Secular progressive moral agenda...
-
People often ask about what is meant by having a 'secular progressive moral agenda' forced upon our society. Here [^] is a perfect example of what it means. The guy is banished for expressing opinions outside the main stream of modern, secular, moral views. There is absolutely no difference between this kind of social ostricism and what we would have if our society had, in fact, been taken over by a religious orthodoxy of some kind and gay people were banned for their views. It is exactly the same kind of social phenomenon and proof that humanity can never really escape religious-like behavior regardless of how far we push actual religion out of our lives. It is always there.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
He wasn't expressing disapproval or unease (which is fine), but hatred (quote: "I hate gays"). That's no different or more or less acceptable than (for example) "I hate blacks" or "I hate rednecks" as far as I'm concerned. In that context, he got what he deserved. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Anna :rose: Linting the day away :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
-
People often ask about what is meant by having a 'secular progressive moral agenda' forced upon our society. Here [^] is a perfect example of what it means. The guy is banished for expressing opinions outside the main stream of modern, secular, moral views. There is absolutely no difference between this kind of social ostricism and what we would have if our society had, in fact, been taken over by a religious orthodoxy of some kind and gay people were banned for their views. It is exactly the same kind of social phenomenon and proof that humanity can never really escape religious-like behavior regardless of how far we push actual religion out of our lives. It is always there.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
The guy is banished
Banished by whom? By the representative of a corporation. Damn those secular progressive corporations forcing their moral agenda on their own employees! Next thing you know, they'll be allowing women, blacks, rednecks, and gays equal opportunities to work for them! How leftist of them! OMG, and look at this: the guy later apologized for his statements: "I want to apologize for my comments yesterday regarding gays," Hardaway's statement said. "My comments were offensive and I regret making them. I'm sorry to anyone I have offended." That leftist brainwashing machine sure acts quickly. :rolleyes:
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
The guy is banished
Banished by whom? By the representative of a corporation. Damn those secular progressive corporations forcing their moral agenda on their own employees! Next thing you know, they'll be allowing women, blacks, rednecks, and gays equal opportunities to work for them! How leftist of them! OMG, and look at this: the guy later apologized for his statements: "I want to apologize for my comments yesterday regarding gays," Hardaway's statement said. "My comments were offensive and I regret making them. I'm sorry to anyone I have offended." That leftist brainwashing machine sure acts quickly. :rolleyes:
But if that same corporation had banned him for being gay, would you be as comfortable with it? Of course not. As long as the corporations are promoting your (and the states) moral agenda, you are perfectly comfortable with it. You and all the others here who have responded in kind are absolutely no different from religious true believers who would similarly enforce their agenda upon society if they were also so empowered.
Al Beback wrote:
OMG, and look at this: the guy later apologized for his statements: "I want to apologize for my comments yesterday regarding gays," Hardaway's statement said. "My comments were offensive and I regret making them. I'm sorry to anyone I have offended."
Begging for forgiveness from the secular priesthood? How very penitent of him.
Al Beback wrote:
That leftist brainwashing machine sure acts quickly.
Indeed.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
He wasn't expressing disapproval or unease (which is fine), but hatred (quote: "I hate gays"). That's no different or more or less acceptable than (for example) "I hate blacks" or "I hate rednecks" as far as I'm concerned. In that context, he got what he deserved. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Anna :rose: Linting the day away :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
but hatred
So? You get to define for people about which emotions are appropriate?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
But if that same corporation had banned him for being gay, would you be as comfortable with it? Of course not. As long as the corporations are promoting your (and the states) moral agenda, you are perfectly comfortable with it. You and all the others here who have responded in kind are absolutely no different from religious true believers who would similarly enforce their agenda upon society if they were also so empowered.
Al Beback wrote:
OMG, and look at this: the guy later apologized for his statements: "I want to apologize for my comments yesterday regarding gays," Hardaway's statement said. "My comments were offensive and I regret making them. I'm sorry to anyone I have offended."
Begging for forgiveness from the secular priesthood? How very penitent of him.
Al Beback wrote:
That leftist brainwashing machine sure acts quickly.
Indeed.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
enforce their agenda upon society if they were also so
You're absolutely right. Society has always imposed certain behavioral norms on its members. And here we have two competing views: the "secularists" who preach love and tolerance of your fellow man and the "religious true believers" who preach intolerance and hate. I think I'll stick with the "secularists".
-
People often ask about what is meant by having a 'secular progressive moral agenda' forced upon our society. Here [^] is a perfect example of what it means. The guy is banished for expressing opinions outside the main stream of modern, secular, moral views. There is absolutely no difference between this kind of social ostricism and what we would have if our society had, in fact, been taken over by a religious orthodoxy of some kind and gay people were banned for their views. It is exactly the same kind of social phenomenon and proof that humanity can never really escape religious-like behavior regardless of how far we push actual religion out of our lives. It is always there.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
It's business, pure and simple. I don't agree with Hardaway's comments, and likewise don't care that he made them. He just looks like an idiot, is all. The public; however, does make a big deal over this kind of expression. The same public to whom the NBA is using Hardaway to represent their product. If the public or media would ignore this kind of speech, the NBA wouldn't have thought twice about it either and Hardaway would still be a rep. It's just capitalism, man. ;)
BW
Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand.
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand.
-- Neil Peart -
People often ask about what is meant by having a 'secular progressive moral agenda' forced upon our society. Here [^] is a perfect example of what it means. The guy is banished for expressing opinions outside the main stream of modern, secular, moral views. There is absolutely no difference between this kind of social ostricism and what we would have if our society had, in fact, been taken over by a religious orthodoxy of some kind and gay people were banned for their views. It is exactly the same kind of social phenomenon and proof that humanity can never really escape religious-like behavior regardless of how far we push actual religion out of our lives. It is always there.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Don't you realize that it is evil to hate, and verbalize that hate unless: you hate: global climate change nuance deniers George Bush Tony Blair Those damned evil anti-illegal immigrant Minutemen Conservatives homophobes Republicans Christians Taxes (because taxes are good for everyone) Howard oops - I believe it is okay to hate Thatcher too. oops - honesty is not good either. -- modified at 10:42 Friday 16th February, 2007 -- modified at 10:44 Friday 16th February, 2007
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
but hatred
So? You get to define for people about which emotions are appropriate?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
So? You get to define for people about which emotions are appropriate?
If you want to keep the moral high ground, then hatred is never appropriate.
the last thing I want to see is some pasty-faced geek with skin so pale that it's almost translucent trying to bump parts with a partner - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before. -
Stan Shannon wrote:
So? You get to define for people about which emotions are appropriate?
If you want to keep the moral high ground, then hatred is never appropriate.
the last thing I want to see is some pasty-faced geek with skin so pale that it's almost translucent trying to bump parts with a partner - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
If you want to keep the moral high ground
He has no idea what that is.
"Christianity is not about tolerance"
Stan Shannon in the Soap BoxChristianity is about getting into heavan, and nothing else.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxThats because you're a f****ing leftist idiot.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxAnd you worthless bastards are proud of that. You assholes just suck.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxBeing classy is for losers.
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxa coalition of hispanics, blacks, and white leftists.
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxled mike
-
Don't you realize that it is evil to hate, and verbalize that hate unless: you hate: global climate change nuance deniers George Bush Tony Blair Those damned evil anti-illegal immigrant Minutemen Conservatives homophobes Republicans Christians Taxes (because taxes are good for everyone) Howard oops - I believe it is okay to hate Thatcher too. oops - honesty is not good either. -- modified at 10:42 Friday 16th February, 2007 -- modified at 10:44 Friday 16th February, 2007
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
Don't you realize that it is evil to hate, and verbalize that hate unless: you hate: global climate change nuance deniers George Bush Tony Blair Those damned evil anti-illegal immigrant Minutemen Conservatives homophobes Republicans Christians Taxes (because taxes are good for everyone) Howard oops - I believe it is okay to hate Thatcher too. oops - honesty is not good either. -- modified at 10:42 Friday 16th February, 2007 -- modified at 10:44 Friday 16th February, 2007
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
Of course, as sanctioned by our moral overlords.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
So? You get to define for people about which emotions are appropriate?
If you want to keep the moral high ground, then hatred is never appropriate.
the last thing I want to see is some pasty-faced geek with skin so pale that it's almost translucent trying to bump parts with a partner - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.Pete O`Hanlon wrote:
If you want to keep the moral high ground
My point precisely.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
I don't suppose you want to back that up with facts... never mind... I have no interest in being engulfed in more right wing nut hysteria lacking even a nuance of logic that is based in reality.
led mike
led mike wrote:
nuance of logic
tell you what sport, I'll match logic ability and IQ with you anytime you find yourself in the Indianapolis area. I simply love fucking with midgets.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
led mike wrote:
nuance of logic
tell you what sport, I'll match logic ability and IQ with you anytime you find yourself in the Indianapolis area. I simply love fucking with midgets.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
Just because you have the capacity does not mean you apply it to political subject matter. Once emotion takes over, it doesn't matter what your IQ is. The post I replied to gave no indication of your superior IQ and logic skills. It is just another example of right wing nut hysteria based on emotion rather than facts and logic. Your reply to me, or "challenge", did nothing to address it. Therefore it is a hollow challenge at best. You have the opportunity "right now" to utilize your self proclaimed superiority. Now what will you do with the opportunity?
led mike
-
Of course, as sanctioned by our moral overlords.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
Of course, as sanctioned by our moral overlords.
What "overlords". Morality exists, period. It does not change just because someone says so. According to your Christian beliefs, when your day comes you will discover the truth of your own morality. What anyone here and now claims to know will not effect the reckoning that you will face at that time. Here's what I can tell you about "your version" of Christianity. If you and people like you are going to be in heaven just because you claim to "believe" in Jesus, that all of your hate mongering and blood thirst will be forgiven because you claim to "believe" in Jesus, that your family pride based superior, compassionless, intolerant version of morality is forgiven, then heaven is the last place I want to be.
"Christianity is not about tolerance"
Stan Shannon in the Soap BoxChristianity is about getting into heavan, and nothing else.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxThats because you're a f****ing leftist idiot.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxAnd you worthless bastards are proud of that. You assholes just suck.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxBeing classy is for losers.
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxa coalition of hispanics, blacks, and white leftists.
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxled mike
-
Just because you have the capacity does not mean you apply it to political subject matter. Once emotion takes over, it doesn't matter what your IQ is. The post I replied to gave no indication of your superior IQ and logic skills. It is just another example of right wing nut hysteria based on emotion rather than facts and logic. Your reply to me, or "challenge", did nothing to address it. Therefore it is a hollow challenge at best. You have the opportunity "right now" to utilize your self proclaimed superiority. Now what will you do with the opportunity?
led mike
Sorry led, you replied to a factual statement and now you're adopting a passive-aggressive stance. It simply isn't worth the effort to continue.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Of course, as sanctioned by our moral overlords.
What "overlords". Morality exists, period. It does not change just because someone says so. According to your Christian beliefs, when your day comes you will discover the truth of your own morality. What anyone here and now claims to know will not effect the reckoning that you will face at that time. Here's what I can tell you about "your version" of Christianity. If you and people like you are going to be in heaven just because you claim to "believe" in Jesus, that all of your hate mongering and blood thirst will be forgiven because you claim to "believe" in Jesus, that your family pride based superior, compassionless, intolerant version of morality is forgiven, then heaven is the last place I want to be.
"Christianity is not about tolerance"
Stan Shannon in the Soap BoxChristianity is about getting into heavan, and nothing else.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxThats because you're a f****ing leftist idiot.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxAnd you worthless bastards are proud of that. You assholes just suck.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxBeing classy is for losers.
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxa coalition of hispanics, blacks, and white leftists.
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxled mike
led mike wrote:
What "overlords".
The overloads that compelled a 7 foot 300 lb millionaire to drop to his knees to beg for forgiveness.
led mike wrote:
Here's what I can tell you about "your version" of Christianity.
Have I ever even claimed to be a christian? If memory serves, the most I have ever claimed personnaly is that I try to live my life according to christian discipline. I mean, hell,I even 'believe in' evolution.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Sorry led, you replied to a factual statement and now you're adopting a passive-aggressive stance. It simply isn't worth the effort to continue.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
you replied to a factual statement
so you claim, but you offer no evidence. Where are the statements from people who claim "hate" is not a virtue, stating hatered of those "groups" you listed? Where?
Mike Gaskey wrote:
It simply isn't worth the effort to continue.
That often seems to be the case.
led mike
-
led mike wrote:
What "overlords".
The overloads that compelled a 7 foot 300 lb millionaire to drop to his knees to beg for forgiveness.
led mike wrote:
Here's what I can tell you about "your version" of Christianity.
Have I ever even claimed to be a christian? If memory serves, the most I have ever claimed personnaly is that I try to live my life according to christian discipline. I mean, hell,I even 'believe in' evolution.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
The overloads that compelled a 7 foot 300 lb millionaire to drop to his knees to beg for forgiveness.
If you are referring to Tim Hardaway he is neither 7 foot nor 300 pounds. He is, or at least was, a great basketball player none the less. What is interesting in your statement however is that you imply, I think, that because of someone's size or financial status that somehow "proves" their sense of morality is correct. I don't believe I can find the words to accurately describe how warped that is.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Have I ever even claimed to be a christian?
I see. So all those statements you made of "what" Christianity is were not based on your own personal experience of Christianity. Interesting, but you should not find it surprising that someone would take your statements to mean you are a practicing Christian.
led mike
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
The guy is banished
Banished by whom? By the representative of a corporation. Damn those secular progressive corporations forcing their moral agenda on their own employees! Next thing you know, they'll be allowing women, blacks, rednecks, and gays equal opportunities to work for them! How leftist of them! OMG, and look at this: the guy later apologized for his statements: "I want to apologize for my comments yesterday regarding gays," Hardaway's statement said. "My comments were offensive and I regret making them. I'm sorry to anyone I have offended." That leftist brainwashing machine sure acts quickly. :rolleyes:
Al Beback wrote:
Next thing you know, they'll be allowing women, blacks, rednecks, and gays equal opportunities to work for them! How leftist of them!
Redneck is not a class, race, income range, or social status: it is a state of mind :)
"I hope he can see this, because I'm doing it as hard as I can" - Ignignot