|
Grex > Agora56 > #84: Newspaper in Denmark prints cartoon pics of Mohammed | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 432 responses total. |
richard
|
|
response 153 of 432:
| 
Feb 7 20:12 UTC 2006 |
This idea that Christians are more persecuted than others in this country is
patently absurd. In many places, liquor store owners must close their stores
on the CHRISTIAN sabbath, Sunday, even if they are not Christian. They don't
make these liquor stores close on the muslim sabbath or the jewish sabbath.
Only the CHRISTIAN sabbath. Non-Christians in this country are also forced
to use a christian calendar, have christmas as a legal holiday, have "in god
we trust" on all their money, .etc Non Christians are beaten over the head
with christianity in many many ways, and persecuted if they don't accept it.
|
tod
|
|
response 154 of 432:
|
Feb 7 20:13 UTC 2006 |
When attorneys and onlookers rose as she took the bench, Grant asked them to
say "Go Seahawks" before they sat back down. When their response was too
quiet, she encouraged them to do it again.
"The tension was very high, and I thought it would be a way of people just
thinking of something else and releasing it," Grant said later. "It was a
diversion tactic to bring unison in the group."
But sheriff's spokesman Ed Troyer said the deputies in the room were stunned
and embarrassed. Deputy prosecutor Sunni Ko said the entire situation was
embarrassing.
"It's the most important day almost in their lives, for both families," Ko
said. "One family is seeing a son go off to prison, and one family is here
to find justice for their loved one who was murdered. It's important to them.
Do you think they want to root for the Seahawks?"
Kathy Patricelli, whose stepson Tino Patricelli was fatally shot by Teang,
said she didn't cheer.
"Super Bowl Sunday is Tino's one-year anniversary of the day he was
murdered," she said. "I was a little tiny bit offended- well, a lot
offended - because this was kind of an important day for us. Cheering for the
Seahawks with Steve Teang in the room, I didn't think it was appropriate".
The judge said she didn.t mean it to offend anyone.
"If the prosecutor and the others took it that way, as far as I'm concerned,
it's trite," she said, after hearing that Ko and the sheriff's deputies were
upset. "The germane issue was to focus on the reason we had to come back in
the first place -- public access to courts."
|
marcvh
|
|
response 155 of 432:
|
Feb 7 20:18 UTC 2006 |
The main difference is that any violations of the religious rights of
Christians is most likely going to be a matter of a rogue individual
(someone ignoring or misunderstanding the rules.) It's more common
for violations of the religious rights of minority believers to be
matters of institutionalized policy (written or unwritten) which is
obviously a much more serious matter.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 156 of 432:
|
Feb 7 22:05 UTC 2006 |
> I don't see how one could come to that conclusion unless he thought
> that the Bill of Rights serves to protect the "rights" of the
> government
You mean like the people who think the 2nd amendment (which is part of
the Bill of Rights) servers to protect the "rights" of the government?
|
albaugh
|
|
response 157 of 432:
|
Feb 7 22:38 UTC 2006 |
> the Christian world, where the image of Jesus on the
> cross is a key of the faith.
richard, you know nothing of Christianity if you write such a thing and
believe it. The image may be a reminder, but it's what the image is
referring to that is the key, not the image itself. The faith would not
crumble if the image were removed, or even mocked or defiled.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 158 of 432:
|
Feb 7 23:19 UTC 2006 |
> The faith would not crumble if the image were removed, or even
> mocked or defiled.
The faith has not crumbled despite the image removed, mocked, and
defiled.
|
richard
|
|
response 159 of 432:
|
Feb 8 01:03 UTC 2006 |
re #157 I did NOT say the faith would crumble without the image, just
that the image is and has been a key component in the buildup of
Christianity. If you think the image of Jesus hasn't help sell him,
particularly in parts of the world where there aren't as many literate
people and people respond to images more than words, you are naive.
