24
   

Non-Christian - not my brother

 
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 08:54 pm
@Arella Mae,
Arella Mae wrote:

I told you that thought has never crossed my mind.

Of course it didn't! Since you live in the Deep South, I wouldn't be surprised if avowed-atheist politicians had never crossed your path.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 08:57 pm
@Thomas,
I am not stupid enough nor naive enough to believe every politician in office in Louisiana is a Christian. The thought that never crossed my mind was those that were non-believers were going to show favoritism to non-believers or the Christian ones were going to show favortism to Christians.
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:02 pm
@Arella Mae,
I'll give up for now. I'm exhausted
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:04 pm
@Thomas,
I'm really not trying to be difficult, Thomas. I'm stubborn. I'm a redhead. Razz
0 Replies
 
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:06 pm
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
I should validate the feelings of everyone in the world I do not know?
Quote:


As the need arises, yes.



I don't intentionally offend people. I have in the past and I've felt horrible and have apologized.


Of course you don't, you seem to be a nice person.

A sincere apology is a validation of the other persons feelings.
Since this thread began, he has apparently apologised, no problem.

My whole argument has been, that people where offended by his statement.
That needed to be validated, by himself. Apparently he has done so. I have'nt seen the video, nor read the statement yet.




Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:09 pm
@wayne,
I am glad that he did apologize. I don't believe he should have made the statement in the first place but only because mixing politics and religion never works.
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:18 pm
@Arella Mae,
Yeah, that's pretty much the sum of it. It's really too bad he made a mistake like that, he's most likely a decent man. It may haunt him for a little while, probably won't matter much locally though.

Religion is a touchy subject in politics , right now.
I gotta say, Obama has done an excellent job of avoiding that.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:19 pm
@wayne,
I agree with you. Religion and politics make strange bedfellows they say. I say it just makes for division.
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:26 pm
@Arella Mae,
Agreed. Glad to have the chance to get to know you a little.
I'm stubborn too, it's cause I'm a man. Smile

" I'm a man
but I can change
if I try
I guess"
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 09:29 pm
@wayne,
Nice to get to know you too. LOL a man change? Um, okay. Kidding!
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 10:35 pm
@wayne,
wayne wrote:

I think you are being too literal in your interpretation of the term brother.
In the context used the meaning is more along the lines of brother in arms, I think. It serves to separate humankind according to religious belief.
It makes it easier to justify leaving you out in the cold when things get tough.



Well, you just explained why the hyper-inflation of the Weimar Republic was fertile ground for anti-Semitism. Duh! Should we stop pretending we all are brothers and try to prevent the tough times that do lead to self-serving behavior.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 10:36 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
I could care less who feels close to me.


Another fine example of a much maligned structure from an English native speaker.

Foofie, wearing his/her prescriptive hat, might be mortified. Smile


I do not understand your post.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 10:50 pm
I do believe this thread is a tempest in a teapot. However, I am not seeing it from the perspective of a Christian. Perhaps, some Christians need to parse this thread for another ten pages to feel some sort of vicarious penance for the non-universal (non)brotherly statement that this thread is based on?

Considering again that most posters here do have a Christian background, why the concern for those that are excluded from the brotherly feelings, if those excluded might not even care?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 10:56 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

I don't want the guy for a brother anyway.

There's the correct answer.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 11:06 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
You misrepresent, I suspect on purpose, what people are offended by. They are offended by the impression that Alabaman Christians will enjoy a privileged relation with their governor---"you are my brothers and sisters"---whereas Alabaman non-Christians will be confined to some inferior status---"you are not my brothers and sisters."

How do you get "inferior status" out of the statement "you [non-Christians] are not my brothers and sisters?" You're not my brother, but that doesn't mean I consider you to be inferior. It just means you're not my brother.

Thomas wrote:
This impression, reasonably derived from the governor's words, raises obvious freedom-of-religion problems: "When government associates one set of religious beliefs with the state and identifies non-adherents as outsiders, it encroaches upon the individual’s decision about whether and how to worship." (Supreme Court opinion in McCreary v. ACLU of Kentucky) Governor Bentley has come awfully close to doing just this. That is what people are taking offense from.

That's just laughable. At no point did the governor associate one set of religious beliefs with the state. He made a religious statement during a religious service. When my Catholic governor recites the Apostle's Creed during mass, I don't take that to mean that he considers non-Catholics to be inferior. Really, if that's why people take offense at Bentley's remarks, then it's astounding to what lengths some people will go to be offended.
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 11:14 pm
@wayne,
wayne wrote:

All you're doing is refusing to validate the feelings of others, that differ from your own.
Silly or not ( in whomever's opinion ), the feelings of others are deserving of validation, especially when they are not our own.

I have no clue what it means to validate the feelings of others. If someone is offended for some silly, trivial reason, how am I to validate that person's feelings? I certainly don't sympathize with someone who is so easily offended. On the other hand, if by "validate the feelings of others" you mean "slap them until they grow a pair," then that's an option worth considering.
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 11:25 pm
@joefromchicago,
I seriously doubt that's how you treat your loved ones.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 11:26 pm
@wayne,
he lives alone with cats.

I wouldn't bet on it...
wayne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 11:29 pm
@Rockhead,
ahh, that explains a lot
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jan, 2011 11:30 pm
@wayne,
wayne wrote:

I seriously doubt that's how you treat your loved ones.

My loved ones aren't easily offended. They don't need a good slapping.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 08:55:54