Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Christian men and their deteriorating moral a

GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 8:41:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Christian men and their deteriorating moral and family values.

As a member of our predominantly Christian nation, you and I have witnessed a marked deterioration in morality and family values.

Children start at an early age to sample the pleasures life offers them in the world of drugs, sex, autonomy and abuse of the safety nets that we as parents have put in place for them.

They do these things because they see us, their parents, doing the same thing. We are reaping what we are sowing. It is impossible to keep our abusive adult activities from passing down to our children. They know all our little secrets and tricks and will continue to emulate us.

Over time, looking at parents and our interaction with our children; especially today; the internet and other technologies have drastically reduced the parent child interaction. It is obvious to anyone with good judgement; collectively our morals and ethics have declined along with our family values.

Proof of this lies in how we allow our children to dress and act.

We are basically allowing our children, male and female, to look and act like skanks and whores.

We are allowing or male children to run amuck and act like irresponsible bull studs with no responsibility for their illegitimate children. We as men also facilitate the rampant drug us, both legal and illegal.

Both men and women are to blame. Christian men, as the religiously and institutionally sanctioned heads of the family; must carry more blame. The world is not witnessing Christian men stepping up to this responsibility. You, as a Christian man are not walking your talk.

As Christian men, we should consider doing so. Perhaps we can stop acting like spoiled children ourselves and start giving our children a good example.

Christian women will also have to stop looking like and teaching their daughters to look like skanks and whores. We must stop teaching our children to idolize certain questionable entertainers who will do nothing but ensure a next generation of skanks and whores.

Do you agree?

Regards
DL

P S. Morality has a price. There is a direct correlation between morality and standard of living. Increasing ours moral position will take wealth. Are our children worth it to us?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 8:59:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 8:41:33 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Christian men and their deteriorating moral and family values.

As a member of our predominantly Christian nation, you and I have witnessed a marked deterioration in morality and family values.

Children start at an early age to sample the pleasures life offers them in the world of drugs, sex, autonomy and abuse of the safety nets that we as parents have put in place for them.

They do these things because they see us, their parents, doing the same thing. We are reaping what we are sowing. It is impossible to keep our abusive adult activities from passing down to our children. They know all our little secrets and tricks and will continue to emulate us.

Over time, looking at parents and our interaction with our children; especially today; the internet and other technologies have drastically reduced the parent child interaction. It is obvious to anyone with good judgement; collectively our morals and ethics have declined along with our family values.

Proof of this lies in how we allow our children to dress and act.

We are basically allowing our children, male and female, to look and act like skanks and whores.

We are allowing or male children to run amuck and act like irresponsible bull studs with no responsibility for their illegitimate children. We as men also facilitate the rampant drug us, both legal and illegal.

Both men and women are to blame. Christian men, as the religiously and institutionally sanctioned heads of the family; must carry more blame. The world is not witnessing Christian men stepping up to this responsibility. You, as a Christian man are not walking your talk.

As Christian men, we should consider doing so. Perhaps we can stop acting like spoiled children ourselves and start giving our children a good example.

Christian women will also have to stop looking like and teaching their daughters to look like skanks and whores. We must stop teaching our children to idolize certain questionable entertainers who will do nothing but ensure a next generation of skanks and whores.

Do you agree?

Regards
DL

P S. Morality has a price. There is a direct correlation between morality and standard of living. Increasing ours moral position will take wealth. Are our children worth it to us?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Hey, if you Christians want to take the blame for society's ills, I'm not going to stop you.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 9:05:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 8:41:33 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
Christian men and their deteriorating moral and family values.

As a member of our predominantly Christian nation, you and I have witnessed a marked deterioration in morality and family values.

Children start at an early age to sample the pleasures life offers them in the world of drugs, sex, autonomy and abuse of the safety nets that we as parents have put in place for them.

They do these things because they see us, their parents, doing the same thing. We are reaping what we are sowing. It is impossible to keep our abusive adult activities from passing down to our children. They know all our little secrets and tricks and will continue to emulate us.

Over time, looking at parents and our interaction with our children; especially today; the internet and other technologies have drastically reduced the parent child interaction. It is obvious to anyone with good judgement; collectively our morals and ethics have declined along with our family values.

Proof of this lies in how we allow our children to dress and act.

We are basically allowing our children, male and female, to look and act like skanks and whores.

We are allowing or male children to run amuck and act like irresponsible bull studs with no responsibility for their illegitimate children. We as men also facilitate the rampant drug us, both legal and illegal.