And if you think the image of the cross isn't really important in the
selling of that faith, you are REALLY naive.
|
kingjon
|
|
response 160 of 432:
|
Feb 8 01:17 UTC 2006 |
The textbook for my religion class that covers the New Testament (I also have
one on the Old) says that depictions of the cross as a Christian symbol don't
start appearing for a *long* time -- on the order of a century? -- after the
event it symbolizes. In less-literate parts of the world, Christians are doing
what they can to increase literacy, not relying on symbols except as stopgap
measures. (I'm not sure what the Roman Catholic justification for the
veneration of symbols is, since what I said doesn't apply quite as much to the
Roman Catholic church.)
|
mcnally
|
|
response 161 of 432:
|
Feb 8 01:54 UTC 2006 |
apropos: http://www.slate.com/id/2135670/
|
kingjon
|
|
response 162 of 432:
|
Feb 8 02:06 UTC 2006 |
Ah, yes, the distinction between veneration/adoration and worship. I'd
forgotten about that. Thanks for the reference!
|
fudge
|
|
response 163 of 432:
|
Feb 8 10:34 UTC 2006 |
The cross has been used as a religious symbol long before Christ. Ref.
Dyonisus/Bacchus who was identified by feats such as being born of a virgin
and resurrecting after being transfixed to a tree...
|
klg
|
|
response 164 of 432:
|
Feb 8 11:46 UTC 2006 |
"Non Christians are beaten over the head" Well, that explains a lot,
RW. I've heard those injuries are nasty.
|
richard
|
|
response 165 of 432:
|
Feb 8 15:58 UTC 2006 |
re #160 yes thats true and its also true that Christianity didn't start
spreading widely until more than a hundred years after the events in
question. Before that Christianity basically had the status of a cult
with only a small band of loyal followers. We as a civilization have
always responded to images more than words. History is filled with "cults
of personality" where people responded to images of their leaders. The
images, painted and otherwise, of Jesus are very important in depicting
him as a real person. Ironic isnt it that the images we know now of Jesus
were painted by people hundreds of years after the fact who never knew
him, if he existed, nor what he looked like. Sonebody just decided, "I
bet he was a long haired guy with a beard and a nice peaceful look"
|
edina
|
|
response 166 of 432:
|
Feb 8 16:27 UTC 2006 |
They would have gone with Charles Manson with the swastika carved in his
forehead, but early screening groups were a bit put off.
|
bru
|
|
response 167 of 432:
|
Feb 8 16:32 UTC 2006 |
you forget the shroud of Turin.
|
jep
|
|
response 168 of 432:
|
Feb 8 16:44 UTC 2006 |
I saw a cartoon in the Adrian Daily Telegram from yesterday, with a TV
newsman reporting something like "15,000 atheists stormed the offices
of a newspaper when 12 blank sheets of paper were spotted on the desk
of a cartoonist".
|
rcurl
|
|
response 169 of 432:
|
Feb 8 17:56 UTC 2006 |
C-14 dating of the shroud of Turin give dates of AD 1260 - 1390.
http://www.shroud.com/nature.htm
It is also important to realize that most people of that era were wrapped for
burial. Evidence for wounds can have many explanations.
|
tod
|
|
response 170 of 432:
|
Feb 8 17:57 UTC 2006 |
Its also possible that some dirty Italian used it after his semi annual bath.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 171 of 432:
|
Feb 8 18:12 UTC 2006 |
"Luigi!! NOT MY FINE LINEN!!!"
|
tod
|
|
response 172 of 432:
|
Feb 8 18:28 UTC 2006 |
Ass Crack of Turin
|
richard
|
|
response 173 of 432:
|
Feb 8 18:34 UTC 2006 |
re #167 The Shroud of Turin has been exposed as almost certainly a hoax. They
have confirmed methods for how it was likely done in the time it was done.
|
richard
|
|
response 174 of 432:
|
Feb 8 18:38 UTC 2006 |
the commonly accepted depictions of Jesus portray him as a white caucasian,
like your average european. wonder why. In fact studies indicate that Jesus,
if he existed, was likely not caucasian but of a darker skinned complexion
common to semitics of that era.
|
khamsun
|
|
response 175 of 432:
|
Feb 8 18:39 UTC 2006 |
well everybody will agree Jesus was a semitic guy, probably looking like
one of the guys seen in palestinian crowds.At that time Mohammed wasn't
born, and the israelis that lives at the place now didn't.
These days he'd be arrested by most cops...and rabbis would probably
still try to get rid of him ...
think about it next time Dubya Imperator says on TV "God save my money"
:-)
|
nharmon
|
|
response 176 of 432:
|
Feb 8 19:14 UTC 2006 |
<nharmon cues up Everlast - Black Jesus>
|
tod
|
|
response 177 of 432:
|
Feb 8 19:15 UTC 2006 |
I'm fairly certain Moses was similar to Sherman Hemsley and they both sang
"Movin on Up"
|