Church invites man's best friend

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Manchu**

Frazzled wrote:No locks any more. Sheriff's gone. Go to town. Rob the Bank! Annoy the school marm! the end fo the Dog is nigh!

Quoi??? What is this MODdish trickery?

**Frazzled**

I am not regulating religion threads any more. I figure if I am potentially part of the problem, then I can be part of the solution, no?
On the positive, I've always wanted to call all you people infidels, you wacky bunch of infidels.

**mattyrm**

I think its cos Frazz said something along the lines of not locking threads anymore cos a few people had a go at him in another thread.

And the end of the dog might be due to him saying that this attitude might spell the end of the Off-topic forum.

I hope not, this one is easily the most interesting.. i read about 40K all the time!

**Manchu**

Also, your reasons for resigning this responsibility are unacceptably logical and bafflingly indicate sincerity. I shall await what I am sure is an already-incoming picture of a wiener dog to accompany your inevitable locking of this thread.

I refuse to accept that the sun has set upon the patented Frazzled Thread Lock Method (C), Christianity's most reliable bulwark in this benighted and heathenous corner of the virtual frontier. Now I will actually have to ignore the angry internet atheists? I will not have Exterminatus called down upon them as they quote their Lord-Saint-Angel-God Richard Dawkins? Frazzled, reconsider the importance of your bias to sanity in these threads? Won't you please think of the children???

**mattyrm**

Yeah i agree with Manchu. (not the bias to sanity bit obviously) You should still lock threads. After all, if you Christian lot start actually letting us infidels talk, then you will have proven me wrong in that i always point out how much the "big 3" love censorship!

**Manchu**

I would sooner declare reverse-jihad on an entire legion of furious Mohammedans, pronouncing reverse-fatwa upon each mullah before challenging the Jannisaries to form single-file lines for single combat, than see Off Topic polluted with the inanity streaming from the apostasy-hole of a single angry internet atheist much less the great myriad of them slobbering, teenage identity search hormones all a-kindled, for just such a chance to pipe up on complex theological topics that they know nothing about with a smugness ten thousand times more noxious than the worst one might find in YMDC. I beg you, Frazzled, for the sake of defending the West against its own woodenly stupid youth, to pick up once more the sword and shield of biased Modquisition powers! In hoc signo vinces!!!

**mattyrm**

Manchu wrote:... than see Off Topic polluted with the inanity streaming from the apostasy-hole of a single angry internet atheist much less the great myriad of them slobbering, teenage identity search hormones all a-kindled, for just such a chance to pipe up on complex theological topics that they know nothing about with a smugness ten thousand times more noxious than the worst one might find in YMDC.

Er... I am 30 years old?

Your ludicrous all consuming tirade about people who dont happen to share your faith is most amusing. You, just like many other people of "faith" seem to be more than happy to insult people, and then cry about it if anyoone happens to toss anything even remotely resembling a rebuttal back in your direction.

A great many secularists start out religious, and change their views as they age. To suggest it is all "teenage identity search hormones" is demonstrably ridiculous.

Im not offended, i dont want you banned or silenced. Indeed, the more you speak like that, the more it proves my point. You behaviour is akin to some sort of veteran street thug that calls the police when a victim finally fights back.

But Please, carry on!

**generalgrog**

@mattyrm

It's fairly obvious that you have an axe to grind, and seem to be itchin' to have a knock down drag out "debate" over religion. Your fairly new here, so you haven't experienced one of these. I recomend that you do a OT forum search and you can find some of the past threads where we have debated several things, such as evolution vs creation, historicity of Christ, being some of the most interesting ones IMO.

However if after reading those past topics and you are still itching to discuss the topic I would be more than happy to have a pm discussion with you about it. If we were to take it up here on these forums it would invariably go down the same road/roads we have allready been. Most people are tired of seeing it.

GG

**reds8n**

generalgrog wrote: Most people are tired of seeing it.

Indeed they are, if the sudden influx of user alerts and PMs that spring up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. a thread like that starts off is anything to go by.

So much so that whilst the removal of the OT board is unlikely there is serious thought given to a moratorium on threads about Religion/politics/issue X etc etc.

