ask?

[PassingFair]

14. You offered: "other religious groups are pushing back."

This leads me to believe you have knowledge of more than one group.
Care to share?

[hrmjustin]

15. The Disciples of Christ are pushing back.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/03/25/christian-denomination-threatens-to-pull-its-convention-from-indiana-due-to-religious-objection-bill/

[PassingFair]

16. Yeah, that's the ONE.

She indicated that there were others.

[Lordquinton]

18. But, have you considered

Not aaAAAaaalllll religions.

[cbayer]

21. That's correct, it's not all religions.

I'm not getting your point.

[Lordquinton]

58. You're in good company

www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/

[cbayer]

62. You are calling me a Men's Right Advocate? I would love to think you have reached the

bottom of your barrel, but sadly I think it's very deep and very dark.

[okasha]

69. Obviously there's some very wonky sustance

at the bottom of that barrel.

The nobility are just a wee bit inbred, you know.

[cbayer]

70. All I know is that comparing me to a men's rights advocate made me laugh

out loud first thing this morning!

[cbayer]

19. Churches and church leaders in Indiana were protesting this before it ever passed.

It's been a day and already many groups are looking at boycotting the state. One religious group came out first.

Give it some time. The majority of religious people in this country support full and equal GLBT civil rights.

Why so hostile on this issue? Let's be glad to see that people are stepping forward, whatever groups they represent.

[PassingFair]

22. "The majority of religious people in this country support full and equal GLBT civil rights?" Really?

Including marriage?



On edit: Notice how SKEWED this is with the inclusion of "unaffiliated"

[beam me up scottie]

25. THANK YOU.

Things that make you go

[cbayer]

28. Context is everything. From the same PEW article

More than half of Americans (56%) say same-sex marriage would go against their religious beliefs, according to a survey we conducted in March 2013. But about half of those who say that same-sex marriage goes against their beliefs also say that gay couples should have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples.

[beam me up scottie]

31. What's half of 56%?

Last edited Thu Mar 26, 2015, 04:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Hint: it's not "The majority of religious people in this country".

It says that half of the 56% "also say that gay couples should have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples."

Reading comprehension is everything.



eta the text:

Most people (56%) say that same-sex marriage would conflict with their religious beliefs. Most (66%) also say that same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples. Just over a quarter (28%) of Americans agree with both of these statements: that same-sex marriage conflicts with their religious beliefs and that same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples.

[PassingFair]

32. And also from the 2nd part of the article:

Not surprisingly, the most religious Americans are the least likely to favor gay marriage. Nearly half of Americans with relatively low religious commitment approve of allowing homosexual couples the right to marry, compared with just 17% of those who are more religious. This gap along religious lines exists across all age groups.

[cbayer]

34. There is no question that there is a wide variation among different religious groups.

That is the point and why it is wrongheaded to say things you have said in your title here.

Of course those are religious people. They are in the demographic of those that wish to deny GLBT rights.

But there is another demographic that are also "real" christians, jews, etc. and it is important to recognize that, support them when they stand up and build coaltions when we can in order to fight that bigoted demographic.

BTW, jews favor GLBT civil rights at a much higher rate than the general population, so it is particularly unfair to include them in your sweeping subject line.

[PassingFair]

36. I was talking about the people in the picture.

THAT was my point and why it is wrongheaded for you to say things that I didn't say in my title there.

[cbayer]

37. But the title indicated that you supposed people would say they are not real.

Or did I read that completely wrong?

[PassingFair]

38. Yes, I supposed that people would say they are not real (TM) Christians.

Because lots of people say shit like that lots of the time.

[cbayer]

39. Well no one has said it at all.

[PassingFair]

40. Not in THIS thread. Why?

Because I preempted it!

[beam me up scottie]

41. A preemptive strike against the NTSF!!!

You're killing me...

[PassingFair]

42. At your service!

[PassingFair]

71. Too bad "The Flying Scotsman" can't be everywhere at once!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141051925#post28

[beam me up scottie]

72. DING! DING! DING!

It's been pretty quiet lately, some days it's like whack a mole out there.

[cbayer]

45. Exactly. Kudos.

[hrmjustin]

23. The Episcopalians, MCC, and others.

Just because it didn't makr the news doesn't mean there weren't others.

[PassingFair]

27. I give Episcopalians a "get out of bigotry" pass on this, hrm.....

They are the least likely to tilt against reality and the concerns of common humanity.
Episcopalians tend to bend!

I doubt that there are any Episcopalians in that group pic.

[hrmjustin]

29. I think the bishop of Indianapolis woukd have a fit if they were in a picture like that.

[AtheistCrusader]

46. Thanks for pointing out the ONE everyone in this thread already knew about.

[hrmjustin]

48. You're welcome.

[trotsky]

44. Doesn't matter.

As long as there is one, then that's enough for some to say everything's equal, religion isn't the problem, yada yada yada.

