Buddhist Family Sues Louisiana School Board For Violating Freedom Through Christian Indoctrination

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

that bigotry and ignorance is pure hate, it hurts my soul that you have so much anger in your heart funk doc

You don't possess a 'soul'.
​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

We'll let our Muslim brothers decide if your statement was bigotry or not. By your logic and definition of bigot, you are definitely a bigot.

By pure logic and definition, Muslims can't call me a bigot. You, on the other hand, may have some issues.​

 

[Bingoman]

Roark told her class recently, Buddhism “’is stupid. Speaking about the founder of Buddhism, Siddhartha, she proclaimed that ‘no one could stay alive that long without food and water.”

aren't their several Bible stories detailing such events? Specifically the story of Moses who wandered a desert for 40 years with hundreds of people?

 

[Type Username Here]

By pure logic and definition, Muslims can't call me a bigot. You, on the other hand, may have some issues.​

Islam specifically forces its adherents to kill, subjugate and demean it's enemies after winning their trust by faking being 'peaceful' until their numbers are greater than those they interact with.

You're ignorant of the facts. Read this and educate yourself.....or don't and continue to make yourself look even more bigoted.
​

Your statement is just as ignorant as those who you think believe what you posted is an accurate representation of what transpired.

Your argument IS invalid since it is not supported by the text or anyone conversant with Christian doctrine.

Stop being ignorant and implying that I'm a theist. YOU are a theist. I study religion.
​

Those 'major forms' do not believe what you stated is accurate. Not even 'ignorant' followers believe it.


Nowhere in the text is what you stated found and I know of no religious organizations (or individuals) that believe it.


I study religion to understand people in my immediate family as I've stated on numerous occasions.​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Uh, you said Islam as a whole forces its adherents to kill, when that isn't true.

You haven't read the Qu'ran.​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

All of that is absolutely true according to history. Smileys won't save you from being a bigot, holmes.

The only cure for that is education.

Read the book.​

 

[The Real]

I think Dafunkdoc's issue is that he's looking for an authentic, originary version of these religions, which is not clearly possible to find, and so he tries to construct an eisegetical, consistent system out of the particular founding texts. That's why his claims have internal coherence. For him, there is a legitimately original, and thus true Christianity, and same for Islam, and he is drawing a rigid line between those original versions and the practitioners who do not follow it. I don't see how this is possible to establish, since there's no such thing as pure eisegesis and since most of the relevant evidence is lost in time, but also because I don't believe there is any actual internal consistency to be found in any of the Jewish or Christian books, since they are compilations of texts that were written over a period of time by authors who themselves held fundamentally different views from each other. But that aside, more fundamentally, I don't think you can separate religion from practice. Even if Islamic texts specifically told Muslims to kill all non-Muslims, if most Muslims were doing no such thing, then it would be inaccurate to call Islam a murderous religion. There is no religion apart from the way its practiced at any particular time, because religion as an institution is much more than any particular interpretations of any particular set of scriptures.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

I Dafunkdoc's issue is that he's looking for an authentic, originary version of these religions, which is not clearly possible to find, and so he tries to construct an eisegetical, consistent system out of the particular founding texts. That's why his claims have internal coherence. For him, there is a legitimately original, and thus true Christianity, and same for Islam, and he is drawing a rigid line between those original versions and the practitioners who do not follow it. I don't see how this is possible to establish, since there's no such thing as pure eisegesis and since most of the relevant evidence is lost in time, but also because I don't believe there is any actual internal consistency to be found in any of the Jewish or Christian books, since they are compilations of texts that were written over a period of time by authors who themselves held fundamentally different views from each other. But that aside, more fundamentally, I don't think you can separate religion from practice. Even if Islamic texts specifically told Muslims to kill all non-Muslims, if most Muslims were doing no such thing, then it would be inaccurate to call Islam a murderous religion. There is no religion apart from the way its practiced at any particular time.

I don't use eisegesis. Strictly exegesis and form/textual criticism. All religions stem from animism AFAIK and can understand thus far. It is the expression of the religions themselves that incur issues.​

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

You haven't read the Qu'ran.​

Why would I waste my time reading fairy tale holy books when I can learn about science and the universe? When I was 9 years old I thought the bible was fukking stupid, so nah, I won't ever read another religious text.

 

[Everythingg]

Why would I waste my time reading fairy tale holy books when I can learn about science and the universe? When I was 9 years old I thought the bible was fukking stupid, so nah, I won't ever read another religious text.

You don't possess a 'soul'.
​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Why would I waste my time reading fairy tale holy books when I can learn about science and the universe? When I was 9 years old I thought the bible was fukking stupid, so nah, I won't ever read another religious text.

Because you have to live in a world populated by people who don't think/believe as you do and to best 'get along' with them (if possible) one should try to understand them.​

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

You don't possess a 'soul'.
​

I don't believe in Souls. It was meant to be taken metaphorically, kind of like the bible is a metaphor for bullshyt

Because you have to live in a world populated by people who don't think/believe as you do and to best 'get along' with them (if possible) one should try to understand them.​

I don't judge people for their beliefs. I judge them by their actions. If they interact with me and are friendly, I don't give a flying fukk.

 

[Everythingg]

I don't believe in Souls. It was meant to be taken metaphorically, kind of like the bible is a metaphor for bullshyt

You don't possess a 'soul'.
​

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

souls aren't real. it doesn't hurt my feelings for someone to say I don't have one.

 

[Everythingg]

souls aren't real. it doesn't hurt my feelings for someone to say I don't have one.

Proof?