No, it's not.sleeper;1157309 wrote:Great. Still hilarious and hypocritical, like the entire faith system.
Til death do us part. Oh yeah, except for these special rules that are outline in a 3000 year old fiction novel.Skyhook79;1157319 wrote:No, it's not.
Non believers divorce too, are they hypocrites too?sleeper;1157322 wrote:Til death do us part. Oh yeah, except for these special rules that are outline in a 3000 year old fiction novel.
Get real.
Only if they try to tell people they're ruining the sanctity of marriage for some reason or another and then don't uphold the promises of their own (an example of that would be getting divorced). So the answer to your question is "maybe".Skyhook79;1157326 wrote:Non believers divorce too, are they hypocrites too?
Yes, but their marriage has nothing to do with god, unlike yours.Skyhook79;1157326 wrote:Non believers divorce too, are they hypocrites too?
You're older than 36?Skyhook79;1156993 wrote:I didn't become a baptized believer until age 36, so your point is not valid.
I acknowledged that it's not rational. It doesn't need to be.sleeper;1157210 wrote:I can use whatever I want as long as faith is seen as rational. Why engage in rational debate when the other side refuses to acknowledge how fraudulent and illogical their beliefs are?
Did they get married in a Church? By a Pastor/Minister/Priest?sleeper;1157363 wrote:Yes, but their marriage has nothing to do with god, unlike yours.
I've never been to a traditional wedding.Skyhook79;1157419 wrote:Did they get married in a Church? By a Pastor/Minister/Priest?
It doesn't. Just because there are hypocritical Christians doesn't mean Christianity is a fraud. Just as there are hypocritical atheist's doesn't make atheism a fraud. Whether Christianity is right or atheist's are right is where faith comes in. I choose Christianity, you choose atheism, in the end we will see who chose the right path or if there is even a right path, which I believe there is.sleeper;1157539 wrote:I've never been to a traditional wedding.
I don't see how calling others hypocrites makes the Christians any less hypocritical.
Good point. Christianity on its core fundamentals is a fraud, which has nothing to do with the cult like ceremonies.Skyhook79;1157763 wrote:It doesn't. Just because there are hypocritical Christians doesn't mean Christianity is a fraud. Just as there are hypocritical atheist's doesn't make atheism a fraud. Whether Christianity is right or atheist's are right is where faith comes in. I choose Christianity, you choose atheism, in the end we will see who chose the right path or if there is even a right path, which I believe there is.
Where do you stand on Priests raping little boys?Skyhook79;1157763 wrote:It doesn't. Just because there are hypocritical Christians doesn't mean Christianity is a fraud. Just as there are hypocritical atheist's doesn't make atheism a fraud. Whether Christianity is right or atheist's are right is where faith comes in. I choose Christianity, you choose atheism, in the end we will see who chose the right path or if there is even a right path, which I believe there is.
They were all "pitiful malcontents" anyway. Apparently the Catholic League isn't for the civil rights of children.DeyDurkie5;1157819 wrote:Where do you stand on Priests raping little boys?
Probably the same stance I have on anyone who rapes little boys.DeyDurkie5;1157819 wrote:Where do you stand on Priests raping little boys?
Just transfer them without legal punishment so they can do it again? good stance!Skyhook79;1157827 wrote:Probably the same stance I have on anyone who rapes little boys.
How do you feel about how they handled raping little boys? ANY other organization, and they most likely go bankrupt. But because it's the "church" it's pushed to the side and hidden for the most part. Hell, sandusky just showered with a kid and he got lambasted for it.Skyhook79;1157827 wrote:Probably the same stance I have on anyone who rapes little boys.
10 years after the fact. Not a great example.DeyDurkie5;1157847 wrote:How do you feel about how they handled raping little boys? ANY other organization, and they most likely go bankrupt. But because it's the "church" it's pushed to the side and hidden for the most part. Hell, sandusky just showered with a kid and he got lambasted for it.
Penn State didn't get "lambasted" for anything. They never fell apart even though they were definitely guilty of not taking action with Sandusky. Syracuse have yet to fall apart on Bernie Fine's supposed rapes.DeyDurkie5;1157847 wrote:How do you feel about how they handled raping little boys? ANY other organization, and they most likely go bankrupt. But because it's the "church" it's pushed to the side and hidden for the most part. Hell, sandusky just showered with a kid and he got lambasted for it.
That is not my stance, where did I say anything remotely like that?Raw Dawgin' it;1157836 wrote:Just transfer them without legal punishment so they can do it again? good stance!
Really? You really believe that?DeyDurkie5;1157847 wrote:How do you feel about how they handled raping little boys? ANY other organization, and they most likely go bankrupt. But because it's the "church" it's pushed to the side and hidden for the most part. Hell, sandusky just showered with a kid and he got lambasted for it.
Should I judge all Gay rights advocates and anti-bullying advocates by what Dan Savage says and does?I Wear Pants;1157825 wrote:They were all "pitiful malcontents" anyway. Apparently the Catholic League isn't for the civil rights of children.
Not really. But when a company that preaches "love thy neighbor" "be a good person" then turns around and has it's leaders rape boys, It's a bit hypocritical in my eye.Skyhook79;1157866 wrote:Really? You really believe that?
They are lawbreakers, sinners and should be justly punished for their actions.DeyDurkie5;1157877 wrote:Not really. But when a company that preaches "love thy neighbor" "be a good person" then turns around and has it's leaders rape boys, It's a bit hypocritical in my eye.