-
[QUOTE=RussBII;562208]Because it's stupid to put yourself out there in any sort of public way on a controversial topic if you're a public figure. Specifically, if you're tied to an organization whose dollar value is directly tied to public opinion.[/QUOTE]
That's simply not true though. Firstly, everyone is entitled to an opinion- you, Chadman, Wallace... even Flippy. Being a public figure should make no difference to that. What's the purpose to an opinion if you must keep it secreted away? What sort of society supports that??
As for the Dolphins organisation's dollar value being tied to public opinion- if that was true, for every NFL player arrested, caught doing the wrong thing or simply seen to be a generally not great guy would cause legions of fans to abandon the organisation's support base. But that doesn't happen. How many people REALLY stopped supporting the Steelers because of Ben Roethlisberger's drama's? What was that LB caught being a pimp? How many fans turned away from the team after that?
You don't have to agree with what Wallace says or thinks, but to label someone's opinion as stupid because it's not very PC, or goes against the masses beliefs, is grossly unfair. So Wallace doesnt seem to approve of homosexuality. Who is to say he's wrong? Why are any of us more right than him?
-
[QUOTE=Chadman;562211]That's simply not true though. Firstly, everyone is entitled to an opinion- you, Chadman, Wallace... even Flippy. Being a public figure should make no difference to that. What's the purpose to an opinion if you must keep it secreted away? What sort of society supports that??
As for the Dolphins organisation's dollar value being tied to public opinion- if that was true, for every NFL player arrested, caught doing the wrong thing or simply seen to be a generally not great guy would cause legions of fans to abandon the organisation's support base. But that doesn't happen. How many people REALLY stopped supporting the Steelers because of Ben Roethlisberger's drama's? What was that LB caught being a pimp? How many fans turned away from the team after that?
You don't have to agree with what Wallace says or thinks, but to label someone's opinion as stupid because it's not very PC, or goes against the masses beliefs, is grossly unfair. So Wallace doesnt seem to approve of homosexuality. Who is to say he's wrong? Why are any of us more right than him?[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying he doesn't have a right to do it. I'm not even saying it's offensive (though I think it is on some level). I'm just saying it's not smart to put yourself out there for any sort of heat nowadays.
-
[QUOTE=RussBII;562209]So not just homosexual behavior? It also has to exhibit NON heterosexual behavior as well?
That's kind of a ticky tack question. Homosexuality has been viewed in many many many species:
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior[/URL]
The concept of community doesn't even exist in all animals.[/QUOTE]
Hey- you asked for an argument that wasn't religion based.
Chadman provides.
You never said it had to be a good aregument, or even well researched for that matter.
-
[QUOTE=RussBII;562213]I'm not saying he doesn't have a right to do it. I'm not even saying it's offensive (though I think it is on some level). I'm just saying it's not smart to put yourself out there for any sort of heat nowadays.[/QUOTE]
But was it smart to put yourself out there for any kind of heat before twitter/facebook etc?
Not having a go at you- Chadman just gets annoyed that people instantly shout down anyone with an opinion that differs from the mass population. Opinions should be encouraged, in Chadman's.... opinion.
-
[QUOTE=RussBII;562205]
Most of what I've read about hte founding fathers paints them as deists at best...[/QUOTE]
That's what they were. If the country was founded on Christian principals, why have a Constitution? The Bible would make everything clear for people that were Christians.
What's interesting is the fact that they were deists is what protects our personal freedoms today. Not religion.
America was formed by people fleeing religious persecution. And it was the diests that protected them and gave them the freedom to choose to treat God and religion they way they want. If we were founded on Godly principles, America would have struggled and would probably continue struggling today because people of religious minds are passionate and controlling.
Even in the early days of America, the various relgious groups tried to control the population and force them to conform to their thinking in various states as they developed. It was as if the people that were fleeing persecution were becoming the new persecutioners. I guess what many were really fleeing was the fact that they weren't in power. And America gave them an opportunity to establish their own power.
If America was founded on Christian principals, we'd have struggled as badly as the Jews in the Old Testament. It feels odd to say this, but we all should be thankful diests were in control. And that they had the foresight and common sense to separate church and state.
