(July 25, 2019 at 12:18 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote:
Why is moving forward in the conversation some sort of Christian doomed side-ism? I took the time to see the other side of the equation and admitted my complicity in the problem. I was attempting to open up the topic to allow for discussion of how to allow for the plurality of beliefs and freedom of action can have an equanimity of outcome or whether equanimity of opportunity, with it's inherent social contrivances and restrictions of freedom is better. It's certainly better than nothing, but I've never really prescribed to the lesser of two evils strategy. I'm not really certain where you got the idea I thought anything was poisonous.
@arewethereyet I wasn't attempting to play word games or deceive anyone. Perhaps there was a miscommunication from this particular medium. I would really like to know what made you think this if you're willing to point it out to me or discuss it.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari