Post Reply
Page 22 of 22  •  Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22
Switch to Forum Live View Does the Baha'i faith
3 years ago  ::  Dec 07, 2011 - 10:43AM #211
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Actually, the issue is simply honesty, not equality.


After 20 pages, that's beyond obvious.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 07, 2011 - 11:15AM #212
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Also Wabbit, you have won an award:

"Most Red Herrings in a single thread".


Gratz. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 07, 2011 - 1:56PM #213
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

Dec 7, 2011 -- 10:43AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Actually, the issue is simply honesty, not equality.


After 20 pages, that's beyond obvious.




I don't see how anybody has been remotely dishonest with you.


I think perhaps the issue is, you're not being told what you want to hear.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 07, 2011 - 4:58PM #214
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Dec 7, 2011 -- 1:56PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Dec 7, 2011 -- 10:43AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Actually, the issue is simply honesty, not equality.


After 20 pages, that's beyond obvious.




I don't see how anybody has been remotely dishonest with you.


I think perhaps the issue is, you're not being told what you want to hear.




Which indicates more dishonesty and yet another fallacy.  I've shown the defintions and all that they require is that you treat one group differently, by nature of being in a group-you do, so that's discimination yet none admit it=dishonesty.


Either way, you don't stay with a cheating girlfriend either.  This thread has come as far as it can.  We can all just disagree on what discrimination is, what honesty is, what atheism is, etc. it is obvious Bahai's ignore dictionaries and instead believe themselves to have the right to make it up as they go to feel fuzzy.


  All I've seen from Baha'is in this thread is rhetoric and red herrings. 


Lastly-the debate was won when your UK spirit council was quoted as admitting it to be discrimination.... so obviously "honesty" is not a revered virtue on this thread.  I'll take a Baha'i spirit council's word on it and you guys on this thread go ahead and make it up however you like. 


It's not about what I want to hear-if that was the case, I'd obviously be arguing MORALITY-would I not?  That's where beliefs and thus desires come into this.  I certainly wanted the respect of honesty-instead I got rhetoric and people trying to redefine a very objective word... even after a leadership group of Bahai is quoted as agreeing with me, and contradicting you (everyone Bahai on this thread).  The only agreement between bahais on this thread and that  council is that the discrimination is JUSTIFIED and not as bad as others, such as racism.  


I'm done with this thread, you all keep up the good work making Baha'is look so honorable.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 07, 2011 - 5:31PM #215
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

Dec 7, 2011 -- 4:58PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Dec 7, 2011 -- 1:56PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Dec 7, 2011 -- 10:43AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Actually, the issue is simply honesty, not equality.


After 20 pages, that's beyond obvious.




I don't see how anybody has been remotely dishonest with you.


I think perhaps the issue is, you're not being told what you want to hear.




Which indicates more dishonesty and yet another fallacy.  I've shown the defintions and all that they require is that you treat one group differently, by nature of being in a group-you do, so that's discimination yet none admit it=dishonesty.


Either way, you don't stay with a cheating girlfriend either.  This thread has come as far as it can.  We can all just disagree on what discrimination is, what honesty is, what atheism is, etc. it is obvious Bahai's ignore dictionaries and instead believe themselves to have the right to make it up as they go to feel fuzzy.


  All I've seen from Baha'is in this thread is rhetoric and red herrings. 


Lastly-the debate was won when your UK spirit council was quoted as admitting it to be discrimination.... so obviously "honesty" is not a revered virtue on this thread.  I'll take a Baha'i spirit council's word on it and you guys on this thread go ahead and make it up however you like. 


It's not about what I want to hear-if that was the case, I'd obviously be arguing MORALITY-would I not?  That's where beliefs and thus desires come into this.  I certainly wanted the respect of honesty-instead I got rhetoric and people trying to redefine a very objective word... even after a leadership group of Bahai is quoted as agreeing with me, and contradicting you (everyone Bahai on this thread).  The only agreement between bahais on this thread and that  council is that the discrimination is JUSTIFIED and not as bad as others, such as racism.  


I'm done with this thread, you all keep up the good work making Baha'is look so honorable.




I'm not following your reasoning, nor am I trying to be snarky.


I said directly, of course, the Baha'i Faith, like many relgions, discriminates in favor of only one type of marriage.


What I, and some others, were taking issue with is the notion that discrimination, in that sense, equals "bigotry."


Past that, I don't much care. It's my impression you have a hostile presdisposition toward the Baha'i Faith, because on this issue, at least, it's not telling you what you want to hear. 


I don't judge things according to the sentiments of others, and most certainly not the popular sentiments of the day. I judge them according to how they square against objective reality. As I Baha'i, I know it's nothing less than my duty to do so.


And while hatred toward gay people remains a very real, and unacceptable, problem in our society, many claims made by gay rights simply don't stand up to objective reality or rational, fair-minded scrutiny. 


And I see many of the same flaws in your assertion here. You're trying to push things in a rhetorical direction in order to satisfy your pre-concived notions.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 09, 2011 - 11:33AM #216
Aka_me
Posts: 12,171

Dec 7, 2011 -- 4:58PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

Which indicates more dishonesty and yet another fallacy.  I've shown the defintions and all that they require is that you treat one group differently, by nature of being in a group-you do, so that's discimination yet none admit it=dishonesty.



how about treating men different from women?


putting requirements on men not to have relations with XYZ... yet not putting any requirements on women?


discrimination right?

not being able to debate is one thing, employing censorship to avoid debate is beyond words.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 22 of 22  •  Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook