You introduce a sidetrack, Boaz, you must expect people to follow it. Especially since you specifically asked me not to.

>>There other sides to the question, such as how particular religions are described by other religions.. and in such cases, what criteria might be used to determine 'which' complaint prevails, if both made a complaint against the other. (No Pericles..don't go there)<<

Forget about free speech, this is a thread demonstrating how many Christians are homophobic. You only raise it to show how Christians in other countries are being prevented from venting their homophobia in an offensive manner.

But on the topic of "one religion vs another", it would appear that you and fundamentalist Islam are at one on the issue of homosexuality, which must please you greatly.

Common ground, Boaz. You should actively look for other areas of compatibility, of which there are many, instead of constantly looking for areas of difference.

It is quite poetic, really. For example, for all you waffle on about Islam's treatment of women, the Bible seems to have a pretty poor opinion of them too.

"and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. These are they which were not defiled with women" Rev 14:3-4

Defiled with women, Boaz?

Surely not?

Clearly pericles, you're interpreting wrong.

The only 'right' way to interpret it, is to interpret the bible as being sugar and spice and all things nice, but the Qu'ran as being snips and snails and puppy dog tails. In other words, just seeing it like boaz does. When he preaches against gays it's okay, because it's biblical, but it's only his religion that's allowed to.

For an explanation as to why, see above. Perhaps he'll even furnish us with more contortions, backflips and bizarre justifications as to why in his case, it's totally different.

Got it? It's really not that hard to grasp. Especially seeing as he's been repeating the same lines over and over ad nauseum on OLO for years now, with vague changes to the labelling. Fear not however, he's doing a great job of dissuading potential converts to Christianity.
Secularists should be grateful.
Besides, it's evident that criticism just flies past and only serves to strengthen his resolve, regardless of the accumulated weight of logic and objections that pile up.

Though his latest three threads (this one, the 'interpretation is not subjective unless I say it is' one and the one where he explains how despite having met kind people from another religion who showed him only kindness, they're not really kind at all because of their ancient book) I think, are his three most objectionable yet, as they're more transparent, clumsy, and plain arrogant than all the others I've seen.

For that reason, I think this'll be the last time I pop into a thread he starts. They're all the same at heart and they're all ugly.

TRTL, you have picked the exact reason I keep coming back.

>>Though his latest three threads (this one, the 'interpretation is not subjective unless I say it is' one and the one where he explains how despite having met kind people from another religion who showed him only kindness, they're not really kind at all because of their ancient book) I think, are his three most objectionable yet, as they're more transparent, clumsy, and plain arrogant than all the others I've seen. For that reason, I think this'll be the last time I pop into a thread he starts. They're all the same at heart and they're all ugly.<<

The closer we get to the real Boaz - the one who has generally escaped any detailed attention when propagating his let's-all-hate-Islam material - the more transparent, clumsy and plain arrogant he becomes.

I cannot think of a better way to expose his formidably un-Christian attitudes and prejudices, than to keep chipping away at his credibility.

What he will eventually come to realise is that it has nothing to do with his religion, but his own attitude.

I know some very decent Christians, who are kind, tolerant and humble. I have absolutely nothing against Christianity, as I have said many times before. But I cannot sit back and watch his systematic, calumnious denigration of another religion.

Logic and truth will win out every time against blind and wilful prejudice. It just takes time.

Pericles, TRTL,

I rather think the time has come to take Chainsmoker's advice and just ignore him now.

I wrote in another thread that I think his whole reason for writing is because he see himself as a martyr for his cause - so every time someone responds to him he chalks that up as another sling and arrow he is suffering in defense of his faith. The proof of this is that though Pericles, TRTL I and others have pointed out that our objections are indeed centred round his patronising, smug attitude and his total lack of any of the redeeming features such as kindness, tolerance, charity or selflessness that should characterise any good citizen - let alone a practicing Christian - he ignores or denies it.

In fact last time I was goaded into pointing this out to him he flatly denied it and informed me that no, it was indeed Christianity that was being attacked.

The fact that so many people, both Christian and non-Christian, have pointed out that he is giving the whole movement a bad name does not seemed to have caused him one single moment of self reflection or doubt.

I am in agreement with TRTL that having this ugliness pushed down ones throat from multiple threads is becoming a little too much and yes, he does seem to be getting worse. I really don't think, Pericles, that he even notices the chipping - his egotism doesn't allow for humility, introspection or even, it seems increasingly, logical thought. This continuous and insulting condescension and intolerance is completely unacceptable.

Leave him be - as pointed out, he is very transparent and every time he posts he is revealing more and more the most unsavoury aspects of his character. One doesn't need to chip - he is hoist on his own petard in every second post . And the fact that he is incapable of realising it compounds the thoroughness with which this is done.

Dear Bron... re my 'ur not progressing'.. "tonque in cheek arrogance" :)
You need to turn up the sensitivity on your 'warm hearted sarcasm' meter.
PS.. a lot of what you say "hurts and offends me" but I absolutely agree to your right to say it.

Sharkfin.. valid point! I'd say that the reaction of Church leaders to homosexuals is confused and mixed. When they are 'ranting' against it, they are probably more ranting against the 'militant/pride' expressions of it, rather than thinking about the birth aspects. Some would not recognize it as a birth defect, but as a chosen behavior.
Personally, I think it might be mixed. Some related to genetic pre-dispositon, others chosen, others a combination. The only people deserving of true compassion are those who:
a)Do not try to tell everyone else that it is is "normal"
b)Never try to educate innocent children that it is so.
c)Don't try to change the law about it.(though this has already happened. We would not expect or allow people with other more dangerous deviences to change the law to support other types of behavior we abhor.

PERICLES.. 'defiled' with women. aah..back to 'interpetation' :) and context. It is hardly reasonable to consider that legitimate and normal involvement in marraige would be considered 'defiling', but good try. Remember Revelation is written in apocalyptic style and is very symbolic, including the number 144,000 which = 12000 from each of the 12 tribes.

The problem with 'homophobia' vs free speech, is that while Pastor Green was a bit coloful with his 'tumor' statement, it hardly exceeds "Evil peversion" mentioned by Paul in Romans. Which is the reason for my concern. That incident occurred IN a Church..not in public.
Very Orwellian.

OLIVER
If The Vatican is doing as you said, then it is to be utterly condemned on that issue.
You should look up what some evangelicals have said about the Pope.. try John Hagee or.. Ian Paisly. (neither are my cuppa but they do condemn the Pope)

Dear Romany..

"his egotism doesn't allow for humility, introspection or even, it seems increasingly, logical thought. This continuous and insulting condescension and intolerance is completely unacceptable."

Do you see a tiny bit of 'intolerance' in your own statement? :)

Perhaps you regard 'pointing out intolerance' as being ok for you, but not for me?

This whole thread is about INtolerance where people are being taken to court.. to star chamber/show trial/closed doors/Kangaroo courts for expressing views.. and you speak of intolerance here?

Now, you mentioned 'logical thought' and 'introspection' and 'humility'.

But that's emotional sentimentality I'm afraid because in the real world, people are being
-Jailed
-Fined
-harrased

by so called 'Human Rights' groups which are discriminatory and selective and hostile.

In the final analysis, there will always be intolerance in this world. Homosexuals will not tolerate a group which is based on a Bible which condemns their behavior, and Christians will not feel to comfortable about being fined, harassed and jailed for simply expressing their beliefs.
Muslims will not tolerate the expression of the Christian gospel in countries they control. Homosexuals will not tolerate preaching against them, Hindues will not tolerate a cow they revere being put down, Tibetan Buddists will not tolerate Atheist Communist Chinese imperialism.

So, the soft left's cry against 'intolerance' is as intolerant as it gets.
That's why Pericles 'chipping away' has little effect.

In your case here, you are attacking me for defending the freedom to express our faith. Thats intolerance.