Intolerance of Conscience?

First!

I'm glad I sparked a productive reaction on your part.  At least your thinking.  You may not allow me to take credit for this but it is to no avail, for credit I shall take. 

I'll tell you what, your tolerance, your perceived moral compass, your conscience has nothing to do with others, it is not wrong to have a conscience only to project your conscience on to others.

What may be the right thing to you may be the wrong thing to others.  Professing your beliefs is fine, but when you project your beliefs onto others thats a different animal.  you see when you out right tell people that something is wrong, and tell them they are morally wrong and sinning and going to hell because of it that is projecting your conscience and beliefs.  Furthermore, calling for a boycott of a company because of its policies which you disagree with is you being intolerant of that company.  You know if you've never heard a pastor preach intolerance or hatred then you are very secluded. 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/21/mccain-backer-hagee-said_n_102892.html

 

Theres a link of a pastor being intolerant and down right crazy.  Again, much like I said in my last reply to you I think you need to do some reading, research, and soul searching because you seem very secluded. 

Now as far "tolerance training" that sounds like indoctrination.  The reason that someone might call someone intolerant is when they project and/or forcibly submit their beliefs onto another person.  That's why I think you should live and let live.  God is the ultimate judge, and furthermore salvation is personal, or is it not?

I wrote this first. I found that other thread later. Ask a Stardock admin, they could tell you the time. I hope.

That is crap. It is a blatant lie. I've listened to MANY (8?) pastors, and had more theological teachers, and there has never been any instance when they have preached intolerance or hatred. Even the less wise or younger or less suitable ones. The problem is when you have a pastor who has strayed from the Truth and interprets his own work instead of the Bible. See my gripe with the LDS Cult.

That is crap also. Truth is absolute. Else, I could tell you that you don't need water to survive or air, either. I have studied the Law, and I have found a connection between foods that have warnings on them and Kosher teaching. This means that either the Jewish society was highly logical and advanced, or there was a divine hand. I have found that in other areas, commands are always for the better.

KFC did that, not me. Why are you considering us the same? I'm not hooked up to some mind-sharing device. At least not one that doesn't use a keyboard for transmission.

Also, some of us consider that a very good reason to boycott a company. It's our money they're spending.

[sarcasm]No, really? I never knew that![/sarcasm] No. I'm not forcing anyone to agree with me. I am merely stating my opinion, and persuading people to agree with me. If I had a dollar for every time I had to type that.

Wait, are you agreeing with me? Well, for the first sentence, at least. I never force anyone to believe with me. If I did, I'd use insidious means.

However, this "live and let live" policy is basically a surrender to letting people go to Hell for no good reason.

If God is the ultimate judge, then shouldn't I preach His Law?

Salvation is not "personal" as you are thinking. It's only available to an individual with each ticket, and relies upon faith.

 

Shall I point out how quickly you fell for my trap, in a sense of speak. See, you pretty much pointed out that the only acceptable grounds are "for" or "neutral", not "against". It is almost impossible to say that you are against anything that doesn't promote maximum pleasure.

Tolerance and Conscience.....Interesting topic Erathaniel. It should rouse some good discussion.

In some states, "Tolerance" and "Diversity" training are indoctrinated in the much lower grades now. Gotta get em' young...you know ,  the younger the better. Can you imagine schools wasting time and our taxpayer monies on such drivel?

They are teaching our kids to tolerate everything and everyone...What's right and what's wrong according to moral absolute standard is long gone ...went out in 1962 with prayer (Christian prayer, that is,)and the Ten Commandments... gone .

 

  

 

really?

But we all have to live together in a society, don't we?

What things as a society should we tolerate and what things shouldn't we tolerate?

What things get zero tolerance and what things get absolute tolerance?

 

 

 

 

We all have an inner voice of conscience dictating to us a law that we didn't make and which no man could ever make. Every one of us is born with a sense of right and wrong.

So, it may be more correct to ask, why is is so wrong to express our conscience? I'd answer that it isn't...It's just that leftists and worldlings don't like to deal with people whose conscience is formed around God's absolutes of right and wrong.

.

It's not a question I meant for you to answer. I know all about conscience. I'm asking them.

Public school sex ed programs are the vehicle used to teach kids "tolerance" of homosexuality as normal, immutable, and natural, even good. What is happening here is the schools are actually either forming or attempting to deform the student's
conscience via "tolerance" training.

Therefore, if not linked to the objective norm of morality which is law, natural law and divine law, conscience itself can be erroneous and knowingly to follow a conscience which is formed erroneously would be wrong (sinful) in itself.

Those questions are answered in a single word: law.

A society is governed by it's laws. Period. While many people would love to see a theocracy here, it simply isn't. It's a country made up of peoples from many different countries, races, religions, and backgrounds. What is and isn't tolerated is determined by the laws of the society. Not religious dogma, not religious rules, not religious standards, but by law.

As for the original post, I agree that the sort of "teaching" described is not what our tax dollars are being paid to teach. The schools need to busy themselves with teaching the skills and knowledge needed to be a productive and successful member of society and not waste time and money on warm and fuzzy crap.

In a time where our students are graduating with less than acceptable reading and math skills, and our students are testing well below those of other nations, this sort of nonsense is not only a waste of taxpayer monies but borders on criminal dereliction of duty on the part of our schools.

The whole 'conscience' issue is actually irrelevant. I am a firm believer in allowing others to live their lives as they see fit as long as they don't harm others or infringe upon the rights of others, and that includes allowing intolerant religious types to spout their message of hate and intolerance of others instead of tending to the planks in their own eyes.

Doesn't mean I won't voice my own opinion of their asinine behavior now and again.

I beg to differ here. All the schools in Arizona teach only abstinence.

And only the laws of God are worth following, only His name is worthy of praise.

Yes, that is what this article is about.

Really? Doesn't the bible say "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man"?

Meaning you should obey the law.

Or don't you believe your bible?

Is that not a law of God?

Cute way of dodging the point there Skippy, but very obvious. What's the matter? Wrote something you can't now stand behind because you know it was dumb?

Either you obey the law or not, and if you don't you're violating your own religion.

Then I obey the law as I am commanded by God. I do not have to believe that the law is worth following to follow it.

You're going off track of the discussion, here. Next time at least post something pertinent to the original discussion.

Are you trying to say that the following was not pertinent to the original discussion?



As for my follow up comments, they were in direct response to your own comments so screw you. I'll never comment on another one of your pathetically moronic posts again you wimpy little worm. Rot in Hell.

Good. First blacklist. I never liked you that much anyways.

Wow you got Mason worked up.  I don't blame him tho.  You are very closed minded.  Being inflexible makes you very difficult to have a discussion with erathoniel.  I know it's hard to understand but when you are as closed minded as you are you guarantee the inability to learn.  You are purposefully negating empathy.  Besides what your pastor teaches in your church may be different from what another pastor teaches in another church.  Much of the bible is left up to interpretation.  In fact figuring out exactly how and when the bible was canonized is left to speculation.  The books in the bible might have changed up until the Council of Nicea, and who knows even unti now.  Makes it all blurry.  By the way the more I read your article the less sense it makes.

 

Typical Erath reaction. I'm sure that is what God taught you as well, when you have the power to silence other people, use it. You are a master at using that free will God gave you.

Is it Mason you didn't like or was it that you didn't like the fact that yet another person has made you think twice about your opinions but in the end you refuse to be open minded as psychx pointed out? So sad, you seem to have some potential for making so decent arguments, but the mere fact that you don't come to debate but to impose your beliefs on everyone else makes you a close minded blind person who will never learn beyond the barriers you create for yourself.

So will I be next on your blacklist? I'm sure my comments merit joining it since you don't like to be told the truth. Not that you would know it if it bit you in the rear.

I agree.

MasonM posts:

Yes the Bible says such, meaning we are to obey all of man's just laws becasue they serve the greater good of society of which we are a part. However, not all of man's laws are just laws, that is , according to the natural law or in harmony with God's laws and those we are not to obey. In other words, man-made laws do not override God's laws.

Take abortion for example...In 1973, the Supreme Court "legalized" abortion, the medical practice of killing a baby in the womb. Laws that approve or condone sodomy is another.


Erathoniel,

Imagine that? CharlesCS is not tolerant of your intolerance of MasonM's hateful remark cursing you to Hell.


CharlesCS,

By my remarks you may have noticed that much like I perceive Erathoniel to be, I'm a person who operates with fixed, absolute standards of truth and justice. I'm a discriminating person in that while I try to understand and appreciate everybody, I do not accept their ideas as being equal or good if they are not in harmony with God's laws or commands.

Yes, we ought to listen to other's ideas with an open-mind, but if we understand some ideas to be false or morally evil and don't tell you about it, then, in truth, we are the ones being dishonest and uncaring about your well-being.


It seems to me that Erathoniel was giving everyone here a fair hearing on their respective views and obviously he doesn't agree, but so what----that's what a good debate is all about. One is not close-minded for simply disagreeing with another's point of view.

If you can't just accept the text.

What truth? Nope, I don't blacklist until someone gets majorly hostile.

You do realize you are being "closed minded" by saying that?

Wow, the comments get cornier and cornier by the minute. Dude, you still have a lot to learn about debating and arguing.



The one you are too blind to see. But hey, we all have the right to ignore reality and live within our "The world should be like this" world. You know, the same world God created in 6 days? By ignoring the realities that God created you are ignoring God himself. But hye, feel free to ignore all you want. You seem to be really good at that.

Which truth, again, would that be?

I respect you way to view the world and it's people. But I have to wonder why bother to try to understand anyone if once you realize their ideals and opinions are not to your satisfaction based on your faith your whole attempt to understand them is replaced with the need to point out to them how wrong you believe they are. It's one thing to tell someone what you believe, it's another to say they are wrong because your faith says so. The truth is, and lets be honest here, that unless my opinions (or anyone else's) are somewhat within your realm of equal and good, my opinions are not valid. Of course, this is not something that bothers me because I have my beliefs and in them I am willing to tolerate your beliefs. I do what I can to help people become better people, but God gave us free will, meaning I can not change anyone, they can only change themselves. I can only point to what I believe is the right direction, it's up to everyone else to do what they believe is best.



Listening means that you would take those ideas into account. But considering you already have a preset mentality where nothing can convince you otherwise of what you have already determined based on your faith, in reality you are not truly listening but simply giving the impression that you are. The other persons opinion, before you even hear it, has already been categorized between " the same as me" and "wrong" with no room for consideration. So the truth is you lose the ability to debate since debating would require both sides to accept that the other person could be right, in your case, you already predetermined the other person is wrong before they made their argument so long as their argument does not fall within your ideals. So again I wonder what's the point of listening? You may as well be upfront and say if someones opinion does not coincide with yours than it is your belief that they are wrong because you believe your ideals are absolute. But then we are not perfect, only God is, so to claim your ideals or rules are absolute is to think somewhat very highly of yourself.



No, one is "not" closed-minded for disagreeing. One is closed-minded for believe their opinion is absolute and everyone else's who does not follow their opinion is wrong. Closed-minded obviously means not allowing anything in to your mind. Debating means you are willing to listen, consider and maybe even change your mind based on new information. Erathoniel does none of these and from what I can see, based on your own words, neither do you. But that's OK, because I do care about both your opinions. And I take everything into consideration because I am not perfect and I could be wrong, which I have been on many topics, including my own faith.

Erathoniel does give everyone a chance to express their opinion, but does not hesitate to point out the errors of their way and when others try to make their point understood, he sticks to his guns and continues to put peoples opinions down by making his opinions absolute, as if he is never wrong. That is when people get upset with him. And then he wonders why people get aggressive and abusive. How would you feel if you were always having your opinions put down by someone who seems to think their opinions are superior to yours, regardless of topic?

I am not God Erathoniel, I can not make the blind see. I can only point in 1 direction and hope you understand. But I may as well try to stop Niagra Falls from running. The results would be the same. You don't wanna understand, you wanna control, you wanna be absolute (I like that word) and that does nothing for a good debate.

Einstein didn't wanna understand, he didn't wanna control. He wanted to be relative (sorry, couldn't resist).

What is a debate? This is life. General consensus determines only one thing: Government. Oh, and also the winner of the popularity contests. But what's the difference?

erathoniel
I'll bet your eyes are brown.