[AtheistCrusader]

47. The Catholic church is in the signing photo. Franciscan monks and nuns.

[skepticscott]

52. Oh, but I'm sure the wonderpope

will be threatening them all with excommunication for publicly supporting bigotry on behalf of the Catholic Church.

Oh...wait....

[Yorktown]

59. therefore religion offers no moral guidance

qed

[hrmjustin]

2. Very sad! They don't represent all believers but too many.

[pinto]

3. Terrible law. I hope it's roundly challenged, legally and socially.

Your OP title line, though, seems to welcome the law to make some other point. A bit convoluted, I figure you oppose the legislation as well. What's your point?

There are religious groups opposed to this discrimination. If your point is to discount them, you're missing it.

[beam me up scottie]

5. Look at all of them, smiling like this is a good thing.

Fucking bigots.

[trotsky]

6. Self-righteous bigots convinced they are pleasing their god.

They evidently have "other ways of knowing" that we cannot possibly criticize.

Good to see you again, bmus!

[beam me up scottie]

7. We should respect their religious beliefs.

Because it's rude, offensive, intolerant or bigoted to question them.

Thanks, haven't been able to get online until recently.

[Arugula Latte]

73. Anything less than Total Appeasement and AssKissing is MILITANT!

[beam me up scottie]

74. Damn uppity atheists ruin it for all the good ones.

Mustn't make them look bad

[LiberalAndProud]

8. Caption the pic: "Separation of Church and State"

There's an invisible wall. Trust me.

[pinto]

9. Can we change that picture?

That's the question, imo.

[LiberalAndProud]

10. I'm just appreciating the irony.

As for the legislative battle, it seems to me that ALEC is way ahead of us.

[cbayer]

13. ALEC is way ahead of us.

What can we do to counter them? Keep painting all religious people with the same brush or identify those that share our position on separation and work with them?

[LiberalAndProud]

17. Thinking strategically,

Maybe the thing that we should be doing is introducing civil rights legislation preemptively. It seems to me that we start from behind when we always approach from a reactive position. I don't see religious organizations as the vehicle to make that happen, but would welcome any support the religious adherents might want to lend to the effort.



This may be a lapse in judgment, but I am going to take a moment for a personal aside and beg you to stop with the broad brush accusations. It's simply not fair and untrue. Honestly and sincerely, please stop it. I honestly thought you would share the rye humor here. I thought we shared the church-state separation ideal.

[cbayer]

20. I like that idea. I also think we need to build coalitions.

Similar legislation is on the table in GA. Four women were arrested when they protested yesterday. They were backed by Moral Monday Georgia (a religious/secular coalition), NOW (secular) and the American Friends Service Committee (religious).

That's how you get things done.

Like you, I think the religious groups that are doing the work on the ground would welcome any support that the non-religious adherents might want to lend.

I don't know what you mean by "broad brush accusations", but maybe we can cut a deal in terms of the words we use. Honestly and sincerely, I am willing to do that. You?

[LiberalAndProud]

24. Sure, coalitions for common cause can be powerful.

Last edited Thu Mar 26, 2015, 04:17 PM - Edit history (1)

Although I would argue with the efficacy of this particular action. I'd also be curious why it took three organizations to back four women, and what that backing consisted of.


As for the other, let me offer an example.
Keep painting all religious people with the same brush

[cbayer]

30. It did not take three organizations to back four women.

The women stood for the three organizations. There was an article posted here about it yesterday, if you are interested.

Your link takes me right back to my post where I inquired as to what you are talking about.

I am willing to listen to you when you have objections to the way I phrase things. I am open to being convinced that it is counter productive or otherwise wrong, but I need to understand why.

In return, I hope we could consider this a two way street. If there are words or phrases that push my buttons like this apparently does yours, then I would ask the same courtesy from you.

[LiberalAndProud]

33. I was right.

Total lapse in judgment. Nevermind.

[cbayer]

35. Now what exactly did I say that would elicit that response?

It was meant to be open and conciliatory, but obviously you took it completely differently.

I'm not sure what the problem is here, but, like I said, I am willing to resolve it.

[trotsky]

11. What, is reality too much to behold?

Ignoring the religious motivation behind this bigotry doesn't make it go away.

[beam me up scottie]

26. Looks like your op touched a few nerves.

Nicely done.

[pinto]

50. Apparently that was the point.

No more nor less.

[beam me up scottie]

51. You thought it was to "welcome the law" earlier.

Because PassingFair just loves her some legalized bigotry as long as she can 'score' in here.

[pinto]

55. Not buying in to your internecine personal games, BMUS. Or anyone's, for that matter.

I'm sorry I stepped into this thread. I made a mistake.

[beam me up scottie]

56. That was a mean thing to say about the op, pinto.

I wasn't going to call you on it but you engaged me.

[trotsky]

61. It's good to call out hypocrisy.

Hypocrites hate it, though.

[skepticscott]

65. and it's even better to call out

hypocrisy and bigotry that try to cloak themselves as ecumenicalism.

[beam me up scottie]

67. Just sick of the double standard.

At least we don't act like we're above the fray.

[MellowDem]

43. Ah yes, proudly representing bigoted religons...

Maybe one day so many of our moderate and progressive religious friends will stop identifying with bigoted ideas and providing cover for real harms.

[stone space]

49. "Purportedly a matter of religious freedom, we find RFRA contrary to the values of our faith"

March 25, 2015

The Honorable Michael R. Pence
Governor of the State of Indiana
200 W. Washington Street, Room 206
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Dear Governor Pence,

We write with respect to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). We urge you to veto the bill.

The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) has been headquartered in Indianapolis for nearly 100 years. Although Butler University is no longer affiliated with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), its founder, Ovid Butler, was a Disciple and a noted abolitionist. The college, in keeping with our values, admitted women in a time when that was rare. We are the church that founded Christian Theological Seminary. Our offices are located on North Meridian. Our Indiana regional offices are located in Indianapolis as well.

Every two years our general assembly, a gathering of over 6000 people from across the United States and Canada, is held in a US city. In 2017 it is scheduled to be in Indianapolis as it was in 2009 and 1989. Like so many other host cities, we find Indianapolis to be a hospitable and enjoyable location for our people. Many of our leaders are citizens of this city, and we take particular pride when our selection process makes it possible to bring the assembly to our home town.

However, the recent passage in the state legislature of the RFRA bill is distressing to us. It is causing us to reconsider our decision to hold our 2017 gathering in Indianapolis.

Purportedly a matter of religious freedom, we find RFRA contrary to the values of our faith – as well as to our national and Hoosier values. Our nation and state are strong when we welcome people of many backgrounds and points of view. The free and robust exchange of ideas is part of what makes our democracy great.

As a Christian church, we are particularly sensitive to the values of the One we follow – one who sat at table with people from all walks of life, and loved them all. Our church is diverse in point of view, but we share a value for an open Lord’s Table. Our members and assembly-goers are of different races and ethnicities, ages, genders and sexual orientations. They have in common that they love Jesus and seek to follow him.

We are particularly distressed at the thought that, should RFRA be signed into law, some of our members and friends might not be welcome in Indiana businesses – might experience legally sanctioned bias and rejection once so common on the basis of race.

We are following closely the progress of this legislation. It will be a factor in whether we continue with our plans to hold an assembly in Indianapolis in 2017. We urge you to veto the bill.

Respectfully,

Sharon E. Watkins
General Minister and President

Julia Brown Karimu, President
Division of Overseas Ministries

Ronald J. Degges, President
Disciples Home Missions

http://disciples.org/sharon_blog/ministry-leaders-send-letter-to-governor/

[guillaumeb]

53. who determines what a real ANYTHING is?

Is there such a thing as a REAL American?
A REAL atheist?
A REAL person of faith?

Or are there just Americans, atheists, people of faith, etc.?

If your point is that Pence is a pandering fool with little Constitutional knowledge and is always on the lookout for a campaign photo op why not just say that?

But the way your post is worded is a not very subtle attempt to broad brush all believers as intolerant while retaining deniability by saying that is not what you meant.

[beam me up scottie]

54. It wasn't a "broad brush" of anyone.

It's a reference to the No True Scotsman fallacy (which is regularly used by posters on on DU).

Calling the op intolerant makes you wrong and hypocritical.

[guillaumeb]

63. my opinion is still the same

The title of the post was: "These must not be "real" Christians, Jews, etc. ...."

These are the poster's words, not a caption to the picture. When one puts quotes around a word, in the case the word real, obviously the poster wishes to emphasize the word.

So what exactly did the poster mean to say by emphasizing the word real? That there are unreal Christians as well as real Christians? Or was the emphasis on the word real the written equivalent of a wink of the eye to let the readers know what the poster was saying?
No, the poster did not explicitly say that Christians are intolerant. That avoids the "broadbrush" argument.

[skepticscott]

66. It was sarcasm...you do know what that it, right?

It was a sarcastic comment on the frequent posts by religionistsas here that anyone who does bad things and says that they are following the dictates of their "faith" in doing so is not a "real" Christian or Muslim or whatever. The poster meant to emphasize how idiotic it is for people like that to try to define who is and is not a "real" member of their religion.

Everyone but you apparently knew that.

[beam me up scottie]

68. Of course it is.

So what exactly did the poster mean to say by emphasizing the word real? That there are unreal Christians as well as real Christians? Or was the emphasis on the word real the written equivalent of a wink of the eye to let the readers know what the poster was saying?

No, like I said it refers to the No True Scotsman fallacy:

With respect to religion, the fallacy is well used, often even overused. Religious apologists will repeatedly try to use the No True Scotsman argument to distance themselves from more extreme or fundamentalist groups, but this does not prevent such extremists actually being religious - they themselves would certainly argue otherwise. Moderate Muslim leaders, for example, are well known for declaring Islamic extremists as "not true Muslims" as Islam is a "religion of peace." Similarly, moderate Christians, such as those in Europe, are sometimes aghast when viewing their fundamentalist counterparts in the US, immediately declaring them "not true Christians," even though they believe in the same God and get their belief system from the same book. Many of these statements stating that the extremists are not true believers are often used as a reaction against Guilt by Association. The No True Scotsman fallacy can also run the other way when it comes to extremism. Extremists will make a religious statement and when someone points out that there are many believers who don't believe the extremist's viewpoint, the moderates are deemed to be not true believers (ie: Christians who support gay marriage are not "real Christians" or Muslims who support women's rights are not "real Muslims&quot . Modern pagans do it all the time, perhaps even more than other religions, due to the fact that there is no agreed-on orthodoxy for the whole group, with some well-established practices in one setting being considered unpalatable in others. Silver Ravenwolf, one of the best selling "leaders" of neopagans, has done this with multiple ancient, well-established practices.

It was a wink to people who are tired of hearing that "real" christians aren't bigots.

[trotsky]

60. A "real" American would be someone who is a citizen of the United States.

That's pretty easy. A "real" atheist doesn't believe in gods. Hard to believe in gods and NOT believe in gods at the same time.

A "real" Christian believes in the Christian god, to the best of their understanding of it. That's where things get tricky, since every Christian pretty much has a slightly different picture of their god, and no one can conclusively state that someone has the "wrong" idea of god, AND since Christianity is a revealed religion, and its god could therefore "reveal" to anyone at any time that it has changed, well, all bets are off. If you say you are a Christian, then you are. Not much room for debate.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

64. Christians are self defining.

So the No True Scotsman fallacy does not apply. If you say you are a Christian, then you are.

This includes Adolf Hitler and "Gott Mit Uns". Both sides in a war say that God is on their sides. People act like the moral rightness of the victor was self-evident beforehand. Lots of people in Germany and Japan were just as convinced their side was right (the Axis powers) as the United States, Russia and Britain (the Allied powers). I think that point is often forgotten in history.

Just because the Nazis were defeated doesn't mean that they saw the error of their ways. Joseph and Magda Goebbels killed themselves and their six children rather than live in a world defeated. Most parents want their children to survive them. The supremacy of the Nazi ideology over the desire for your children to live is something I don't understand. Rudolf Hess and Albert Speer offered to take the children away for safekeeping. They were turned down.

Helga Suzanne, 12; Hildegarde Traudel,11; Helmut Christian,9; Holdine Kathrin, 8; Hedwig Johanna, 6; Heidrun Elizabeth, 4;
Joseph Goebbels, age 47; Magda Goebbels, age 43. All dead on May 1, 1945.

Magda's first child from a previous marriage, Harald Quandt, was her only child to survive the war. His descendants now own large shares in BMW and Mercedes-Benz.


Magda's letter to her son Harald:

My beloved son! By now we have been in the Führerbunker for six days already—daddy, your six little siblings and I, for the sake of giving our national socialistic lives the only possible honourable end ... You shall know that I stayed here against daddy's will, and that even on last Sunday the Führer wanted to help me to get out. You know your mother—we have the same blood, for me there was no wavering. Our glorious idea is ruined and with it everything beautiful and marvelous that I have known in my life. The world that comes after the Führer and national socialism is not any longer worth living in and therefore I took the children with me, for they are too good for the life that would follow, and a merciful God will understand me when I will give them the salvation ... The children are wonderful ... there never is a word of complaint nor crying. The impacts are shaking the bunker. The elder kids cover the younger ones, their presence is a blessing and they are making the Führer smile once in a while. May God help that I have the strength to perform the last and hardest. We only have one goal left: loyalty to the Führer even in death. Harald, my dear son—I want to give you what I learned in life: be loyal! Loyal to yourself, loyal to the people and loyal to your country ... Be proud of us and try to keep us in dear memory ...

[LostOne4Ever]

57. Perfect!!!

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]Totally nailed it!

Oh, and love your avatar![/font]