Both men and women are to blame. Christian men, as the religiously and institutionally sanctioned heads of the family; must carry more blame. The world is not witnessing Christian men stepping up to this responsibility. You, as a Christian man are not walking your talk.

I don't think your looking at the right places. I know many Christian families that operate and raise their children fine. I think a larger problem has more to do with 1) public education system, and 2) intellectually dumb-ing and numbing down entertainment.

As Christian men, we should consider doing so. Perhaps we can stop acting like spoiled children ourselves and start giving our children a good example.

Christian women will also have to stop looking like and teaching their daughters to look like skanks and whores. We must stop teaching our children to idolize certain questionable entertainers who will do nothing but ensure a next generation of skanks and whores.

Do you agree?

The gospel is all we need. Not a legalistic form of silf-righteous appearance.

Regards
DL

P S. Morality has a price. There is a direct correlation between morality and standard of living. Increasing ours moral position will take wealth. Are our children worth it to us?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
GenesisCreation
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 9:52:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Matthew 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."
Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'

I disagree with your assumption of degrading Christian morality. I would argue that the label "Christian" is being applied as a general religious preference without any true conviction by the people who claim it.

The majority of the country does claim to be Christian, but are you really under the impression that the majority of the country is walking the narrow path? Is America the "few" that found the path?
I would argue that American Christianity is filled with those who publicly proclaim Christ but live without any conviction. Those that cry 'Lord, Lord' are many.

The true Christian still struggles with the world also, but it's a lifestyle of repentance. You may see them stumble and fall.....but you'll always find them crawling to the cross and holding on for dear life as they get back up.

What you've seen is a decrease in American morality, which reflects just how informed the average American is about the religion they claim.
Um....You've got a log in your eye.
"I would be suspicious of an argument without any concessions." - John Dickson
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 9:56:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 8:59:27 AM, drafterman wrote:


Hey, if you Christians want to take the blame for society's ills, I'm not going to stop you.

I am not a Christian but I see that like most of them, you are quite eager to put your share of the blame on others.

Family values and our national moral status includes all of us. Religious or not.

Regards
DL
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 9:57:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 9:05:48 AM, joneszj wrote:
I don't think your looking at the right places. I know many Christian families that operate and raise their children fine. I think a larger problem has more to do with 1) public education system, and 2) intellectually dumb-ing and numbing down entertainment.

Well, i cannot see how the public education system is at fault, as it is the responsibility of the parents, not the school, to teach your children about drugs sex and alcohol. Its not like the schools are endorsing those things, nor are the schools completely void of trying to educate kids about these by means of sex ed and Police officers giving lectures.

Quite frankly, i think the Abstinence only program failed miserably in this respect. Id rather children practice safe sex than try practicing no sex at all an failing, miserably, and this only opens kids up to things like oral and anal sex.

The gospel is all we need. Not a legalistic form of silf-righteous appearance.

If the gospel is all we needed, we wouldnt be in this mess.
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 10:04:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 9:05:48 AM, joneszj wrote:


I don't think your looking at the right places. I know many Christian families that operate and raise their children fine. I think a larger problem has more to do with 1) public education system, and 2) intellectually dumb-ing and numbing down entertainment.

Sure. Many raise their children right. In the higher tiers of our socio economic demography.

The rest of your brethren, you allow to be less prosperous and add to one of the highest criminal incarceration and abortion rates in the world.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 10:11:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 9:52:54 AM, GenesisCreation wrote:
Matthew 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."
Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'


I disagree with your assumption of degrading Christian morality. I would argue that the label "Christian" is being applied as a general religious preference without any true conviction by the people who claim it.

The majority of the country does claim to be Christian, but are you really under the impression that the majority of the country is walking the narrow path? Is America the "few" that found the path?
I would argue that American Christianity is filled with those who publicly proclaim Christ but live without any conviction. Those that cry 'Lord, Lord' are many.

The true Christian still struggles with the world also, but it's a lifestyle of repentance. You may see them stumble and fall.....but you'll always find them crawling to the cross and holding on for dear life as they get back up.

What you've seen is a decrease in American morality, which reflects just how informed the average American is about the religion they claim.

I agree that most Christians have no clue as to what their religion stands for.

You complain how Christians are not walking their talk but I would point out that many of our fellow democratic countries are less religious than ours and have better stats than we do.

Dropping out of religion we know little about seems to make us more moral.

A strange paradox that Christians who are the most hypocrite in their religion, make better citizens.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 10:15:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 9:57:40 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 9:05:48 AM, joneszj wrote:
I don't think your looking at the right places. I know many Christian families that operate and raise their children fine. I think a larger problem has more to do with 1) public education system, and 2) intellectually dumb-ing and numbing down entertainment.

Well, i cannot see how the public education system is at fault, as it is the responsibility of the parents, not the school, to teach your children about drugs sex and alcohol. Its not like the schools are endorsing those things, nor are the schools completely void of trying to educate kids about these by means of sex ed and Police officers giving lectures.

Quite frankly, i think the Abstinence only program failed miserably in this respect. Id rather children practice safe sex than try practicing no sex at all an failing, miserably, and this only opens kids up to things like oral and anal sex.

The gospel is all we need. Not a legalistic form of silf-righteous appearance.

If the gospel is all we needed, we wouldnt be in this mess.

In the addiction field, they use the term, intelligent use of freedom of choice.

This is what we need to teach our children and train them in it's use.
We adults do not do this yet so it is to us to learn it before we can teach it.

We have an adult problem. Not a children problem.

Regards
DL
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 10:16:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 9:56:44 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 3/13/2012 8:59:27 AM, drafterman wrote:


Hey, if you Christians want to take the blame for society's ills, I'm not going to stop you.

I am not a Christian but I see that like most of them, you are quite eager to put your share of the blame on others.

Family values and our national moral status includes all of us. Religious or not.

Regards
DL

I'm not putting anything anyhwere. I'm simply not objecting to someone taking it.
GenesisCreation
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 10:24:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 10:11:31 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 3/13/2012 9:52:54 AM, GenesisCreation wrote:
Matthew 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."
Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'


I disagree with your assumption of degrading Christian morality. I would argue that the label "Christian" is being applied as a general religious preference without any true conviction by the people who claim it.

The majority of the country does claim to be Christian, but are you really under the impression that the majority of the country is walking the narrow path? Is America the "few" that found the path?
I would argue that American Christianity is filled with those who publicly proclaim Christ but live without any conviction. Those that cry 'Lord, Lord' are many.

The true Christian still struggles with the world also, but it's a lifestyle of repentance. You may see them stumble and fall.....but you'll always find them crawling to the cross and holding on for dear life as they get back up.

What you've seen is a decrease in American morality, which reflects just how informed the average American is about the religion they claim.

I agree that most Christians have no clue as to what their religion stands for.

You complain how Christians are not walking their talk but I would point out that many of our fellow democratic countries are less religious than ours and have better stats than we do.

Dropping out of religion we know little about seems to make us more moral.

A strange paradox that Christians who are the most hypocrite in their religion, make better citizens.

Regards
DL

I'm not sure you're talking about Christianity here. If other democratic countries have less statistical moral issues, I doubt religion (or the lack thereof) can be used to justify those stats. Perhaps culture, economy, law enforcement, judicial due process, education and politics have a bigger hand in the statistics.

It seems like you want to attack Christians (even the fake ones) for something that simply cannot be traced to them.
Um....You've got a log in your eye.
"I would be suspicious of an argument without any concessions." - John Dickson
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 10:54:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 10:24:38 AM, GenesisCreation wrote:
At 3/13/2012 10:11:31 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 3/13/2012 9:52:54 AM, GenesisCreation wrote:
Matthew 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."
Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'


I disagree with your assumption of degrading Christian morality. I would argue that the label "Christian" is being applied as a general religious preference without any true conviction by the people who claim it.

The majority of the country does claim to be Christian, but are you really under the impression that the majority of the country is walking the narrow path? Is America the "few" that found the path?
I would argue that American Christianity is filled with those who publicly proclaim Christ but live without any conviction. Those that cry 'Lord, Lord' are many.

The true Christian still struggles with the world also, but it's a lifestyle of repentance. You may see them stumble and fall.....but you'll always find them crawling to the cross and holding on for dear life as they get back up.

What you've seen is a decrease in American morality, which reflects just how informed the average American is about the religion they claim.

I agree that most Christians have no clue as to what their religion stands for.

You complain how Christians are not walking their talk but I would point out that many of our fellow democratic countries are less religious than ours and have better stats than we do.

Dropping out of religion we know little about seems to make us more moral.

A strange paradox that Christians who are the most hypocrite in their religion, make better citizens.

