And to think that by December 31 I was kinda missing the Backroom. Silly me. :laugh4:
Printable View
And to think that by December 31 I was kinda missing the Backroom. Silly me. :laugh4:
:P, I know how you feel. ~;) I waste more time here than with anything else I use my computer for. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Gregoshi
I think he should take some dirt and leaves and rub them on his face and say he converted to Wiccan.
As the Russian orthodox church is located in Russia, it's unfortunately just as screwed up as the rest of the country is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
So I don't really think there are many things the Russian church is tolerant towards....
Bah, at least I don't hear that much from them.
You know, I'm quite ready to get all worked up about it. But I just can't. I don't feel the outrage welling up form deep inside.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Is he proselytising? Yes, but...so what? Brit Hume is a Christian, so he obviously thinks Christianity would help Tiger Woods. He would think that, wouldn't he?
Me, I think it is about time the Jews started eating pork already and stopped chopping up their little boys. I merely refrain from saying so because it would get a bit tiresome if everytime I encountered somebody of a different persuasion the first five minutes of conversation would be devoted to a mutual exchange of why the other is blisteringly wrong. But that's more a practical than a moral qualm.
As I said, to claim that any religion has a quantifiably "bigger" claim to, say, forgiveness, is a strange and misguided statement. So no, darling, I was not slapping my meat on the table and saying "Who's bigger?" I was saying that making claims of "bigger" or "smaller" are, by their very nature, strange.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
The man claims he was not "proselytizing," when that was exactly what he was doing. Either he is unclear on the meaning of a fairly straightforward word or he's lying. Take your pick.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Since you seem to believe that asserting something makes it so, let's try for an analogy. Let's say I'm drinking a beer. Am I drinking alcohol? No, I say, I'm just having a beer. That's not consuming alcohol; that's beer-drinking. See the difference?
Either I don't know what the word "alcohol" means, or I'm in massive, idiotic denial. Your choice.
:inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Coming from the guy who several times in this thread said stuff that was straight out not true in his moments of rage.
- Almighty WikiQuote:
Today, the connotations of proselytizing are often negative and the word is commonly used to describe attempts to force people to convert.
Perhaps he mistakenly believed that this was the way the word was being used. Have you considered that?
Who's raging? Please, feel free to address what I'm saying, but spare me your (mistaken) attempt to decode my personal state of mind. I'm having a fantastic day, getting good news right and left, for reasons that shall remain unstated on this board, since they have everything to do with Real Life and nothing to do with the internet tubes. Frankly, I'm full of happiness right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Vuk Again
You seem to believe that some sort of equation between Chris Matthews excuses anything that goes down on Fox News in a distinctly tu quoque sort of way. In other words, other media figures have said idiotic things on-air, so all idiotic things on-air are equivalent and excused. Consider this sort of factual and moral relativism closely before pelting down that path, please.
Well I am sorry if I misjudged you, but your posts seemed pretty hot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
I think you missed my entire point. My point had nothing to do with Chris Matthews does bad stuff so Fox can too. May I suggest you reread my posts. I made several, distinct arguments that tied into a greater one.
I am glad that you are enjoying your day, may the good news continue. :yes:
Meh. It's Fox News[sic], I'm not really sure how anyone can be surprised or outraged. The only way to watch Fox News[sic] is in HD, with the sound off and babes on.
No they aren't, don't you think we can compare religions? I think your claim that we can't compare redemption in Christianity and Buddhism to be strange, we have done so in this thread as a matter of fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Personally I think Buddhism is one of the more philosophically sound religions (though it has its flaws). I don't agree with Britt (weird to call him Hume) that Tiger would do well to convert to Christianity to find redemption and forgiveness. Although I don't really have advice for tiger, except to say don't get married for dumb reasons.
You said he doesn't have a competent grasp of the English language. Shall I assume you don't know what "competent" means, or should I assume you do and said that because you don't like him? The latter.Quote:
The man claims he was not "proselytizing," when that was exactly what he was doing. Either he is unclear on the meaning of a fairly straightforward word or he's lying. Take your pick.
Since you seem to believe that asserting something makes it so, let's try for an analogy. Let's say I'm drinking a beer. Am I drinking alcohol? No, I say, I'm just having a beer. That's not consuming alcohol; that's beer-drinking. See the difference?
Either I don't know what the word "alcohol" means, or I'm in massive, idiotic denial. Your choice.
As vuk pointed out, since proselytize has a negative connotation, people will claim to have not been doing it if they know what it means.
I thought maybe we could argue about what standards the news companies should be held to, but you didn't reply to that part :shame:
I have been thinking long and hard about this one. I might have to break it down...
A) Cheating on your wife is ALWAYS wrong... Do not get maried unless you intend to keep it, and if you can't, then break up the marriage.
B) He is rich and famous, of course he has every ability in the world to make love around.
C) There is absolutely NO chance in hell that his wife didn't know about it unless their marriage was like a vacuum...
*don't you mods love when I self-cencor myself?*
So my bottom line is, either he lived in a loveless marriage with an informal understanding of his side affairs, or he lived in a really really bad marriage, and then one should pity him and have some understanding.
ON TOPIC about Fox though...
C'mon, it is fox news we talk about, anyone actually take it seriosly??
SK, to call something "bigger" or "smaller," you're assuming that there is some quantifiable property. In other words, "Christianity has 20 redemptions, whereas Buddhism has only 10. Therefore, Christianity has more redemptions." You keep glossing over the quantification part of your own argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
I never said that we "can't compare" anything; we have to compare in ways that make sense. To flatly assert that Christianity has "more" redemption than another religion is a meaningless statement. You have persisted in asserting that it's true ... because you assert that it's true. You haven't bothered to back it up in any way whatsoever.
Certainly we can contrast and compare religions and faiths -- why not? But if we're going to make quantitative assertions of X has more Y than Z, we might want to back it up. Somehow.
Go tell your local Baptist Church that proselytize has a negative connotation. They'll be dumbfounded. The wiki article has some good bits, but the flat assertion that "the word is commonly used to describe attempts to force people to convert" is a little weird.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
I'll roll with Mirriam-Webster, thanks very much:
Main Entry: pros·e·ly·tize
Pronunciation: \ˈprä-s(ə-)lə-ˌtīz\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): pros·e·ly·tized; pros·e·ly·tiz·ing
Date: 1679
intransitive verb 1 : to induce someone to convert to one's faith
2 : to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause
But would it make you more comfortable to call Hume's actions "evangelizing"? Same meaning, after all.
What, the half-sentence where you went on about the coverage of Tiger? The bit that was buried in repetitive uses of the word "bizarre"? The only point you were making in that little riff was how "bizarre" it was for me to react to Brit Hume's evangelizing. If you have broader points about "what standards the news companies should be held to," feel free to make them. All ears.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
When garth brooks says "I'm not big on social graces" what does he mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Brit knows perfectly well that proselytizing on air is looked down upon, so his denial has more to do with that than with "not having a competent grasp of the English language".Quote:
Go tell your local Baptist Church that proselytize has a negative connotation. They'll be dumbfounded. The wiki article has some good bits, but the flat assertion that "the word is commonly used to describe attempts to force people to convert" is a little weird.
I'll roll with Mirriam-Webster, thanks very much:
Main Entry: pros·e·ly·tize
Pronunciation: \ˈprä-s(ə-)lə-ˌtīz\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): pros·e·ly·tized; pros·e·ly·tiz·ing
Date: 1679
intransitive verb 1 : to induce someone to convert to one's faith
2 : to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause
But would it make you more comfortable to call Hume's actions "evangelizing"? Same meaning, after all.
The news exists to provide fodder for real debate and shine a light on the government. The more entertaining it is, the more people watch it. The more people watch it, the better it carries out its two main functions.Quote:
What, the half-sentence where you went on about the coverage of Tiger? The bit that was buried in repetitive uses of the word "bizarre"? The only point you were making in that little riff was how "bizarre" it was for me to react to Brit Hume's evangelizing. If you have broader points about "what standards the news companies should be held to," feel free to make them. All ears.
Therefore opinion from commentators is generally a good thing, and Brit's comments do not warrant the hyperbole.
He obviously means that on most days he averages around 5.0% less "Thank you"s and 6.2% "Please"'s than the national average. :clown:Quote:
When garth brooks says "I'm not big on social graces" what does he mean?
