Punish family and friends who interfere with your right to believe or not believe

[Onyx]

onyx is an anarchist and every bit as messed up as is bripat, btm.

Jumping in here.

bripat9643 is not a real anarchist. He is a poser if I have ever seen one.

 

[JakeStarkey]

onyx is an anarchist and every bit as messed up as is bripat, btm.

Jumping in here.

bripat9643 is not a real anarchist. He is a poser if I have ever seen one.

Now that we are both picking on somebody else, I will take you off personal ignore and agree.

OK, back on personal ignore.

 

[Onyx]

Exactly, as a good little liberal it is your duty to stick your nose in to everybody's business, and let them know what they are doing wrong.

I actually do not have a problem with holding yourself to a higher station than others. I take pride and confidence in my beliefs, and am not afraid to call someone else out for not elevating their mind. Of course, I try to stay humble to a degree, so I do not get caught in an echo chamber.

I am not a liberal by the way. In the liberal-conservative spectrum, I would be considered a reactionary I guess.

 

[OldLady]

You are very young, aren't you?

You are keen on deflecting via subtle ad hominem fallacies, are you not?

Yes, that's right. It's the only way to live in a society such as ours; no one said it was always pleasant.

I believe in tolerance. Like I said, you are conflating tolerance with appreciation and subservience.

I had forgotten that you don't believe in our society or peace and order as such.

Of course I do.

I believe the way I do because statism is chaotic and disorderly. Nearly every war in human history was waged between states. Government democide killed more people in the 20th century than every war in human history.

Are you getting the picture? Out of the two of us, I am not the savage and uncivilized one.

You are keen on deflecting via subtle ad hominem fallacies, are you not?
No, I hate that. It was just an amused comment from an old lady. Sorry you took it as an insult.
I believe in tolerance. Like I said, you are conflating tolerance with appreciation and subservience.
No again. I assure you, I do not find it easy to tolerate a lot of things, yet I do.

Anarchy makes me deeply suspicious, so I have not followed a lot of your threads and probably haven't given you a fair hearing. What I know is that humans do not wish for chaos and uncertainty. It is how Hitler rose to power. It is how most every dictator in history has found his place. Enemies of our country have used the lure of anarchy to undermine our social structure time and again. So your message raises my hackles. Yet I tolerate you, best as I can.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The motive for a believer to pester a nonbeliever is clear - they believe their eternal salvation is at stake.
What is the motivation for a nonbeliever to pester a believer? Demonic is my only answer.

Pestering (weak word there, penguin) is not acceptable either way.

So do you let everyone you know do whatever without you interjecting comment? DUI, Heroin use, self mutilation. Any commentary by you if you see a loved one doing those things?

Are you on opiates? Try this again, please.

Now with the personal attacks. So predictable.

YOU attacked ME, penguin. Believe as you will, but I do not want a Christian government state. Because if we can have that, we can also have an antiGodist state.

Thinking you are being attacked because I asked you a simple question is very childish.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Yesterday in Adult Sunday School, a woman told us about her sister and husband who go to church on Wednesday nights because the people they live with work and don't know about it. If they go to church on Sunday, the people who are antiGodists get on them severely.

My family members have been on notice for years to not interfere with us or others in the family on these matters.

Do not interfere with the right of family members to believe or not to believe when they are of age.

If they do, there is no contact, there is no birthday or Christmas or other gifts, there is no vacation, there is nothing in the will. Three, one antiGodist and two religious freeks, are infuriated. Tough.

I know members of the LDS and Catholic churches who have done their wills to leave all to the churches rather than family members who pester them about their faith beliefs.

Excellent.

Different family's have different dynamics. I am not a religious person, but I have 2 sisters who are absolute god freaks. Our family is pretty open and we have a lot of religious, spiritual, political etc discussions. It was that way when I was growing up and we raised our kids that way too. I never really realized that our family was that different until after I was married, and noticed my wife's family didn't have those type of discussions.

Now you said "interfree with the right....", so that is beyond just discussing. I would be agitated if a family member actively tried to keep someone from their faith, but I think you have to look from both perspectives. If someone I cared about was involved in something I considered a harmful cult, then I would feel it was my duty to try an intervene.

No right or wrong answer here IMO. It Depends on circumstances and individuals involved.

The solution is simple - you don't hangout with people you have uncivil relations with, Starkey can't grasp that.

 

[Onyx]

No again. I assure you, I do not find it easy to tolerate a lot of things, yet I do.

Do you acknowledge that one can criticize something and still tolerate its existence?

I guess in my mind, to not tolerate something would be to actively try and destroy it. If using words to disprove something is a display of intolerance, then I guess I do not believe in full tolerance.

Anarchy makes me deeply suspicious, so I have not followed a lot of your threads and probably haven't given you a fair hearing.

It is the most misunderstood ideology, and it does not help that we have "anarchist" hoodlums rioting and engaging in petty turf wars with fascist street gangs.

What I know is that humans do not wish for chaos and uncertainty.

A little bit of uncertainty can be healthy. What you want to avoid is cruel stability.

It is how Hitler rose to power. It is how most every dictator in history has found his place.

Just about every dictator has risen to power in an anocracy.

To be an anarchist means that you reject rulers. Half of anarchists justify violence against rulers and regimes as a means of self defense. The other half are pacifists that believe violence should never be used under any circumstances. Anyone else is just posing for militant chic.

Enemies of our country have used the lure of anarchy to undermine our social structure time and again. So your message raises my hackles. Yet I tolerate you, best as I can.

"Enemies of our country?" Russia and China have historically persecuted and killed anarchist factions. In fact, anarchists are still be systematically killed and imprisoned in those countries as we speak.

The lure of power has caused 99% of unnatural human deaths. Dare I say 100 percent? Anarchists reject power, and anyone that does not reject power is savage and uncivilized.

 

[OldLady]

No again. I assure you, I do not find it easy to tolerate a lot of things, yet I do.

Do you acknowledge that one can criticize something and still tolerate its existence?

I guess in my mind, to not tolerate something would be to actively try and destroy it. If using words to disprove something is a display of intolerance, then I guess I do not believe in full tolerance.

Anarchy makes me deeply suspicious, so I have not followed a lot of your threads and probably haven't given you a fair hearing.

It is the most misunderstood ideology, and it does not help that we have "anarchist" hoodlums rioting and engaging in petty turf wars with fascist street gangs.

What I know is that humans do not wish for chaos and uncertainty.

A little bit of uncertainty can be healthy. What you want to avoid is cruel stability.

It is how Hitler rose to power. It is how most every dictator in history has found his place.

Just about every dictator has risen to power in an anocracy.

To be an anarchist means that you reject rulers. Half of anarchists justify violence against rulers and regimes as a means of self defense. The other half are pacifists that believe violence should never be used under any circumstances. Anyone else is just posing for militant chic.

Enemies of our country have used the lure of anarchy to undermine our social structure time and again. So your message raises my hackles. Yet I tolerate you, best as I can.

"Enemies of our country?" Russia and China have historically persecuted and killed anarchist factions. In fact, anarchists are still be systematically killed and imprisoned in those countries as we speak.

The lure of power has caused 99% of unnatural human deaths. Dare I say 100 percent? Anarchists reject power, and anyone that does not reject power is savage and uncivilized.

Do you acknowledge that one can criticize something and still tolerate its existence?
I guess in my mind, to not tolerate something would be to actively try and destroy it. If using words to disprove something is a display of intolerance, then I guess I do not believe in full tolerance.
Of course in a place like this we can discuss ideas we disagree with, and still tolerate sharing our space with each other. Jake's situation is a family one and to me that's very different, doubly because it relates to religion, which as Jefferson said should be between a person and his/her God, no one else's business to speak of.

 

[Onyx]

Of course in a place like this we can discuss ideas we disagree with, and still tolerate sharing our space with each other.

Okay, so how was I being intolerant?

Jake's situation is a family one and to me that's very different, doubly because it relates to religion, which as Jefferson said should be between a person and his/her God, no one else's business to speak of.

Saying it is not my business to speak of his circumstances is purely conjecture. I have the ability to speak about it, therefore I can make it my business to speak about it (not to mention he started the thread asking for opinions).

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pestering (weak word there, penguin) is not acceptable either way.

So do you let everyone you know do whatever without you interjecting comment? DUI, Heroin use, self mutilation. Any commentary by you if you see a loved one doing those things?

Are you on opiates? Try this again, please.

