Shrek 2 outed by christian fundys

In all the states that voted on the gay marriage issue in 2004, around 60% of the populace voted against it, despite the fact that there is no logical reason to ban gay marriage outside of the realm of the superstitious.
Click to expand...

To be fair, a lot of polls put support for civil unions at around 80%, and support for gay marriages at around 20% when in all reality they are the same thing. I think a lot of it comes from people not understanding the whole issue. We can all wish for a world without ignorance, but don't hold your breath. The point is a lot of anti-gay marriage people are actually pro-civil union/gay rights people. So to paint them all with the broad brush of anti-homosexuality is unfair.
 
This is just another Christian-bashing thread. Yup, it's pretty f'ked up what these people believe, but without getting tied up in endless quoting matches, they're a tiny minority, and you get said minorities in every sector of society, religious or no.

I'm not pro religion at all, but this kindof stuff gets on my nerves
 
GhostFox said:
To be fair, a lot of polls put support for civil unions at around 80%, and support for gay marriages at around 20% when in all reality they are the same thing. I think a lot of it comes from people not understanding the whole issue. We can all wish for a world without ignorance, but don't hold your breath. The point is a lot of anti-gay marriage people are actually pro-civil union/gay rights people. So to paint them all with the broad brush of anti-homosexuality is unfair.
Click to expand...

As minor as the difference betwen "marriage" and "civil union" may seem, in one case a group is being banned from practicing their particular religious beliefs. Yeah, it's just a word. but it's a word that has religious value to these people in the context of their daily lives.
The government's role is to eliminate as much harm from society as possible while simultaneously sustaining personal freedoms and improving the quality of life of its law-abiding citizens. Preventing gays from calling their religious unions marriages serves none of these purposes, and is in fact contrary to them. Thus it is inherently wrong for the government to interfere, even slightly, in this case.

I'm not saying these anti-marriage people are all anti-gay, but in their own little ways they are all undermining the basic tenets of our north american society.
Even if they still support unions, it's like stealing a dollar instead of the entire wallet. It's comparatively better, but still not good.
 
these extemist religious people really need to pack into a spacecraft, and go and trouble another planet. The moon will be good enough for me.
 
Historically, lots of things change.
Click to expand...
Huh, how can history change just because religion played a role in it? You are merely denying the history of the town in order to be 100% PC. Most Seals, at least the ones I have seen, portray an event which shaped or founded the town. If that event happened to be related to Christianity, then I see no problem leaving the Cross. If Christianity had no historical context in the town then it would be wrong. Having a Cross in a Seal doesnt affect anybody, just as having a Jewish symbol wouldnt affect anybody. All of it is BS.
 
seinfeldrules said:
you apparently just enjoy grasping onto nothing in order to make some sort of attack against Christians.
Click to expand...


jondyfun said:
This is just another Christian-bashing thread. Yup, it's pretty f'ked up what these people believe, but without getting tied up in endless quoting matches, they're a tiny minority, and you get said minorities in every sector of society, religious or no.

I'm not pro religion at all, but this kindof stuff gets on my nerves
Click to expand...


Raziaar said:
Nice to see people like stern still attacking whole religions based on isolated cases of warped minorities of the practitioners. I'm surprised he wasn't on the pro war bandwagon for Iraq!

Heh.
Click to expand...





you people see what you want to see:


Thread: Shrek 2 outed by christian fundys


CptStern said:
seinfeldrules said:
Church as a whole is very against homosexuality
Click to expand...


that's not entirely true:

"In August 2000, the 37th General Council affirmed that human sexual orientations, whether heterosexual or homosexual, are a gift from God and part of the marvellous diversity of creation. The Council further resolved to advocate for the civil recognition of same-sex partnerships. In August 2003, the 38th General Council decided "to call upon the Government of Canada to recognize same-sex marriages in marriage legislation."
Click to expand...

I'm defending christianity here
 
friggin insanity...damned fanatics..I don't care if its a christian,muslim,jew or a worshipper of cthulu..
slowly but surely the crusades are starting up again..."I George W.,shall bring christiani....I mean Democracy to the middle east and the rest of the world!"

I see quite a connection between bush and all this religous hate going around..hopefully we are all still alive in 4 years so we can see the end of this idiocy..
 
I've mentioned the united church on a number of occasions

again: the topic is about FUNDAMENTALISTS
 
I am insinuating that if you call people 'hate mongers' and 'bigots' 99 times out of 100, 1 time when you defend them doesnt mean you are on their side. Just like if I called GW Bush a 'moron' 99 out of 100 times I talked about him, the one time I say something positive doesnt really mean I respect him.

it's really becoming a nation of intolerance ...what's going on down there?
Click to expand...

nutjobs and hatemongers
Click to expand...

Just a few examples of where I'm coming from if you were interested. If you wanted to dig through some of the other gay marriage threads there is even more stuff, I dont really feel like it though. :|
 
but they are nutjobs and hatemongers ...what did you expect me to say? that they're nice little misguided fundys with big hearts and smiley faces?
 
but they are nutjobs and hatemongers ...what did you expect me to say? that they're nice little misguided fundys with big hearts and smiley faces?
Click to expand...

Earlier you claimed that you were somehow defending Christians, thanks for clarifying that for us.
 
stop twisting words seinfeldrules you know I'm refering to that group
 
CptStern said:
stop twisting words seinfeldrules
Click to expand...

Indeed. So many needless flamewars start because of behaviour such as that.
 
CptStern said:
but they are nutjobs and hatemongers ...what did you expect me to say? that they're nice little misguided fundys with big hearts and smiley faces?
Click to expand...

Hahaha.

You know I'm not even sure where this thread is going. Started off talking about crazy-ass Christian fundamentalists accusing another harmless thing of promoting homosexuality, and then it devolved into people yelling at each other for no reason. So Stern said something about the nation, speaking in generalities. Oh no, GhostFox, time to defend America from CptStern's agenda!

He's speaking out against fundamentalists who are part of the Christian religion and made a couple more generalizing comments, I guess he's attacking Christianity.

And then there was some shit about history and religion in the government...where's this thread going? Seriously this is why I don't post in politics, especially religion-themed threads, because someone's always bound to get up in arms over something. Chill out fools.

Focus on the Family is an anti-homosexual group. That's what they were made for. Their happy little name serves two purposes: One, they couldn't go around calling it "God Hates Fags." Two, the biggest "argument" against homosexuality is that it's detrimental to families. The name is promoting their "strongest" point.
I haven't watched all of Shrek 2, but from reading that article, some of the things they were protesting sounded really funny. You know, so what if Pinocchio wears women's underwear? So? Oh noes our children are corrupt now. Jesus Christ...if a boy wants to wear a dress, let him f*cking wear a dress. Dresses can be pretty stylish, yo.

You know, it amazes me what these people go after. It's not only homosexuality. On the news yesterday, some fundamentalists were attacking an episode of the TV series "Angel" for having Angel having sex with another vampire, and her biting his neck. They were complaining about his hips visibly moving, and the bite itself. I swear to God, these people...Angel has (unfortunately) been off the air for over a year now! Possibly nearing two! Furthermore, it used to be on at the latest possible hour and was definately not a show for children, preteens, or even young teens. It was a show for adults and you knew what you were watching. I guess their message is that if you're watching it for blood and gore, all's well, but sex, oh no!

It will be nice once all these people just die. The younger generations are tired of all this shit. I can imagine the world that we, and subsequent generations will build, and how all the fundamentalists will be rolling in their graves.
 
stop twisting words seinfeldrules you know I'm refering to that group
Click to expand...

That group, as you pointed out, includes 43,000 members. It is quite a blanket statement to refer to them all as 'hatemongers' and 'nutjobs'.

Indeed. So many needless flamewars start because of behaviour such as that.
Click to expand...
And many flamewars begin because people make hateful statements based solely on their opinion without taking into consideration that of others.
 
seinfeldrules said:
And many flamewars begin because people make hateful statements based solely on their opinion without taking into consideration that of others.
Click to expand...

What are you saying?
 
seinfeldrules said:
That there is an awful lot of hate flying around at people who dont see eye to eye.
Click to expand...

uhuh..
And thats why I said that "So many needless flamewars start because of behaviour such as that."
 
uhuh..
And thats why I said that "So many needless flamewars start because of behaviour such as that."
Click to expand...

I never insulted anybody though, misunderstood maybe, but didnt insult.
 
seinfeldrules said:
That group, as you pointed out, includes 43,000 members. It is quite a blanket statement to refer to them all as 'hatemongers' and 'nutjobs'.
Click to expand...
i think its actually a valid title for them, after all they display prejudice against people purely because of their sexuality and label them as abominations of nature and so on.
 
seinfeldrules said:
I never insulted anybody though, misunderstood maybe, but didnt insult.
Click to expand...

People can be insulted when you twist their words.
 
i think its actually a valid title for them, after all they display prejudice against people purely because of their sexuality and label them as abominations of nature and so on.
Click to expand...

If you go to their website, as I just did, you would also notice that they provide information to parents on how to help raise their children. It isnt like they are focused solely on preventing Gay Marriage, they also seem very interested in helping parents and children get through rough times. I'm not saying that I agree with all or any of it (Im not very religious myself), but some of the things they preach seem pretty reasonable.

People can be insulted when you twist their words.
Click to expand...

Is it any more twisting than implying that 43,000 people is making a country of 250,000,000 people one of 'intolerance'?
 
seinfeldrules said:
Is it any more twisting than implying that 43,000 people is making a country of 250,000,000 people one of 'intolerance'?
Click to expand...

Well, all I can say is that he made an attempt at justifying what he said, whereas what you said was clearly just based on twisting the semantics of a prior post.

But enough of this, and on with the discussion at hand.
 
Well, isnt a justifiable discussion to see how a group of 43,000 suddenly makes a nation of 250,000,000 intolerant? It is part of the topic at hand.
 
that "tiny group" is 43,000 members strong.
Click to expand...

Well damn Stern, when did you throw down and worship? Did'nt you stop that 12 years ago?

Clearly a tiny group of wacko fundementalists represent the whole nation.
Click to expand...

No they dont, but these "outraged or concerned" responses are all a facade to continue on the lost pursuit of ousting Bush's reputation as a President; to also make us feel more guilty as a nation, with or without our modern situation at hand.

Secondly, its just to deface Christians and Religion by slandering them with activist bigotry and intolerance.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Huh, how can history change just because religion played a role in it? You are merely denying the history of the town in order to be 100% PC. Most Seals, at least the ones I have seen, portray an event which shaped or founded the town. If that event happened to be related to Christianity, then I see no problem leaving the Cross. If Christianity had no historical context in the town then it would be wrong. Having a Cross in a Seal doesnt affect anybody, just as having a Jewish symbol wouldnt affect anybody. All of it is BS.
Click to expand...

You would be correct here, were it not for the fact that beyond tradition there is no standard for what a seal must or must not be. Seals are meant to be related to what they represent. You may desire that a seal that has become obsolete over time be kept for historical signifigance, but that desire is no more or less as valid of those who would wish for an updated version.

Some people do, in fact, object to symbols of christianity being used to represent their secular government, just as people might not want a big picture of jesus on the side of their synagogue.

History is nothing more than a record of the changes that occur over time. You cannot have history unless things change. Germany had a swastika, and now they don't. Canada had the british flag, and now it doesn't. But everyone knows that they once did. Changing a symbol does not erase history any more than removing your hat causes amnesia.

On the other hand, the fact that something is old does not instill upon it any inviolability. More often than not, it is quite the opposite. So what exactly is so reprehensible about change? 'Oh, they want the symbol of their society to more accurately reflect their cultural diversity. Obviously they hate christians.'


On a related note, I find it odd that you are accusing me of being in denial and attempting to rewrite history in the name of being "100% PC" simply because I said I don't care if people want to give their town a new seal.
In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not pushing for any such change. I actually don't give a damn if this seal in some unnamed town changes or not.
The only reason I'm bothering to write this is that you inaccurately compared these people to the anti-homosexual groups in question when they are actually quite dissimilar.