Regards
DL


I'm not sure you're talking about Christianity here. If other democratic countries have less statistical moral issues, I doubt religion (or the lack thereof) can be used to justify those stats. Perhaps culture, economy, law enforcement, judicial due process, education and politics have a bigger hand in the statistics.

It seems like you want to attack Christians (even the fake ones) for something that simply cannot be traced to them.

No one is claiming that religion itself is the sole factor in why some countries, atheistic secular countries do better than religious non-secular countries, however, what is clear is that religion does play a role, it is a factor in whether the country has better moral systems, higher or lower crime, poverty rates, etc. And whether it plays only a small role, or a larger role, is irrelevant to the fact that it is still a factor in the well-being of the country.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 11:08:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 9:57:40 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 9:05:48 AM, joneszj wrote:
I don't think your looking at the right places. I know many Christian families that operate and raise their children fine. I think a larger problem has more to do with 1) public education system, and 2) intellectually dumb-ing and numbing down entertainment.

Well, i cannot see how the public education system is at fault, as it is the responsibility of the parents, not the school, to teach your children about drugs sex and alcohol. Its not like the schools are endorsing those things, nor are the schools completely void of trying to educate kids about these by means of sex ed and Police officers giving lectures.

I meant more of the environments then the school itself. I went to a public school and for the most part it was a complete failure imo. Most (atleast 90%) were more focused of the opposite sex then they were their math homework. It had no way to discipline the students to keep their attention. It was much more of a daycare program then an educational facility. Couple that with main stream media and we got ourselves something to be proud of!

Quite frankly, i think the Abstinence only program failed miserably in this respect. Id rather children practice safe sex than try practicing no sex at all an failing, miserably, and this only opens kids up to things like oral and anal sex.

I am not sure what/how an abstinence program is supposed to work. My health class encouraged abstinence while teaching safe sex. I don't see anything wrong with that. I don't know anyone who would teach abstinence w/o at the same time or relative to it teaching safe sex.....

The gospel is all we need. Not a legalistic form of silf-righteous appearance.

If the gospel is all we needed, we wouldnt be in this mess.

Its all I needed and I am not in that mess.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 11:44:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 11:08:21 AM, joneszj wrote:
I meant more of the environments then the school itself. I went to a public school and for the most part it was a complete failure imo. Most (atleast 90%) were more focused of the opposite sex then they were their math homework. It had no way to discipline the students to keep their attention. It was much more of a daycare program then an educational facility. Couple that with main stream media and we got ourselves something to be proud of!

This is true with anything type of environment though. Teen years are when our hormones go crazy. What we need to teach is responsibility, not discipline.

I am not sure what/how an abstinence program is supposed to work. My health class encouraged abstinence while teaching safe sex. I don't see anything wrong with that. I don't know anyone who would teach abstinence w/o at the same time or relative to it teaching safe sex.....

Well, the program is called abstinence ONLY education, which is basically teaching children not to have sex, and not teaching them ho to have safe sex because they think it sends them mixed signals. Like "Dont have sex, but if you must, use a condom" sort of thing. And this is something that is solely advocated by christians and their groups.

Its all I needed and I am not in that mess.

Clearly it isnt all that others need.

I didnt need a bible and i am not in that mess, either. What we need to find is something that works for everyone, or atleast most people. We already know that the bible wasnt sufficient for many people, including, for example, Sarah Palins daughter who im sure used the bible.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 12:30:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 11:44:42 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 11:08:21 AM, joneszj wrote:
I meant more of the environments then the school itself. I went to a public school and for the most part it was a complete failure imo. Most (atleast 90%) were more focused of the opposite sex then they were their math homework. It had no way to discipline the students to keep their attention. It was much more of a daycare program then an educational facility. Couple that with main stream media and we got ourselves something to be proud of!

This is true with anything type of environment though. Teen years are when our hormones go crazy. What we need to teach is responsibility, not discipline.

I disagree. It is not the case in my youth groups. Or my church for that matter. Whats wrong with discipline?!? Why not both?!?

I am not sure what/how an abstinence program is supposed to work. My health class encouraged abstinence while teaching safe sex. I don't see anything wrong with that. I don't know anyone who would teach abstinence w/o at the same time or relative to it teaching safe sex.....

Well, the program is called abstinence ONLY education, which is basically teaching children not to have sex, and not teaching them ho to have safe sex because they think it sends them mixed signals. Like "Dont have sex, but if you must, use a condom" sort of thing. And this is something that is solely advocated by christians and their groups.

Wait, you said abstinence only says don't have sex and doesn't teach safe sex practices because it may send a mixed signal. Then, you used an example "Dont have sex, but if you must, use a condom" which happens to be a safe sex teaching...? Abstinence-only programs sounds wishy washy to me. A quick google search says that it works and that it doesn't work. woot.

Its all I needed and I am not in that mess.

Clearly it isnt all that others need.

I didnt need a bible and i am not in that mess, either. What we need to find is something that works for everyone, or atleast most people. We already know that the bible wasnt sufficient for many people, including, for example, Sarah Palins daughter who im sure used the bible.

It worked for me. It worked for my youth group. It worked for my brother and his wife. It worked for his wife's brothers. It works- why the useless argumentative attitude? I didn't say for everyone- he was speaking to Christians and the 'we' is referring to them. I am happy that your not in the mess. I don't think we will ever find something that works for everyone, save perhaps a knife lolz.
GenesisCreation
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 1:15:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 10:54:56 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 10:24:38 AM, GenesisCreation wrote:
At 3/13/2012 10:11:31 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 3/13/2012 9:52:54 AM, GenesisCreation wrote:
Matthew 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."
Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'


I disagree with your assumption of degrading Christian morality. I would argue that the label "Christian" is being applied as a general religious preference without any true conviction by the people who claim it.

The majority of the country does claim to be Christian, but are you really under the impression that the majority of the country is walking the narrow path? Is America the "few" that found the path?
I would argue that American Christianity is filled with those who publicly proclaim Christ but live without any conviction. Those that cry 'Lord, Lord' are many.

The true Christian still struggles with the world also, but it's a lifestyle of repentance. You may see them stumble and fall.....but you'll always find them crawling to the cross and holding on for dear life as they get back up.

What you've seen is a decrease in American morality, which reflects just how informed the average American is about the religion they claim.

I agree that most Christians have no clue as to what their religion stands for.

You complain how Christians are not walking their talk but I would point out that many of our fellow democratic countries are less religious than ours and have better stats than we do.

Dropping out of religion we know little about seems to make us more moral.

A strange paradox that Christians who are the most hypocrite in their religion, make better citizens.

Regards
DL


I'm not sure you're talking about Christianity here. If other democratic countries have less statistical moral issues, I doubt religion (or the lack thereof) can be used to justify those stats. Perhaps culture, economy, law enforcement, judicial due process, education and politics have a bigger hand in the statistics.

It seems like you want to attack Christians (even the fake ones) for something that simply cannot be traced to them.

No one is claiming that religion itself is the sole factor in why some countries, atheistic secular countries do better than religious non-secular countries, however, what is clear is that religion does play a role, it is a factor in whether the country has better moral systems, higher or lower crime, poverty rates, etc. And whether it plays only a small role, or a larger role, is irrelevant to the fact that it is still a factor in the well-being of the country.

---------------------------------
Friend, the forum topic is exclusively attempting to quantify the loss of morality amongst Christians. It also attempts to label America as a Christian nation.

Most Americans are not Christian. Most Christians are not American. No serious, repeatable study has been done to show that Christian Americans are even affecting a decline in moral values.

Why don't we study the sliding moral decline amongst people who have a crucifix tattoo but never attend church? Do you think we'd find a statistic of poor moral conduct? Would you call them Christians after?
Um....You've got a log in your eye.
"I would be suspicious of an argument without any concessions." - John Dickson
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 1:36:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 12:30:58 PM, joneszj wrote:
I disagree. It is not the case in my youth groups. Or my church for that matter. Whats wrong with discipline?!? Why not both?!?

Its not like public schools are void of discipline. There is such a thing as detention, academic discipline, etc. No one is sayng that you cant have both, or that discipline doesnt exist in public schools. But its certainly not a problem we can solve via more discipline. The more we push, the more likely they are to push back.

Wait, you said abstinence only says don't have sex and doesn't teach safe sex practices because it may send a mixed signal. Then, you used an example "Dont have sex, but if you must, use a condom" which happens to be a safe sex teaching...? Abstinence-only programs sounds wishy washy to me. A quick google search says that it works and that it doesn't work. woot.

The example i used, is to show that people who believe in abstinence only programs, believe that using abstinence alongside safe sex education gives mixed signals, such as the example of "Dont have sex but if you must use a condom." They(The abstinence only people) believe this to be a mixed signal, and they therefore advocate ONLy saying "Dont have sex" and cut it off there.

I agree, abstinence only programs are a failure. But again, they were proposed, supported, and are currently being supported by christian groups and christian coalitions.

It worked for me. It worked for my youth group. It worked for my brother and his wife. It worked for his wife's brothers. It works- why the useless argumentative attitude? I didn't say for everyone- he was speaking to Christians and the 'we' is referring to them. I am happy that your not in the mess. I don't think we will ever find something that works for everyone, save perhaps a knife lolz.

Were talking about the general public here. We are talking about society and the deteriorating morals of christians in this society. So it is kind of a given that we discuss the general public. Again, sure, i grew up with no bible and i turned out fine. So, again, we should be searching for a way that educates all of us.

Sure, it wont work for EVERY single person, but christianity and the bible seem to be working poorly.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 1:45:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 1:15:03 PM, GenesisCreation wrote:
---------------------------------
Friend, the forum topic is exclusively attempting to quantify the loss of morality amongst Christians. It also attempts to label America as a Christian nation.

Most Americans are not Christian. Most Christians are not American. No serious, repeatable study has been done to show that Christian Americans are even affecting a decline in moral values.
First off, america is still a largely christian country. About 70% of the population identify themselves as either Catholic or Protestant, with 10% more people belonging to the many hundred denominations and splinter groups.

Why don't we study the sliding moral decline amongst people who have a crucifix tattoo but never attend church? Do you think we'd find a statistic of poor moral conduct? Would you call them Christians after?

And this takes us to the second thing. As long as they profess and claim they are christian, why would we label them anything else? These 70-80% of people who are christian, openly agree and identify themselves as christian. So yes, as long as they identify themselves as christian, i would call them christians.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 1:58:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 1:36:27 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 12:30:58 PM, joneszj wrote:
I disagree. It is not the case in my youth groups. Or my church for that matter. Whats wrong with discipline?!? Why not both?!?

Its not like public schools are void of discipline. There is such a thing as detention, academic discipline, etc. No one is sayng that you cant have both, or that discipline doesnt exist in public schools. But its certainly not a problem we can solve via more discipline. The more we push, the more likely they are to push back.

I was thinking more of self discipline. Nothing is taught of self-restraint or self-discipline. Why would there be? When I said discipline you said "responsibility, not discipline"... why would you say that if you were not advocating responsibility only?!? I work for my local school district and we are forced to take ethics courses. Why are not students forced to do the same?

Wait, you said abstinence only says don't have sex and doesn't teach safe sex practices because it may send a mixed signal. Then, you used an example "Dont have sex, but if you must, use a condom" which happens to be a safe sex teaching...? Abstinence-only programs sounds wishy washy to me. A quick google search says that it works and that it doesn't work. woot.

The example i used, is to show that people who believe in abstinence only programs, believe that using abstinence alongside safe sex education gives mixed signals, such as the example of "Dont have sex but if you must use a condom." They(The abstinence only people) believe this to be a mixed signal, and they therefore advocate ONLy saying "Dont have sex" and cut it off there.

I agree, abstinence only programs are a failure. But again, they were proposed, supported, and are currently being supported by christian groups and christian coalitions.

I have seen articles that say they work and others that say it fails. I think teaching abstinence only leads to more unsafe sex, and safe sex only leads to more sex in general and all the negative/positive things that follow. Teaching both seems to be the best of both worlds.

It worked for me. It worked for my youth group. It worked for my brother and his wife. It worked for his wife's brothers. It works- why the useless argumentative attitude? I didn't say for everyone- he was speaking to Christians and the 'we' is referring to them. I am happy that your not in the mess. I don't think we will ever find something that works for everyone, save perhaps a knife lolz.

Were talking about the general public here. We are talking about society and the deteriorating morals of christians in this society. So it is kind of a given that we discuss the general public. Again, sure, i grew up with no bible and i turned out fine. So, again, we should be searching for a way that educates all of us.

So general public = Sarah Palins daughter?!? Why would you drop on someone specific and then say that we are talking about general society?!? Christian morals are not deteriorating in this country, Christians are.

Sure, it wont work for EVERY single person, but christianity and the bible seem to be working poorly.