This is a bit petty (Yes yes, I know I don't visit the backroom enough). The first clarification of what you meant by 'bigger' should have been enough. Now you're just arguing about whether that was the right word to use. Semantics.
:beam: Well, I enjoy arguing. But yes, the meaty topic for discussion is what the news should be like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Myrddraal
:laugh4: I know the feeling. I don't even post here that often and yet I have trouble keeping myself away from the forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Vuk Again
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregoshi
What if Mister Woods took the advice of Mister Hume - stood in front of Our Lady of Perpetual Guilt Church and declared he'd been born again and now sees the light, repents his sins, and begs forgiveness from Jehova and Missus Woods and the 99 girlfriends, and his children?
Would his wife welcome him with open arms? Would the media lay off? Would a nearby burning bush tell him to go and sin no more? Would he get back his sponsors? Would it improve his short game? Would teh wimmins stop laying nekkid in front of him, causing him to trip, fall on them, and accidentally copulate with them? Could he get a 4-season reality TV show called "Redemption - Not Just for Fundies Anymore"? Or maybe a Sunday-morning "Miracle Hour" show on the Golf Channel?
Could he have a beer with POTUS and Veepie Joe to 'splain hisself? How about a part-time gig on Fox News, as a consultant on forgiveness? Or Fox Sports as an expert on bad-boy atheletes? Or maybe he could replace Oprah; I hear she's leaving.
Given that a lot of people think the Daily Show/Colbert Report are actual news shows, I think that a lot of people take Faux News seriously. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
You´ve got it turned around...Quote:
Originally Posted by Scienter
It's channels like Faux News that make the Daily Show/Colbert Report look like real news shows.:2thumbsup:
The Armenian and Coptic churches are not part of the Eastern Orthodox family.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
As for religious intolerance in them...well, I'm no expert on any of those churches but I recall an anecdote about some Greek neo-pagans who wanted to revive worship of Zeus, Hera etc. and tried to get recognition as an "official" religion, wich the orthodox church vehemently opposed.
There are probably a lot of christians who don't believe in hell as such, but I've never heard of a church who made that their official position...
Hear Ye! Hear Ye! Hear Ye!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
The Church of Vuk has made it their official position that there is nohell!
Catholics would disagree.
I like conversions, and missionaries about as much as a toothache.
If we're going to nitpick, I may as well point out that by the above definition- he wasn't proselytizing. Hume did not induce Woods to convert, nor did he recruit him to Christianity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
So you find Hume acting outwardly as a Christian in his personal comments offensive? That's your right I guess. :coffeenews:Quote:
As for why I abhor a paid "news" representative calling for a public figure to change his religion, well, if you don't get it now you never will. As a Christian I find it offensive.
I think the Daily Show nailed it pretty well.
Follow-up.
Hehe, that is great stuff.
But seriously, who watches faux news and expects sensible content?? Have they stopped going on about how President Obama is actually a Kenyan/British/Indonesian/Martian citizen? Or that he is a muslim, and therefore can't be president somehow?
That was really good, Lemur. Nice find.
From a political point of view maybe Fox shouldn't air that stuff so that they don't offend their viewers, but I fail to see what is inherently wrong with what Hume said. Fox is a sensationalit network like MSNBC and they can air whatever they wan't. I think it is funnier that Christians can claim to believe in a Biblical God and not proselytize (which is clearly what Hume was doing). Lemur, If you believe that it is wrong to ask Buddhists to convert to Christianity that is a peculiar form of Christianity.
All-in-all, nothing wrong with the words, only the venue to some, not me. There is no difference between this and a Muslim doing the same thing. If, after saying what he said, Brit took out a bomb on air and subsequently drove the Fox building into a larger building, I would be playing a different tune.
He's all that and a whole lot more. In the Harry Potter universe, Obama is a boggart to the Republicans - he turns into whatever is your greatest fear. Bush on the other hand, must be a dementor. Whenever he was around, Democrats felt like they would never be happy again. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by aimlesswanderer
Er, sorry, I'm in the middle of re-reading the Harry Potter books, so I've got Harry Potter on the brain. :7wizard: