|
Well you should have stuck with your basic debate. Your explanation takes things into another realm.
But I’m going to ignore that.
Anyway, you are absolutely correct. Our natural response is to try to categorize people and things
into recognizable groups. It’s an extremely useful ability in terms of being able to make quick
decisions as well as in analyzing the ‘Big Picture’. However there is a sacrifice in accuracy on
the individual level. No two people think exactly the same way in any group. I would have to say you
miller are plenty guilty of the same error in regards to other people who might fall into different
categories than yours. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sure. But if treating a whole group's beliefs or behaviors as monolithic is invalid then all of
your other debates where you bich your stereotypes and insults at everyone in a group are also
invalid. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
That kinda is a self defeating argument. And there are a lot of blind following sheep... As well as
so many different versions of christianity... So someone isn't thinking and someone else IS doing
too much thinking independently.
Now you can get the scenario where many people took aristotle and philosophize a very aristotelian
christian version of him. It's not quite antichristian but it is indepepndent. Just like every
person goes through phases of questioning in life, I believe there are christian versions. Saying
that these people are not independent in their understanding is illogical unless they are totally
blind sheep. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
In some cases christians are a monolithic group and be defined as such.
The definition of a christian is someone who thinks there was a cheezus and claims to follow "him".
Any discussion that defines christians on that basis is valid.
That's true even if you don't particularly like or agree with the group. Pointing out that the Ku
Klux Klowns are christians doesn't infer that all christians agree with them. If you knew anything
about mathematics and set theory, you'd know that supersets define a subset, but not the reverse.
Strangely, time and again I hear christians do the very thing you are railing against. I've lost
count of christians falsely infer that all atheists are communists, or that all muslims are
terrorists. Even within the ranks of christians, some protestants will call catholics "papists" and
"satanists", or within protestants baptists see anglicans as "flawed" or "failing", or within
baptists, fundamentalists see baptists as "too liberal", etc.
Clean up your own house - in this case, christianity as a whole, which is a valid generalization.
You don't agree with each other, and most of the time, what's being said is an opinion of the
speaker who wants others to bend to his will (e.g. You), not the opinion of "god".
If you don't like what someone says, ask him for a clarification of which particular group he's
talking about. |
| |
 K9  24 Oct 2009 14:24
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
So why do Christians freely put Muslims in one bucket? Hmm. Please answer that one. And don't give
me that, "not all" argument because most do from average people to the Media christian talking
heads. They do not hold back their charges against Muslim behavior.
Than we have the regular gay bashing from Christians on this website. Nobody uses the "Not all"
dislaimer either. Its just a blanket judgement of Gays . Again, why do you freely do that?
The problem is you Christians love to dish out your verbal attacks and abuse toward anyone that
doesn't follow your belief. But when your belief is challenged and your behaviors are brought
forward, you call foul.
Sorry, but a Christian is a Christian. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