Now with the personal attacks. So predictable.

YOU attacked ME, penguin. Believe as you will, but I do not want a Christian government state. Because if we can have that, we can also have an antiGodist state.

Thinking you are being attacked because I asked you a simple question is very childish.

You attacked me, then accused me of attacking you, silly bird. Yes, you are very childish if you think I believe any of those crimes are acceptable. Silly bird.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yesterday in Adult Sunday School, a woman told us about her sister and husband who go to church on Wednesday nights because the people they live with work and don't know about it. If they go to church on Sunday, the people who are antiGodists get on them severely.

My family members have been on notice for years to not interfere with us or others in the family on these matters.

Do not interfere with the right of family members to believe or not to believe when they are of age.

If they do, there is no contact, there is no birthday or Christmas or other gifts, there is no vacation, there is nothing in the will. Three, one antiGodist and two religious freeks, are infuriated. Tough.

I know members of the LDS and Catholic churches who have done their wills to leave all to the churches rather than family members who pester them about their faith beliefs.

Excellent.

Different family's have different dynamics. I am not a religious person, but I have 2 sisters who are absolute god freaks. Our family is pretty open and we have a lot of religious, spiritual, political etc discussions. It was that way when I was growing up and we raised our kids that way too. I never really realized that our family was that different until after I was married, and noticed my wife's family didn't have those type of discussions.

Now you said "interfree with the right....", so that is beyond just discussing. I would be agitated if a family member actively tried to keep someone from their faith, but I think you have to look from both perspectives. If someone I cared about was involved in something I considered a harmful cult, then I would feel it was my duty to try an intervene.

No right or wrong answer here IMO. It Depends on circumstances and individuals involved.

The solution is simple - you don't hangout with people you have uncivil relations with, Starkey can't grasp that.

I am talking about family and friends, not other people.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I think onyx wants to conflate family space with public space, so he is wrong and can take a walk.

penguin merely wants to quarrel.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

I will say, "Mind your business, my friend."

Why should I?

Exactly, as a good little liberal it is your duty to stick your nose in to everybody's business, and let them know what they are doing wrong.

onyx is an anarchist and every bit as messed up as is bripat, btm.

I understand what you mean about folks being involved in cults, whether religious or secular, and, yes, I would find that a hard call.

But I'm still messed up, huh? I believe in live and let live. I don't generally engage in faith/religious/spiritual debates with those who do not want to debate. It's a personal choice and there is so many things involved in ones personal beliefs. As long as your beliefs/faith/religion don't involve restricting others rights, then what ever works for you is fine with me.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Yesterday in Adult Sunday School, a woman told us about her sister and husband who go to church on Wednesday nights because the people they live with work and don't know about it. If they go to church on Sunday, the people who are antiGodists get on them severely.

My family members have been on notice for years to not interfere with us or others in the family on these matters.

Do not interfere with the right of family members to believe or not to believe when they are of age.

If they do, there is no contact, there is no birthday or Christmas or other gifts, there is no vacation, there is nothing in the will. Three, one antiGodist and two religious freeks, are infuriated. Tough.

I know members of the LDS and Catholic churches who have done their wills to leave all to the churches rather than family members who pester them about their faith beliefs.

Excellent.

Different family's have different dynamics. I am not a religious person, but I have 2 sisters who are absolute god freaks. Our family is pretty open and we have a lot of religious, spiritual, political etc discussions. It was that way when I was growing up and we raised our kids that way too. I never really realized that our family was that different until after I was married, and noticed my wife's family didn't have those type of discussions.

Now you said "interfree with the right....", so that is beyond just discussing. I would be agitated if a family member actively tried to keep someone from their faith, but I think you have to look from both perspectives. If someone I cared about was involved in something I considered a harmful cult, then I would feel it was my duty to try an intervene.

No right or wrong answer here IMO. It Depends on circumstances and individuals involved.

The solution is simple - you don't hangout with people you have uncivil relations with, Starkey can't grasp that.

I am talking about family and friends, not other people.

If you want to be with people who you think treat you poorly, that is your problem that is regardless of the topic matter.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I will say, "Mind your business, my friend."

Why should I?

Exactly, as a good little liberal it is your duty to stick your nose in to everybody's business, and let them know what they are doing wrong.

onyx is an anarchist and every bit as messed up as is bripat, btm.