...but let's not worry about that in this thread eh ?

**Manchu**

Yeah, er, Matty, I forgot you were new. That wasn't serious. If you read some of the stuff grog just mentioned, I think you'll see what I mean. Ha, but thanks for playing into the stereotypes I was evoking!

**mattyrm**

GG, yeah im kinda knew, i dont have a desperate urge to "debate" with people. I just feel the need to point it out when people state what are their opinions as "fact".

The reason it has happened so many times is that alot of people are on here (i can name 5 or 6 already!) are devoutly religious and this is inevitably dragging me into conflict.

To be fair, i dont go on any forums other than this, and devoutly religious people are very rare where i live in the UK, so i am rather unused to dealing with it.

I really do try to keep a lid on it, but as long as people keep on constantly mentioning "God" and religion then i am going to keep getting the urge to pitch in with my opinion because it seems to me like it is terribly unfair to only allow one side of the coin on the forums.

Regards PMs, i would love for you to make a convincing case for creationism to send me it if you believe in it, as i find the peoples opinions on this matter (and how they came to them) genuinely fascinating.

And as always, i remain sincere in my attempts to be as civil as possible. I never get offended when my non belief is "bashed" and i think that people need to grow thicker skins.

@ Manchu, which stereotype did i play into exactly? The fact that i am not teenage, slobbering, angry, hormone addled or smug and noxious

**Frazzled**

Manchu wrote:

Also, your reasons for resigning this responsibility are unacceptably logical and bafflingly indicate sincerity. I shall await what I am sure is an already-incoming picture of a wiener dog to accompany your inevitable locking of this thread.

I refuse to accept that the sun has set upon the patented Frazzled Thread Lock Method (C), Christianity's most reliable bulwark in this benighted and heathenous corner of the virtual frontier. Now I will actually have to ignore the angry internet atheists? I will not have Exterminatus called down upon them as they quote their Lord-Saint-Angel-God Richard Dawkins? Frazzled, reconsider the importance of your bias to sanity in these threads? Won't you please think of the children???

Fear, the Weaner Dogs of Death! See how they cleverly give the appearance of warm relaxation, but its a deception! They are really coiled springs of DOOM!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:

A great many secularists start out religious, and change their views as they age.

Of course the reverse is true is well, many a person sees the light as it were later in life, once they've seen the glories of life.

**Manchu**

mattyrm wrote:Regards PMs, i would love for you to make a convincing case for creationism to send me it if you believe in it

Just want to further clarify that creationism is not Christianity. (Would you be assuming some facts there, bub?)

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Intelligent design is not science and should not be taught as a scientific theory in schools alongside Darwinian evolution, an article in the Vatican newspaper said.

The article said that in pushing intelligent design some groups were improperly seeking miraculous explanations in a way that creates confusion between religious and scientific fields.

At the same time, scientists should recognize that evolutionary theory does not exclude an overall purpose in creation -- a "superior design" that may be realized through secondary causes like natural selection, it said.

The article, published in the Jan. 17 edition of L'Osservatore Romano, was written by Fiorenzo Facchini, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Bologna in Italy.

The article noted that the debate over intelligent design -- the idea that certain features of life and the universe are best explained by an intelligent designer rather than adaptive evolution -- has spread from the United States to Europe.

The problem with intelligent design is that it turns to a "superior cause" -- understood though not necessarily named as God -- to explain supposed shortcomings of evolutionary science. But that's not how science should work, the article said.

"If the model proposed by Darwin is held to be inadequate, one should look for another model. But it is not correct methodology to stray from the field of science pretending to do science," it said.

The article said a Pennsylvania judge had acted properly when he ruled in December that intelligent design could not be taught as science in schools.

"Intelligent design does not belong to science and there is no justification for the pretext that it be taught as a scientific theory alongside the Darwinian explanation," it said.

From the church's point of view, Catholic teaching says God created all things from nothing, but doesn't say how, the article said. That leaves open the possibilities of evolutionary mechanisms like random mutation and natural selection.

"God's project of creation can be carried out through secondary causes in the natural course of events, without having to think of miraculous interventions that point in this or that direction," it said.

