Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 16:34:48 GMT -5
They also act as if they are protecting a gay person's rights for pulling Phil off of the show but they've basically crapped all over Phil's own rights by punishing him for his freedom of speech. You mean like every liberal ever? "You have the freedom of religion, unless you're Christian, and the freedom of speech, unless you speak against our beliefs." :thumbsup: Perfect description. |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 18:07:41 GMT -5
I swear to god if I hear one more teen song with a group of white kids and one token black one I'm killing someone.
|
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 19, 2013 18:09:59 GMT -5
I swear to god if I hear one more teen song with a group of white kids and one token black one I'm killing someone. I would post a video of whatever it is you are describing.... If I knew what you were describing. |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 18:20:07 GMT -5
I swear to god if I hear one more teen song with a group of white kids and one token black one I'm killing someone. I would post a video of whatever it is you are describing.... If I knew what you were describing. watch cartoon network and you'll see |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 18:32:40 GMT -5
They also act as if they are protecting a gay person's rights for pulling Phil off of the show but they've basically crapped all over Phil's own rights by punishing him for his freedom of speech. You mean like every liberal ever? "You have the freedom of religion, unless you're Christian, and the freedom of speech, unless you speak against our beliefs." I think you're misrepresenting here. I can only speak for my self but You have freedom to religion but it's your personal religion and shouldn't be allowed to force it onto others no one religion or lack of religous belief should get special treatment over anyone else belief . As for free speech. People have the right to free speech but that doesn't mean you get immunity from the consequences for what you say. No matter how racist, homophobic, sexist, ect I believe they have the right to say it but that doesn't mean they get immunity from backlash rather I agree with them or disagree with what they said. Should Phil have been suspended? it's not for me to say I would lean toward no. |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 19, 2013 18:43:56 GMT -5
You mean like every liberal ever? "You have the freedom of religion, unless you're Christian, and the freedom of speech, unless you speak against our beliefs." I think you're misrepresenting here. I can only speak for my self but You have freedom to religion but it's your personal religion and shouldn't be allowed to force it onto others no one religion or lack of religous belief should get special treatment over anyone else belief . As for free speech. People have the right to free speech but that doesn't mean you get immunity from the consequences for what you say. No matter how racist, homophobic, sexist, ect I believe they have the right to say it but that doesn't mean they get immunity from backlash rather I agree with them or disagree with what they said. Should Phil have been suspended? it's not for me to say I would lean toward no. So according to you, we have freedom to follow our religion unless we spread our religion and express our religion like our religion tells us to? So we can follow our religion, unless we do it publicly like we are supposed to? So instead we should hide our beliefs because fools like you might get offended by our religion? Remember, it's freedom OF religion that was expressed in the constitution, NOT freedom FROM religion. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Dec 19, 2013 18:53:09 GMT -5
You have freedom to religion but it's your personal religion and shouldn't be allowed to force it onto others Really? Then why is murder wrong? And don't give me "because everybody agrees that it is." That's not the case. The Constitution speaks of Freedom OF Religion, not Freedom FROM Religion. Our legal system was based on Christian ethics, and the people that wrote it minced no words about that fact. When they spoke of Freedom of Religion, they meant that no one should be given lesser legal status because they were Roman Catholic, Jewish, or agnostic... not that every Religion (or no religion) should always have equal consideration when laws are written. As history has proven, it's simply not even possible to provide such a thing; when two belief systems are at opposition, the law cannot remain neutral. As to your statement about the repercussions of free speech; you're partially correct, but as is usually the case (no offense), because you're on the other side, you don't perceive the massive inequality of treatment that occurs on a daily basis, despite the two views having roughly equal support from the general public. |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 18:55:54 GMT -5
I think you're misrepresenting here. I can only speak for my self but You have freedom to religion but it's your personal religion and shouldn't be allowed to force it onto others no one religion or lack of religous belief should get special treatment over anyone else belief . As for free speech. People have the right to free speech but that doesn't mean you get immunity from the consequences for what you say. No matter how racist, homophobic, sexist, ect I believe they have the right to say it but that doesn't mean they get immunity from backlash rather I agree with them or disagree with what they said. Should Phil have been suspended? it's not for me to say I would lean toward no. So according to you, we have freedom to follow our religion unless we spread our religion and express our religion like our religion tells us to? So we can follow our religion, unless we do it publicly like we are supposed to? So instead we should hide our beliefs because fools like you might get offended by our religion? Remember, it's freedom OF religion that was expressed in the constitution, NOT freedom FROM religion. You can spread your religion but to those who don't mind hearing it, that being said I'm sure those who have a interest in hearing your religion would go to a church or read whatever religious text you follow. Actually wasn't Jesus not for public expression of one religion? It's about your religion getting the same treatment as other beliefs. Meaning people have the right to whatever religious belief they want to believe in. |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 19, 2013 18:56:14 GMT -5
You have freedom to religion but it's your personal religion and shouldn't be allowed to force it onto others The Constitution speaks of Freedom OF Religion, not Freedom FROM Religion. High five on saying almost the exact same thing! |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 19, 2013 18:58:43 GMT -5
So according to you, we have freedom to follow our religion unless we spread our religion and express our religion like our religion tells us to? So we can follow our religion, unless we do it publicly like we are supposed to? So instead we should hide our beliefs because fools like you might get offended by our religion? Remember, it's freedom OF religion that was expressed in the constitution, NOT freedom FROM religion. Actually wasn't Jesus not for public expression of one religion? It's about your religion getting the same treatment as other beliefs. Use logic and you can see pretty easily that this is utterly false. Jesus went around speaking the word of God, so why the hell would he be against people going around and speaking the word of God? |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 19:08:58 GMT -5
You have freedom to religion but it's your personal religion and shouldn't be allowed to force it onto others , You can't be serious. Murder was consider wrong before the Bible of even written. Meaning you can practice your religion "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" This is way we don't governor base off religion. As I said I disagree with Phil being suspended. You're right when it comes to gay right America is almost 50/50(52/48 the last I checked) |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 19, 2013 19:12:18 GMT -5
Yes, the government established entirely by Christians based on their beliefs is not in anyway based on the Christian religion.
Makes sense...I suppose...
|
|
|
|
Post by ethanm1834 on Dec 19, 2013 19:12:58 GMT -5
I was wondering when this would come up.
|
|
|
|
Post by ethanm1834 on Dec 19, 2013 19:15:09 GMT -5
Look the Phil thing isn't even about freedom of speech. It's about marketing and accountability. He signed a contract and networks generally have contracts like this because you represent their network. I have one with my company, even while I'm not at work, I am a representative of them. If I say something that casts them in a negative light or brings negative attention to them they have cause to fire me.
|
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 19:15:39 GMT -5
Actually wasn't Jesus not for public expression of one religion? It's about your religion getting the same treatment as other beliefs. Use logic and you can see pretty easily that this is utterly false. Jesus went around speaking the word of God, so why the hell would he be against people going around and speaking the word of God? In terms of public praying Jesus was not for it(Matthew 6:5-15) but if we're talking in terms of street preaching or what the WestBro BaptistChurch does no he never expressed his belief. |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 19:18:15 GMT -5
Yes, the government established entirely by Christians based on their beliefs is not in anyway based on the Christian religion. Makes sense...I suppose... Considering we have a separation of church and state and what was written in the Treaty of Tripoli I would say it's not a christian nation. "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 19, 2013 19:19:30 GMT -5
Use logic and you can see pretty easily that this is utterly false. Jesus went around speaking the word of God, so why the hell would he be against people going around and speaking the word of God? In terms of public praying Jesus was not for it(Matthew 6:5-15) but if we're talking in terms of street preaching or what the WestBro BaptistChurch does no he never expressed his belief. Jesus went around preaching to people all the time, as did the prophets. Do you really think he would be against people doing what he himself dedicated his life to doing? |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 19:19:43 GMT -5
I was wondering when this would come up. I think we all knew it would happen at some point  It's better to just get it out of the way now and we can all move on. |
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Dec 19, 2013 19:20:24 GMT -5
I like cheeseburgers. I really enjoy double cheeseburgers. I'm going to marry a bacon cheeseburger.
|
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Dec 19, 2013 19:20:36 GMT -5
In terms of public praying Jesus was not for it(Matthew 6:5-15) but if we're talking in terms of street preaching or what the WestBro BaptistChurch does no he never expressed his belief. Jesus went around preaching to people all the time, as did the prophets. Do you really think he would be against people doing what he himself dedicated his life to doing? Fair enough. |
|
It's better to just get it out of the way now and we can all move on. 