A dislike of fundamentalism is not an attack against an entire religion, and indifference is not equivalent to support.
So before you go off half-cocked accusing someone of being intolerant and anti-christian, ask yourself if maybe there's more to the situation than black and white.
It would keep the threads clear, makes everyone happier, and saves me the hassle of rebuking you.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
No they dont, but these "outraged or concerned" responses are all a facade to continue on the lost pursuit of ousting Bush's reputation as a President; to also make us feel more guilty as a nation, with or without our modern situation at hand.
Click to expand...
The topic at hand is about Shrek 2 being outed by christian fundamentalists. It has nothing at all to do with Bush.
 
Seals are meant to be related to what they represent.
Click to expand...

They represent the town. If the town was founded by Christians, shouldnt they be represented?

Some people do, in fact, object to symbols of christianity being used to represent their secular government, just as people might not want a big picture of jesus on the side of their synagogue.
Click to expand...
When did I ever suggest putting Jesus on a synagogue? I dont care if its a Christian symbol or a Jewish symbol, if that religion played a major historical role in creating a town it shouldnt be ignored.


History is nothing more than a record of the changes that occur over time. You cannot have history unless things change
Click to expand...
I meant that you cannot change what happened, unless you somehow invented a timemachine for me to use.

Changing a symbol does not erase history any more than removing your hat causes amnesia.
Click to expand...
No, it does not change history. By that same token you shouldnt be forced to deny history in a public light because it contains a religious tie.

On the other hand, the fact that something is old does not instill upon it any inviolability. More often than not, it is quite the opposite. So what exactly is so reprehensible about change? 'Oh, they want the symbol of their society to more accurately reflect their cultural diversity. Obviously they hate christians.'
Click to expand...
What is so reprehensible about tradition?

On a related note, I find it odd that you are accusing me of being in denial and attempting to rewrite history in the name of being "100% PC" simply because I said I don't care if people want to give their town a new seal.
Click to expand...
The people of the town didnt want it, the ACLU did.

I actually don't give a damn if this seal in some unnamed town changes or not.
Click to expand...
Really?! I hadnt noticed, nor cared.

The only reason I'm bothering to write this is that you inaccurately compared these people to the anti-homosexual groups in question when they are actually quite dissimilar.
Click to expand...
These groups are strongarming the media into being more "christian', and they're surprisingly successful in that regard.
Click to expand...
My point was in response to that statement. Just as much as Christian groups push their agenda, their progressive equals push back. Since you most likely agree with their goals, you probably dont view it as such.

So before you go off half-cocked accusing someone of being intolerant and anti-christian, ask yourself if maybe there's more to the situation than black and white.
Click to expand...
I didnt call anyone intolerant, although I must be since I live in America with a few 'nutjobs'.

It would keep the threads clear, makes everyone happier, and saves me the hassle of rebuking you.
Click to expand...
If you have a problem with what I say, then put me on your ignore list. Its as simple as that.
 
seinfeldrules said:
If you go to their website, as I just did, you would also notice that they provide information to parents on how to help raise their children. It isnt like they are focused solely on preventing Gay Marriage, they also seem very interested in helping parents and children get through rough times. I'm not saying that I agree with all or any of it (Im not very religious myself), but some of the things they preach seem pretty reasonable.
Click to expand...
I dont see how you can call a group reasonable if the group finds the Bert & Ernie are sending out gay vibes to children.
Or when that group thinks that a joke about a puppet wearing a thong is going to turn their kids gay.
When a 3 year old watches Sesame Street, its not gonna pass through his head that their gay, and its not gonna send out gay subliminal messages either because the child wont even understand what gay is.
 
I dont see how you can call a group reasonable if the group finds the Bert & Ernie are sending out gay vibes to children.
Or when that group thinks that a joke about a puppet wearing a thong is going to turn their kids gay.
When a 3 year old watches Sesame Street, its not gonna pass through his head that their gay, and its not gonna send out gay subliminal messages either because the child wont even understand what gay is.
Click to expand...

And I dont see how you can call a group unreasonable if the group reaches out to strengthen the relationship between parent and child. In a society like ours, isnt that something to be applauded?

Again, I'm not saying that I agree with these people on all issues, just playing devils advocate. It seems people in this thread were only pointing out one aspect of the group and making an instant judgement call based on that, and solely that.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Again, I'm not saying that I agree with these people on all issues, just playing devils advocate. It seems people in this thread were only pointing out one aspect of the group and making an instant judgement call based on that, and solely that.
Click to expand...
But thats exactly what this group is doing too. They're pointing one aspect of a group of people and attacking them for it, more so then we're attacking them for it We're just
arguing on a forum about it, they going about trying to stop gay people from being gay in real life. Which be anyone's standards is pretty extreme.
 
Sparta said:
But thats exactly what this group is doing too. They're pointing one aspect of a group of people and attacking them for it, more so then we're attacking them for it We're just
arguing on a forum about it, they going about trying to stop gay people from being gay in real life. Which be anyone's standards is pretty extreme.
Click to expand...

i hate people who try to force other people into something. :x

religious people knock my door all the time.. with leaflets and such, im telllin you the next one that does knock, theyre gonna have a shovel in thier face.
 
seinfeldrules said:
And I dont see how you can call a group unreasonable if the group reaches out to strengthen the relationship between parent and child. In a society like ours, isnt that something to be applauded?
Click to expand...

not when they use hate propaganda to teach children hate ideology

seinfeldrules said:
Again, I'm not saying that I agree with these people on all issues, just playing devils advocate. It seems people in this thread were only pointing out one aspect of the group and making an instant judgement call based on that, and solely that.
Click to expand...

:upstare: you're unrepentantly thick-headed ..I posted many examples of their hate filled rhetoric ..in fact the shrek thing was small compared to the other crap these "people of god" cram down our throats. Stop trying to softball the fact that these are fanatical disseminators of hate
 
CptStern said:
that "tiny group" is 43,000 members strong. it's not just this one incident as I've already cited: spongebob, Ernie and Bert, Teletubbies, even the secretary of education got involved in it with the Postcards From Buster episode ban
Click to expand...
Bert and Ernie: Gay.
Teletubbies: Inspired by lots and lots of hallucinogenics.
Spongebob: Both of the above.

And a good thing too.
I wonder why they haven't complained about Invader Zim - it'd probably make their minds cave in.
And a good thing too.
 
Probably Neutrino - mine's been Spongebob almost since day one.
Seriously though, kids' TV is at its best when it's subversive, although that is from a student's perspective.

Honestly though, it beggars belief that these people would be so closed-minded as to be afraid that TV might "turn" their kids onto a road of depravity and degenerate homosexuality. Surely if you so desperately want to "avoid" your child being gay (Can we say "brain-washing", class?) then you should be focussing on your own bloody parenting skills, not the horrors of what lies outside your realm.
I'm fed up of people blaming the outside world for their own failings at parenting. Sometimes, people's complaints hold some veracity, but not in this case.

I'm not even get started on the whole "Everyone must do as I do" principle. Can we say "Fascism", class?
 
Prior to the election I saw a bumper sticker that read, "Real Catholics are not pro-choice"

Since your status as pro choice has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with whether or not you personally want access to abortion, I really think it is fair to say that this Catholic believes that true catholics MUST IMPOSE THEIR BELIEF SYSTEM ON OTHERS, or not be a true catholic.

I think we ought to round up every catholic that has ever served alcohol to a minor during communion and throw them in jail.

Thats what we do to bartenders that serve alcohol to minors.

I have a hard time seeing the world as a worse place when Christianity is part of mythology class. Well, unless Christians started acting like Christ. I'd prefer that to disolving the religion, but come on that is just a pipe dream it will never ever ever happen.
 
you're unrepentantly thick-headed ..I posted many examples of their hate filled rhetoric ..in fact the shrek thing was small compared to the other crap these "people of god" cram down our throats. Stop trying to softball the fact that these are fanatical disseminators of hate
Click to expand...

Hey, bud lay off the insults if you need to make a point. I even put this disclaimer before my statement:

Again, I'm not saying that I agree with these people on all issues, just playing devils advocate
Click to expand...

If posting another opinion incites you to such a hateful level, maybe you should calm down after reading each post.

My objective by pointing out the positives of this group are to show how and why some Churches probably choose to associate themselves with the group. I'm still waiting for your explanation on "nation of intolerance" by the way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top