Mjpb I understand w has responded appropriately to you on the same manner but I will continue anyway, you are saying it is ok and pious for Christians to attack others but not ok for Christianity to be criticised. Christianity has been bullying and victimising and undermining people for centuries. Wether there are non-white Christians or not the philosophy and ideology and motivations and justifications of Christianity are in the same league with the Klu Klux Klan. The Klu Klux Klan represents Christian values in action. I understand Christianity is superstition based and therefore extreme and irrational paranoia is necessary in order for a person to believe in a god. That is why the KKK fear non-whites , Catholics, Baptists and Pentecostals fear Harry Potter, thats why those who believe in god are obsessed with death , holding faith in an immortality that comes to them through magic charms of a god evoked through the magic spells of prayer and ritualistic conjuring.

Yes each Christian sect has its specialised hatred of others , Gays, bi-sexuals, women, scientists, atheists, Muslims, Jews, Hindu’s, Buddhists, Satanists, wiccans, pagans, Academia , University students, public school students, single parents, gypsies, Non-whites, Chinese, Serbians , Croatians, Darwin , NASA, unemployed , the poor, other Christian sects, Northerners, southerners, city folk, Divorcees , abortees, Left wing governments, long hair, nature and anything clergy, shock jocks, TV evangelists and neo cons find useful to exploit.

From the Dutch Reformists and Calvinists to the Catholics to the Baptists and Pentecostals there would be hardly a person who Christians do not believe should, and must be punished by god because the Christian despises them and therefore God does too. The inherent Christian bigotry and prejudice and vilification of ‘others’ is inevitable because God is a paranoid product of both superstition and imagination.

Mjpb perhaps you could explain the Christian obsession with homosexuality. Is it reaction to innuendo Genesis creates? God created an unclad Adam in his image obviously to have as a lover and then condemned women to painful childbirth as a tantrum for Adams apparent heterosexuality

Ireally think the ant-religious or anti-Christian posting here (on this topic) should go away. I also think those religious zealots posting here should do like wise.

Unless of course you can stick to the topic.

It's obvious to me that many comments are made from a point of ignorance and just exacerbates the biases being displayed.

I'm a Christian, I believe in God and that Jesus was the son of God, to the best of my ability I follow his teachings. I'm not homosexual, but don't condemn those that are. That's their choice. God allows us to choose.

As for Pell he is a Catholic they practice various rituals, these are not part of being Christian they are part of being Catholic. His decision who may partake of the rituals relate dot his church. personally having written to Pell about various political prognostications of his, i've found him to be ignorant and arrogant. As the saying goes, Christians aren't perfect... just forgiven.

Now do you think we could get back to the topic and discuss Rudd and his various foibles.

I think it is ironic that you totally miss the point and at the same time confirm all that I have said T800.

It is not enough to just ‘bag’ Rudd just because you are Christian and therefore Rudd’s views are foibles according to you. We so called ‘anti-religious and religious zealots’ have contextualised exactly what Rudd is all about. Rudd is concerned with the failure of the superstition he prescribes to. The failure of Christianity has been on going and deepening since the 4th century and as it is a dying cult its baggage of occult based prejudices is hastening its demise, it is literally a Dark Age superstition out of context in the 21st Century. Rudd knows it’s the end for Christianity, he knows why and he has sought to save it. What I have offered is reasons why Rudd is failing and will fail.

Further irony is the bigotry inherent in Christianity that you possess, that your opinion is the only relevant opinion and that we should concentrate on attacking Kevin Rudd personally and not critique the views he has aired.

To confirm the religiously inherent bigotry we should be censored if you are displeased with our views.

To top it all off you don’t offer this debate anything other than the fact you don’t personally like Kevin Rudd and you wish to censor critics of your superstition or those of your faith of whom you consider an embarrassment.

I don’t intend to ‘go away’ and I sincerely hope w, Boaz, Gadget and mjpb and others including you don’t either, there is something to be learned from everybody.

If you are sincerely interested in Kevin Rudd’s views I suggest you learn to focus and re-read the thread and save your censorship for church where people go to be told what to think.

Here we go :roll:

I've taken an interest in australian politics for quite a while West. probably lomger than you've been born. I happen to know quite well what Rudd espouses politically. I also happen to recognise a lying hypocrite when I hear one, one driven by an ambition that has no moral bounds.

Turning this political topic into a topic solely related to religion and belief in God, and going off on tangents re homosexuality etc, etc, etc is hardly.

As for name-calling... I'm no BIGOT... a fact that your particular biases seems to blind you to.

In these days of Islamic infiltration into our political landscape, it is the role of Christian politicians like K. Rudd to discern their hidden agendas and counter-balance our democratic system.

The anti-religious secular humanist lobby will have very little to offer let alone understand the intricacies of the Islamic rampant disintegration of our free society. This is a deep seeded spiritual battle they cannot take part in.

Love your homos and lesbians, abort your babies if you must, but wake up to this eminent threat that will close your pubs, clubs, and beaches… in the very short future.

Bye bye Christian secularism – hello fundamental Islamism.

Well, T800, your long years may have piled on the pomposity, but they haven’t taught you that making controversial statements is no way to end a discussion on any topic, let alone religion and homosexuality.

First, you are repeating the commonly-held misconception that homosexuality is a choice. For a few it may be, but for the majority of homosexuals it most definitely is not.

Second, despite all the claims about loving the sinner, the churches practise discrimination against homosexuals based on their sexuality, not their actions. This would be illegal for any other institution, but the churches claim the right to hold themselves above the law.

I agree with you that this discussion has been straying, but your years should also have brought you to the realisation that it is in the nature of human discourse to cover a wide range of areas in a single conversation, and OLO is no exception.

West, your heart’s probably in the right place, but essentially there is zero possibility of you changing mjpb’s views by associating her with some of the more evil organisations in human history. When someone’s trying to understand your position, as I believe mjpb is, you’ll get further by showing you understand where she’s coming from than by insulting her by association. For more on this: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4664#47953