I understand what you mean about folks being involved in cults, whether religious or secular, and, yes, I would find that a hard call.

But I'm still messed up, huh? I believe in live and let live. I don't generally engage in faith/religious/spiritual debates with those who do not want to debate. It's a personal choice and there is so many things involved in ones personal beliefs. As long as your beliefs/faith/religion don't involve restricting others rights, then what ever works for you is fine with me.

I did not say and did not imply your conclusion. I don't think you are messed up on this. I believe in live and let live within family space but retain the right to draw the line in my family space.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yesterday in Adult Sunday School, a woman told us about her sister and husband who go to church on Wednesday nights because the people they live with work and don't know about it. If they go to church on Sunday, the people who are antiGodists get on them severely.

My family members have been on notice for years to not interfere with us or others in the family on these matters.

Do not interfere with the right of family members to believe or not to believe when they are of age.

If they do, there is no contact, there is no birthday or Christmas or other gifts, there is no vacation, there is nothing in the will. Three, one antiGodist and two religious freeks, are infuriated. Tough.

I know members of the LDS and Catholic churches who have done their wills to leave all to the churches rather than family members who pester them about their faith beliefs.

Excellent.

Different family's have different dynamics. I am not a religious person, but I have 2 sisters who are absolute god freaks. Our family is pretty open and we have a lot of religious, spiritual, political etc discussions. It was that way when I was growing up and we raised our kids that way too. I never really realized that our family was that different until after I was married, and noticed my wife's family didn't have those type of discussions.

Now you said "interfree with the right....", so that is beyond just discussing. I would be agitated if a family member actively tried to keep someone from their faith, but I think you have to look from both perspectives. If someone I cared about was involved in something I considered a harmful cult, then I would feel it was my duty to try an intervene.

No right or wrong answer here IMO. It Depends on circumstances and individuals involved.

The solution is simple - you don't hangout with people you have uncivil relations with, Starkey can't grasp that.

I am talking about family and friends, not other people.

If you want to be with people who you think treat you poorly, that is your problem that is regardless of the topic matter.

You are confused, obvisouly.

But, for the most point, you have tried to engage here without too much bile, so good on you.

 

[Weatherman2020]

So do you let everyone you know do whatever without you interjecting comment? DUI, Heroin use, self mutilation. Any commentary by you if you see a loved one doing those things?

Are you on opiates? Try this again, please.

Now with the personal attacks. So predictable.

YOU attacked ME, penguin. Believe as you will, but I do not want a Christian government state. Because if we can have that, we can also have an antiGodist state.

Thinking you are being attacked because I asked you a simple question is very childish.

You attacked me, then accused me of attacking you, silly bird. Yes, you are very childish if you think I believe any of those crimes are acceptable. Silly bird.

"So do you let everyone you know do whatever without you interjecting comment? DUI, Heroin use, self mutilation. Any commentary by you if you see a loved one doing those things?"
That's a cookie cutter civilized question. If you want to call it a personal attack, I have my answer to the question.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Are you on opiates? Try this again, please.

Now with the personal attacks. So predictable.

YOU attacked ME, penguin. Believe as you will, but I do not want a Christian government state. Because if we can have that, we can also have an antiGodist state.

Thinking you are being attacked because I asked you a simple question is very childish.

You attacked me, then accused me of attacking you, silly bird. Yes, you are very childish if you think I believe any of those crimes are acceptable. Silly bird.

"So do you let everyone you know do whatever without you interjecting comment? DUI, Heroin use, self mutilation. Any commentary by you if you see a loved one doing those things?"
That's a cookie cutter civilized question. If you want to call it a personal attack, I have my answer to the question.

Nope, it does not pertain except in your strange head.

I am talking about my family space, penguin. If you do DUI, Heroin use, self mutilation and it affects children, yep, you and the po-lice are going to get real close.

 

[bripat9643]

onyx is an anarchist and every bit as messed up as is bripat, btm.

Jumping in here.

bripat9643 is not a real anarchist. He is a poser if I have ever seen one.

Right, says the guy who is supporting Hillary, the archetype of an authoritarian statist.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Do you have right to pester adult family members about their belief or lack of it"

One's beliefs, or lack thereof, should be respected by all, family members in particular.