Why would you say that? Christianity/Bible is not allowed to be taught in public schools. It is pointless to look at the general public and judge their morals as if they were brought up in a Christian environment!
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 2:11:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 1:45:42 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 1:15:03 PM, GenesisCreation wrote:
---------------------------------
Friend, the forum topic is exclusively attempting to quantify the loss of morality amongst Christians. It also attempts to label America as a Christian nation.

Most Americans are not Christian. Most Christians are not American. No serious, repeatable study has been done to show that Christian Americans are even affecting a decline in moral values.
First off, america is still a largely christian country. About 70% of the population identify themselves as either Catholic or Protestant, with 10% more people belonging to the many hundred denominations and splinter groups.

That is a grossly ignorant statistic. Many people will claim to be of a certain religion and yes they should be called of that religion. However, for the sake of sanity and accuracy it would be healthy to distinguish them from those who actually practice their religion. Generally the media uses terms like fanatic, extremist, or fundamentalist....

Why don't we study the sliding moral decline amongst people who have a crucifix tattoo but never attend church? Do you think we'd find a statistic of poor moral conduct? Would you call them Christians after?

And this takes us to the second thing. As long as they profess and claim they are christian, why would we label them anything else? These 70-80% of people who are christian, openly agree and identify themselves as christian. So yes, as long as they identify themselves as christian, i would call them christians.

Perhaps to distinguish them from those who actually practice their religion.... Just saying..... Accuracy.... Validity.....
GenesisCreation
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 2:38:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 1:45:42 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 1:15:03 PM, GenesisCreation wrote:
---------------------------------
Friend, the forum topic is exclusively attempting to quantify the loss of morality amongst Christians. It also attempts to label America as a Christian nation.

Most Americans are not Christian. Most Christians are not American. No serious, repeatable study has been done to show that Christian Americans are even affecting a decline in moral values.
First off, america is still a largely christian country. About 70% of the population identify themselves as either Catholic or Protestant, with 10% more people belonging to the many hundred denominations and splinter groups.


Why don't we study the sliding moral decline amongst people who have a crucifix tattoo but never attend church? Do you think we'd find a statistic of poor moral conduct? Would you call them Christians after?

And this takes us to the second thing. As long as they profess and claim they are christian, why would we label them anything else? These 70-80% of people who are christian, openly agree and identify themselves as christian. So yes, as long as they identify themselves as christian, i would call them christians.

Interesting. So let me get this straight.
1.> You don't care if a person is genuinely a Christian.
2.> You will gladly blame Christians for a moral decline.

At this point I'd have to stop taking you seriously.
Um....You've got a log in your eye.
"I would be suspicious of an argument without any concessions." - John Dickson
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 3:05:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 1:58:35 PM, joneszj wrote:
I was thinking more of self discipline. Nothing is taught of self-restraint or self-discipline. Why would there be? When I said discipline you said "responsibility, not discipline"... why would you say that if you were not advocating responsibility only?!? I work for my local school district and we are forced to take ethics courses. Why are not students forced to do the same?

Oh, youre talking about self discipline. In which case, i would still say that teaching responsibility is superior to teaching self discipline, because responsibility includes self discipline. When a teenager goes to a party, self discipline may or may not prevent him from drinking too much, but responsibility will teach him that in the event that he does, he should do the responsible thing and, for example, pass his keys on to his friend so that he will not drink and drive, or even choose a designated driver.

To me, self discipline is much like Abstinence. Dont do this, dont do that. I agree this is necessarily, but we should never stop there, and in that sense, yes, responsibility teaches self discipline and is necessarily more important.

And when i said to teach responsibility and not discipline, i was reffering to the discipline that already exists in schools.

I have seen articles that say they work and others that say it fails. I think teaching abstinence only leads to more unsafe sex, and safe sex only leads to more sex in general and all the negative/positive things that follow. Teaching both seems to be the best of both worlds.

Sure, and im an advocate of teaching both. But, as with the above, safe sex does necessarily teach abstinence as well. It teaches us the consequences of sex and why we should practice safe sex, while abstinence teaches us the consequences of sex and why we shouldnt have sex.

So general public = Sarah Palins daughter?!? Why would you drop on someone specific and then say that we are talking about general society?!? Christian morals are not deteriorating in this country, Christians are.

No no, what happened with Sarah Palins daughter is that, you couldnt get a more religious family aside from maybe a Mormon familly. Palin is dumb, but shes dumb in the christian sense of blind faith an blind reverence to the morals of the bible. I could not suggest anyone else, again, maybe aside from a mormon family, that has as high or higher "Christian" moral standards than Palin. Thats about as high as you can get for an example of someone who actively supports and flaunts her christian morals around.

This is why im telling you, that christian morals seem to not be very effective. What we need is to choose the good, secular things from Christianity, chuck out the bad, and create a secular moral system and guideline to teach our children.

Why would you say that? Christianity/Bible is not allowed to be taught in public schools. It is pointless to look at the general public and judge their morals as if they were brought up in a Christian environment!

What do you think the abstinence only program came from? Do you seriously think that many christian families have never had their children stepped foot in a church or taught their children about the bible and God?
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 3:12:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 2:11:31 PM, joneszj wrote:
That is a grossly ignorant statistic. Many people will claim to be of a certain religion and yes they should be called of that religion. However, for the sake of sanity and accuracy it would be healthy to distinguish them from those who actually practice their religion. Generally the media uses terms like fanatic, extremist, or fundamentalist....

Really? Cause both the religious and non-religious sides are agreeing that the USA is a highly christian majority country.

Furthermore, are you kidding me? How are you going to decide who is ACTUALLY practicing their religion? Is it someone who visits church once a week? Daily? Once a month?

Perhaps to distinguish them from those who actually practice their religion.... Just saying..... Accuracy.... Validity.....

Again, there is no way to determine this. And, yes, if you ever take a drive down on the southern states, you couldnt pass a mile without passing by atleast one church, if not half a dozen. And since we can probably both agree that most christians have atleast read the bible, or actually discussed their religions, or actually stepped foot inside a chruch in their adult life, how are these people not practicing their religion?
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 4:09:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 3:05:33 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 1:58:35 PM, joneszj wrote:
I was thinking more of self discipline. Nothing is taught of self-restraint or self-discipline. Why would there be? When I said discipline you said "responsibility, not discipline"... why would you say that if you were not advocating responsibility only?!? I work for my local school district and we are forced to take ethics courses. Why are not students forced to do the same?

Oh, youre talking about self discipline. In which case, i would still say that teaching responsibility is superior to teaching self discipline, because responsibility includes self discipline. When a teenager goes to a party, self discipline may or may not prevent him from drinking too much, but responsibility will teach him that in the event that he does, he should do the responsible thing and, for example, pass his keys on to his friend so that he will not drink and drive, or even choose a designated driver.

Sometimes I think you suffer from some form of NPD. The teen would need self-discipline and the know how to act responsible in the first place......... And, per your example, what is to say that by lacking self discipline the teen neglects the responsible decision to pass their keys over?!? Yes, its good to know what to do when sh!t hits the fan, but its just as good to prevent sh!t from hitting the fan.... JUST SAYIN....

To me, self discipline is much like Abstinence. Dont do this, dont do that. I agree this is necessarily, but we should never stop there, and in that sense, yes, responsibility teaches self discipline and is necessarily more important.

NPD agian? Responsibility does not teach self-discipline, it requires it. In order to be responsible one must be self disciplined.

And when i said to teach responsibility and not discipline, i was reffering to the discipline that already exists in schools.

Good for you.

I have seen articles that say they work and others that say it fails. I think teaching abstinence only leads to more unsafe sex, and safe sex only leads to more sex in general and all the negative/positive things that follow. Teaching both seems to be the best of both worlds.

Sure, and im an advocate of teaching both. But, as with the above, safe sex does necessarily teach abstinence as well. It teaches us the consequences of sex and why we should practice safe sex, while abstinence teaches us the consequences of sex and why we shouldnt have sex.

Great.... Lets move on.

So general public = Sarah Palins daughter?!? Why would you drop on someone specific and then say that we are talking about general society?!? Christian morals are not deteriorating in this country, Christians are.

No no, what happened with Sarah Palins daughter is that, you couldnt get a more religious family aside from maybe a Mormon familly. Palin is dumb, but shes dumb in the christian sense of blind faith an blind reverence to the morals of the bible. I could not suggest anyone else, again, maybe aside from a mormon family, that has as high or higher "Christian" moral standards than Palin. Thats about as high as you can get for an example of someone who actively supports and flaunts her christian morals around.

...Really...? So you pick someone who best fits your crucible and then blanket the rest of that persons religious adherents based on that persons actions......

This is why im telling you, that christian morals seem to not be very effective. What we need is to choose the good, secular things from Christianity, chuck out the bad, and create a secular moral system and guideline to teach our children.

Christian morals have not been instituted. