Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
I think "enabling" is not the best choice of words longship Apr 2012 #1
I think "enable" is a word that puts a special focus on the problem. trotsky Apr 2012 #3
You have a point, but... longship Apr 2012 #6
I don't see it as meaning "tacit approval." Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #7
Faith is an important issue here longship Apr 2012 #10
No, they definitely are not actively supporting them. trotsky Apr 2012 #8
My bad! longship Apr 2012 #11
About IRS concerns? Or...? n/t trotsky Apr 2012 #19
About why moderates might not be standing up against religion in politics longship Apr 2012 #26
Oh, on that I really can't be sure. trotsky Apr 2012 #27
Perhaps not, but they *are* actively funding them... Act_of_Reparation Apr 2012 #83
I believe that religious moderates can enable hateful fundamentalists, but rhett o rick Apr 2012 #2
You say: trotsky Apr 2012 #4
Plus add to that the sister claim Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #5
Very important point. trotsky Apr 2012 #9
How does having faith enable bad behavior? nm rhett o rick Apr 2012 #14
It's not the act of having faith that enables bad behavior. trotsky Apr 2012 #17
Ermmm.. what? dmallind Apr 2012 #18
Faith can be used to justify bad behavior, I agree. But having faith rhett o rick Apr 2012 #66
I think we have a tail and dog issue here dmallind Apr 2012 #12
It's not just wrong, it's hate speech, and it's stupid. bananas Apr 2012 #13
Now, now, you're not supposed to call beliefs stupid. trotsky Apr 2012 #15
As I pointed out, you can replace "faith" with just about anything bananas Apr 2012 #29
You sure can. Just as you can substitute a pear for an apple in an apple pie. trotsky Apr 2012 #35
No, religious faith doesn't close that off. nt bananas Apr 2012 #37
OK, go convince Fred Phelps he's wrong. trotsky Apr 2012 #39
What piffle dmallind Apr 2012 #16
Wrong. bananas Apr 2012 #30
Modern eugenics, genetic engineering, and ethical re-evaluation bananas Apr 2012 #32
You either didn't read or didn't understand your own "rebuttal". It makes my point perfectly! dmallind Apr 2012 #34
Why do they believe genetic composition of a population can be improved? bananas Apr 2012 #41
........ eqfan592 Apr 2012 #45
Your coin came down on the wrong side I see. Bad luck. dmallind Apr 2012 #53
rofl - the concept of earth was around long before geography as a science. nt bananas Apr 2012 #59
Wow, really??? eqfan592 Apr 2012 #79
Thoroughgoing religious liberalism in no way enables fundamentalism. E_Pluribus_Unitarian Apr 2012 #20
Again, no one is equating the beliefs. trotsky Apr 2012 #23
This is a variation on the assertion in a recent thread that: LTX Apr 2012 #21
No one is saying that religious beliefs are identical. trotsky Apr 2012 #22
But faith is a valid justification for all beliefs, whether religious or not. LTX Apr 2012 #24
I don't think religious faith is a valid justification for any belief. trotsky Apr 2012 #25
Actually, yes. LTX Apr 2012 #31
Great post! Religion does indeed evolve, and believers evolve, too. kwassa Apr 2012 #33
and also use imaginary father figures as a symbol yes dmallind Apr 2012 #36
And I'll add that those made-up sources LTX Apr 2012 #42
That's a gigantic caveat you just tried to tack on innocuously at the end there! trotsky Apr 2012 #43
Not really. LTX Apr 2012 #49
Absolutely dmallind Apr 2012 #55
Of course, I never said they couldn't. So bully for the brilliant dispatch of that straw man. trotsky Apr 2012 #46
Actually, no. trotsky Apr 2012 #38
So give me your definition of faith. LTX Apr 2012 #44
Religious faith. trotsky Apr 2012 #47
It can be a justification for both. LTX Apr 2012 #52
There you go muddling the definitions again. trotsky Apr 2012 #56
Valid point, but taken too far I think dmallind Apr 2012 #57
I agree for the most part with your statement that: LTX Apr 2012 #68
I disagree with this also kwassa Apr 2012 #73
I think thete is a difference rrneck Apr 2012 #28
How you ask? Probably humblebum Apr 2012 #40
"Oh, do elaborate", he said as he put on his wading boots. nt rrneck Apr 2012 #48
What is there to elaborate on? I merely responded with humblebum Apr 2012 #50
Well, you could elaborate on your opinion. eqfan592 Apr 2012 #51
Ah, good. Knee boots are more comfortable. nt rrneck Apr 2012 #54
So given the fact that groups of freethinkers/skeptics/atheists and individuals gave their open humblebum Apr 2012 #58
Except we have this thing called the Constitution. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #60
I was not aware that the Constitution had any teeth outside of the Unites States, and humblebum Apr 2012 #61
I am talking about what we are doing here. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #63
You are just kinda throwing out all sorts of straw men humblebum Apr 2012 #64
"limited separation" Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #67
I would certainly question your grasp of American history and in particular humblebum Apr 2012 #70
In short, because you've never heard of organizations like LTX Apr 2012 #84
I've heard about Americans United. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #87
I see. You don't know the history of LTX Apr 2012 #88
pssst. There used to be and "O" in the acronym, too. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #89
Right. Which just proves LTX Apr 2012 #91
You are misunderstanding a lot of arguments in this thread Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #92
Oh, I haven't missed the point of thread. LTX Apr 2012 #93
Faith in Constitution... nt tama Apr 2012 #71
Whatever. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #72
Faith in word games tama Apr 2012 #75
Id didnt work rrneck Apr 2012 #62
Never said it did work. I said "attempted" eradication. nt humblebum Apr 2012 #65
Then don't worry about it. nt rrneck Apr 2012 #69
Christianity has been reforming for two thousand years and continues to reform Leontius Apr 2012 #74
The 1950s called. 2ndAmForComputers Apr 2012 #77
And 20s 30s 40s 60s 70s 80s and today. nt humblebum Apr 2012 #80
Making heavy use of helicopters painted in the color black, I'm sure. 2ndAmForComputers Apr 2012 #76
You called? onager Apr 2012 #78
And that is a vile and bigoted suggestion LeftishBrit Apr 2012 #82
OK, I think it is wrong and here's why. LeftishBrit Apr 2012 #81
I don't believe you understood what the point of the quote was. eqfan592 Apr 2012 #85
+1 nt mr blur Apr 2012 #94
But is isn't that simple when there's money involved Act_of_Reparation Apr 2012 #86
Not exactly. kwassa Apr 2012 #90
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»How can religious moderat...»Reply #44