What the church does insist upon is that the emergence of the human supposes a willful act of God, and that man cannot be seen as only the product of evolutionary processes, it said. The spiritual element of man is not something that could have developed from natural selection but required an "ontological leap," it said.

The article said that, unfortunately, what has helped fuel the intelligent design debate is a tendency among some Darwinian scientists to view evolution in absolute and ideological terms, as if everything -- including first causes -- can be attributed to chance.

"Science as such, with its methods, can neither demonstrate nor exclude that a superior design has been carried out," it said.

From a religious viewpoint, it said, there is no doubt that the human story "has a sense and a direction that is marked by a superior design."

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0600273.htm

**mattyrm**

No Manchu, of course i wasnt assuming facts. Catholicism is not Creationism. I am extremely well versed on this subject and pointed out several times that the Catholic church had accepted evolution. Also i sent Jeb a PM outlining my thoughts on this issue several days ago.

The reason I asked if he was a Creationist is because he has a quote at the bottom of his posts from David Berlinski.

**Albatross**

Anyway.....

Dogs in church?

**mattyrm**

Albatross wrote:Anyway.....

Dogs in church?

Yeah.. i like dogs. ive already said so several times. I vote yes.

**Manchu**

mattyrm wrote:I never get offended when my non belief is "bashed" and i think that people need to grow thicker skins.

vs.

mattyrm wrote:You behaviour is akin to some sort of veteran street thug that calls the police when a victim finally fights back.

mattyrm wrote:@ Manchu, which stereotype did i play into exactly?

I think it was the "have my cake and eat it, too" angry internet atheist one. The one where you get defensive and insulting while claiming that the religionists are being defensive and insulting but no worries everyone because you're not offended at all. In all seriousness, no actual worries, though, mate. I've seen it again and again, in life and especially on Off Topic. Trust me, there's nothing new that either of us or anyone else could add to these fruitless discussions. Besides the way to faith is not paved with the same bricks from which arguments are built. I see no reason to defend my personal faith (I once sounded a lot like you but am over it), I just hate to see people misrepresenting what the institutional facet of that faith teaches. But if you have serious questions, I'd be glad to answer.

**mattyrm**

Manchu, very true. Neither of us will add anything new, and both of us are merely reacting when we think people are misrepresenting our opinions.

I concur, of course.

And no actual worries indeed.

Hey so do you think they should have dogs in church or not?!

**youngblood**

Churches should be allowed to have dogs. You should be able to drink beer during the service. There shouldn't be pastors. Worship doesn't equal music. Get-out-of-hell card free (aka Jesus) shouldn't be the driving reason churches exist. Denominations shouldn't exist. The majority of church tradition comes from cultural influence.

So ya, do away with institutional church and you can have your dog and drink beer too.

**Manchu**

No, I don't think we should have dogs or cats or birds, etc, at mass. We can have them blessed on St Francis's feast day outside but we needn't dirty the sanctuary. (Think of the poor sacristans and ladies' alter guilds who have to tidy up in the wake of such a mess!) There is no religious reason for this, as has been mentioned. It is purely practical.

@youngblood: You're in luck! Worship actually doesn't equal music and there is no get-out-of-hell-free card. Denominations (from the Catholic perspective) are also basically non-existent and every respectable scholar of Tradition agrees with you about cultural influence. Also, one free, albeit modest, alcoholic refreshment is provided to every communicant at every service. Trust me, it's the best drink you'll ever have. Plus, there are no restrictions on drinking beer or any other alcoholic beverage afterwards!

**generalgrog**

mattyrm wrote:GG, yeah im kinda knew, i dont have a desperate urge to "debate" with people. I just feel the need to point it out when people state what are their opinions as "fact".

I understand, and I have the same impulse, which I am learning to control, to point out when people state their opinions as "fact". The hard thing is to pick and choose when it is "appropriate" to interject your(and mine) opinion. It can be a fine line sometimes, because I think we are in agreement that we don't want to intentionally make people angry. As you have seen, some people object to the mere mention of God. Which I personally don't think is fair, as long as the mention of God is not obnoxious or a blatant attempt at prosceletising, and or directly related to the topic at hand.

mattyrm wrote:
The reason it has happened so many times is that alot of people are on here (i can name 5 or 6 already!) are devoutly religious and this is inevitably dragging me into conflict.

To be fair, i dont go on any forums other than this, and devoutly religious people are very rare where i live in the UK, so i am rather unused to dealing with it.

I really do try to keep a lid on it, but as long as people keep on constantly mentioning "God" and religion then i am going to keep getting the urge to pitch in with my opinion because it seems to me like it is terribly unfair to only allow one side of the coin on the forums..

I don't think one side has ever been "sensored". The problem is when one side is rude,obnoxious,insulting, etc.etc. This is the behaviour that gets sensored. There have been many times where there is several page long debate about some issue, where both sides are giving their arguments respectfully and sometimes it gets heated. Then "out of the blue" someone with the internet etiquette, equivalent to terretts syndrome jumps in making insulting, ignorant comments, when all they had to do was type their objection respectfully. It happens over and over again.

mattyrm wrote:
Regards PMs, i would love for you to make a convincing case for creationism to send me it if you believe in it, as i find the peoples opinions on this matter (and how they came to them) genuinely fascinating...

This is an interesting site http://www.evcforum.net/

I have learned a lot on there, and most people on their are evlolutionists.

And another thing, I have been debating removing my sig, as it could be construed as "baiting"

GG

**mattyrm**

They have alcohol at service?!

I think i feel a conversion coming on ....

**youngblood**

mattyrm wrote:They have alcohol at service?!

I think i feel a conversion coming on ....

Everyone knows that catholics get the goods.

**Albatross**

@Mattyrm/Manchu/GG

- Aww! See? These arguments often seem to work themselves out when the modquisition doesn't step in so frequently or heavy-handedly. It's certainly been the case whenever I've had a debate such as this via PM.

**Manchu**

@Alby: I always looked at it as more of a sport (up to a point, that point being full-on trolling). I'm sad to see the Mods are seriously considering that it be gotten rid of. All board argument should ultimately diffuse into humor. I think Frazz and Kilkrazy are Jedi masters at that. Alpharius is like their padawan. I'd rather people get their crap out in OT with insoluble and ultimately meaningless debate over religion than keep taking it to YMDC where it really does tear the community apart.

**Albatross**

@Manchu - It would sadden me if they got rid of the OT - I'm pretty much an OT Dakkite. OK, I chime in in other forums from time to time - but I mainly come here to shoot the breeze with other table-top wargamers from around the globe. Well, North America and Britain.

**Kanluwen**

Obviously the best, and only, solution to people not getting along is to have a ready supply of youtube links and photobucket links that can result in the levels of insanity that the Changer of Ways himself couldn't even imagine.

**tblock1984**

First of all, sorry for the wall of text...
Second, my internet has been off for the past week, so I am just reading this thread. Sorry if I am out of line or totally off topic
Third, fething AT&T!!! FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU...

Albatross wrote:@Manchu - It would sadden me if they got rid of the OT - I'm pretty much an OT Dakkite. OK, I chime in in other forums from time to time - but I mainly come here to shoot the breeze with other table-top wargamers from around the globe. Well, North America and Britain.

QFT... Me too. Kirsanth has crunched the numbers... 95% of my Dakka posts are OT...

I did feel the urge to debate when I first got here. I have baggage about Mormon's, and Frazz called me intolerant because of it. We actually had an 3 day long beef. Frazz, if you don't mind, I would like to share these PM's. I am not going to dredge up the old issue. Just the fallout:

tblock1984 wrote:Hey Frazz,

I have a beef, with you this time. I was just wondering why you insist on calling me intolerant? Below is copy-pasta from the thread in question, a quote from a PM, as well as a quote you made in another thread.

Frazzled wrote:Lets remember Rule #1 people. Attack the argument, not the poster.

That is what I was doing... I was defending the argument. Mad Dok spoke his mind about Bible thumpers. Jeb went ape gak. He said:

JEB_Stuart wrote:you border on the irresponsible by constantly trashing other peoples beliefs and belittling their intellect. It is completely disrespectful and uncalled for."

Well, his post offended MY religion. I felt like he said that my opinion doesn't matter if it isn't Christian, a sentiment you echoed at the end of the thread.

Frazzled wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:So free speech means nothing compared to the passages in a book of unprovable provedence?

Translation-slamming religion on Dakka is not permitted youbetcha.

Later, in a PM, he said:

JEB_Stuart wrote:I never said anyone couldn't share their opinions. If you read my post you would note that I only demanded respect. MDG, among others, has a history of being incredibly disrespectful towards Christians and that is neither proper or within the rules of the forum."

So, disrespecting the thoughts of a Druid is OK (and indeed encouraged by the rules of this forum, and yourself), but disrespecting a Christian gets Mod attention?

Feth that. He demands respect, throws a fething hissy-fit, and I try to defuse the argument by saying that:
Christian=/=stupid, and I was paraphrased, mis-quoted, and you flame me and call me intolerant... Twice
/boggle

Or, Frazz, is this the reason why:

Frazzled wrote:Really? I didn't see those posts on here. Maybe we're both interpreting differently.

I like it here on Dakka, but if this is the way people of alternative faith are treated, I think I am going to take a little vacation from it.

I implore you to please reread what was said and see who was trolling whom. I was saying:
Stupidity and intolerance doesn't discriminate against religion. It makes me sad when bad decisions are made when logic is disregarded because of faith, and not by ignorance...

Let me tell you this:
If I had used an insurgent with a bomb strapped to his chest as an example of a bad decision based on faith instead of logic, the whole tread would have applauded and say the solution is to NUKE THE FETHERS!! But Jeb said: "The cynicism that drips from your point of view is nowhere near reality."
So I gave him a dose of reality as a counter point in his debate with MGD. Oh well... Now I am ranting again.

I am not reporting anything... for the moment. Contrary to popular belief, I am tolerant... but if something like this happens again, I might reconsider it.

Frazz then countered:

Frazzled wrote:I did not see the Druid thing. Is that a religion? I thought that had died out.

Comments attacking people's religious views out of hand are not acceptable, neither is attacking religion in general. The reverse is also true, attacking atheism out of hand is not acceptable on this board. We can discuss the merits of a religion/nonreligion and their philosphical points (the rare time a good discussion on that occurrs) but straight trashing is right out.

You were trashing Mormons. Irrespective of my opinions on that belief thats close minded. Then you tied your family into it. You really can separate the two.

I reply:

tblock1984 wrote:Uh, no... I was not trashing Mormons. No offense, but did you read what I wrote? Yes, I used an example of their doctrine in the story about my family, who IS Mormon. For me the, two things are painfully one. And, my second post on mormons was to clarify what some one else wrote. No, I didn't say I was a Druid, exactly. Should I have? An argument about Christianity is always better when people are not listening and calling you a ignorant pagan, instead. Is that better than an intolerant atheist? Hurm... It has been three days... I am tired of trying to argue about this sad atrocity that is being treated differently because I don't believe in Jesus.

The moral of the story:

Be careful, the debate you want so badly is not going to be fun if there IS NO SOLUTION!!!

When it comes to debates about religion, there IS NO SOLUTION!!! Agree to disagree or STFU!!!

The person you just unknowing insulted is probably just as bi-polar or damaged as you are. The debate will end in tears... An there is a 50-50 chance they will be yours...

Understanding and tolerance are two different things. Do not assume either you or your debate partner know the difference. Those concepts ave VERY SUBJECTIVE!!!

Frazz and other mods probably get 37 PMs like this a day...

Sorry for the EPIC SOAP!!! I just had to... Mah intarwebz have been gone for days... I am in WITHDRAWS!!! MUST VENT NERDRAGE in healthy manner!!!

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU...

OK, all better

Dakka OT is mah therapy

Thx Dakka!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW, sorry JEB... I wrote that before we squashed the issue...

**JEB_Stuart**

Iz cool, Ima go back to paintin da boyz now

**chromedog**

I think dogs in church are a great idea.

As long as they are 'working' dogs that is. Helping with the flock and all.