One theme continues that's plagued humanity forever. The religious want to control others with their ways of thinking. The first thing God did was allow Adam and Eve to make their own choices. And it's ironic that the diests were the ones who followed this word of the Bible more closely than the believers who wanted to control what others think and do.
Christians can be like fat kids on diets. If they can't have cake, no one can have cake either. But everyone's different. And lots of people can handle cake. Just cause cake's not for you doesn't mean cake is bad for everyone else.
May we all pursue our own stupidity in the stupid ways we choose. That's the way God wanted it as well as the non believers. There's a load of common ground between the Christian teachings and the actions of the non believers. Sometimes I believe moreso than the common ground between God and the believers.
Sometimes religion gets in its own way. Maybe it's trying to hard.
-
[QUOTE=Chadman;562214]Hey- you asked for an argument that wasn't religion based.
Chadman provides.
You never said it had to be a good aregument, or even well researched for that matter.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough.
My argument will be that Mike Wallace is stupid. If an argument doesn't have to be well informed or well-reasoned, then any random opinion is seemingly valid.
That's silly, in my...opinion...
-
[QUOTE=Chadman;562206]One non-religious argument against homosexuality...
OK, here goes- how many animal species have active gay communities? (Note: Gay/homosexual- not bi-sexual)
Disclaimer- Chadman has no problem with homosexuality- you just asked for an argument against with no religious basis.[/QUOTE]
Just about any time something seems logical, Wikipedia is there for you:
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior[/url]
This list is freaking huge.
-
[QUOTE=Chadman;562215]But was it smart to put yourself out there for any kind of heat before twitter/facebook etc?
Not having a go at you- Chadman just gets annoyed that people instantly shout down anyone with an opinion that differs from the mass population. Opinions should be encouraged, in Chadman's.... opinion.[/QUOTE]
No, it wasn't smart then either. It's just that it was much easier to mitigate. It didn't travel as fast so there were less repercussions. Doesn't change that it's not a smart thing to do for a celebrity.
Just like Ernie Holmes' shooting at a police helicopter wasn't smart before twitter/facebook/24-hour news cycle. But almost no one knows about it. Imagine the ****storm today...
BTW, I don't feel like you're coming after me, so no worries.
-
Half of our country is obese. Gluttony is a sin. Being fat is a choice. Where are all the church folk calling out fatties as sinners? It's in the bible.
-
[QUOTE=flippy;562216]That's what they were. If the country was founded on Christian principals, why have a Constitution? The Bible would make everything clear for people that were Christians.
What's interesting is the fact that they were deists is what protects our personal freedoms today. Not religion.
America was formed by people fleeing religious persecution. And it was the diests that protected them and gave them the freedom to choose to treat God and religion they way they want. If we were founded on Godly principles, America would have struggled and would probably continue struggling today because people of religious minds are passionate and controlling.
Even in the early days of America, the various relgious groups tried to control the population and force them to conform to their thinking in various states as they developed. It was as if the people that were fleeing persecution were becoming the new persecutioners. I guess what many were really fleeing was the fact that they weren't in power. And America gave them an opportunity to establish their own power.
If America was founded on Christian principals, we'd have struggled as badly as the Jews in the Old Testament. It feels odd to say this, but we all should be thankful diests were in control. And that they had the foresight and common sense to separate church and state.
One theme continues that's plagued humanity forever. The religious want to control others with their ways of thinking. The first thing God did was allow Adam and Eve to make their own choices. And it's ironic that the diests were the ones who followed this word of the Bible more closely than the believers who wanted to control what others think and do.
Christians can be like fat kids on diets. If they can't have cake, no one can have cake either. But everyone's different. And lots of people can handle cake. Just cause cake's not for you doesn't mean cake is bad for everyone else.
May we all pursue our own stupidity in the stupid ways we choose. That's the way God wanted it as well as the non believers. There's a load of common ground between the Christian teachings and the actions of the non believers. Sometimes I believe moreso than the common ground between God and the believers.
Sometimes religion gets in its own way. Maybe it's trying to hard.[/QUOTE]
Seriously man, write a book, or a blog, or a book of your blogs.