15 Jul 06
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeAbso-freakin'-lutely. Anything less would be a scosch disingenuous, don't you think?
So, just to be absolutely clear on this:
[b] I, FreakKBH, support the damnation of my child to an eternity of agony for not accepting Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour (i.e., by becoming an atheist).
Would you be prepared, before the RHP community, to endorse the statement above?[/b]
15 Jul 06
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeSo, in your view, if I supported judgment for someone outside of my immediate family while condemning judgment for a member of my family, this would be compatible with truth?
Glad to know that family values are alive and well.
While I am a man who obviously loves his family, I love truth more. There are a few things in life which are more important than "family values."
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI don't regard you as ethically inconsistent; I regard you as morally perverted.
So, in your view, if I supported judgment for someone outside of my immediate family while condemning judgment for a member of my family, this would be compatible with truth?
While I am a man who obviously loves his family, I love truth more. There are a few things in life which are more important than "family values."
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeI'd say moral perversion would look more like the picture being painted by your beliefs than mine. In your world, it's okay for one of your children to rape/torture/kill; in my world, justice is blind.
I don't regard you as ethically inconsistent; I regard you as morally perverted.
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou mean this question: "So if the person who perpetrated the act was another of your children, you would feel like bashing their skull in, as well?"? I don't see how his answer or non-answer to this question is relevant here. He already said before that while he would feel like bashing the skull of a person who raped his child in, he doesn't think it would be morally right to do so. You should rather have asked if he would support putting his child who tortures and rapes another of his children in prison for a finite spell, as this is what he would want to happen to a stranger who did the same. Now if he'd answer that with "no", I might agree that he'd be morally perverted.
When he didn't respond to the question put to him, one page back.
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by NordlysIt remains an assumed in light of the declaration he wanted to make on my behalf. According to him, love for family outweighs love for truth. For me, I love my family enough to put the truth first.
You mean this question: "So if the person who perpetrated the act was another of your children, you would feel like bashing their skull in, as well?"? I don't see how his answer or non-answer to this question is relevant here. He already said before that while he would feel like bashing the skull of a person who raped his child in, he doesn't think it ...[text shortened]... e same. Now if he'd answer that with "no", I might agree that he'd be morally perverted.
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI don't see what love for truth has to do with it. He says it's morally perverted to support the damnation of your child to an eternity of agony for not accepting Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour. I would say it's morally perverted to support the damnation of anyone to an eternity of agony for not accepting Jesus Christ as xyr Lord and Saviour, but it may be more easy to see this when you think of the person being your own child.
It remains an assumed in light of the declaration he wanted to make on my behalf. According to him, love for family outweighs love for truth. For me, I love my family enough to put the truth first.
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by NordlysYour view is more consistent, at least. I used the analogy of rape/torture/kill as a picture of violence comparable to the affront of man's rejection of God, of his blatant refusal to accept the gift of His grace.
I don't see what love for truth has to do with it. He says it's morally perverted to support the damnation of your child to an eternity of agony for not accepting Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour. I would say it's morally perverted to support the damnation of anyone to an eternity of agony for not accepting Jesus Christ as xyr Lord and Saviour, but it may be more easy to see this when you think of the person being your own child.
In my view, if I accept eternal separation from God for anyone refusing that gift, I must accept it for everyone... including a loved one. However, in PKH's view, it's okay for anyone to enter hell unless it's a loved one. In that situation, he apparently expects God to compromise His character--- just this once.
16 Jul 06
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou are attributing beliefs to me I don't hold and never claimed, either directly or by implication.
Your view is more consistent, at least. I used the analogy of rape/torture/kill as a picture of violence comparable to the affront of man's rejection of God, of his blatant refusal to accept the gift of His grace.
In my view, if I accept eternal separation from God for anyone refusing that gift, I must accept it for everyone... including a loved one. In that situation, he apparently expects God to compromise His character--- just this once.
In my view, it's NOT okay for anyone to be condemned to hell--an eternity of ceaseless torment.
In contrast, you would support your child being sent there, just for not sharing your religious beliefs.
That's sick.
16 Jul 06
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHFor the record, my feelings might be somewhat tempered by affection.
So if the person who perpetrated the act was another of your children, you would feel like bashing their skull in, as well? Or would your anger be tempered by affection?
But that isn't relevant to any argument under discussion. I would support, on reflection, the temperate bringing to justice of anyone, related to me or not, who commited a heinous crime, against me or not. I would also support their appropriate punishment by life imprisonment, but certainly NOT their pointless eternal torment.
17 Jul 06
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeWell done for getting on the record, Freaking Idiot proving himself to be a nasty, vindictive feaking idiot.
For the record, my feelings might be somewhat tempered by affection.
But that isn't relevant to any argument under discussion. I would support, on reflection, the temperate bringing to justice of anyone, related to me or not, who commited a heinous crime, against me or not. I would also support their appropriate punishment by life imprisonment, but certainly NOT their pointless eternal torment.
"I, FreakKBH, support the damnation of my child to an eternity of agony for not accepting Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour (i.e., by becoming an atheist). "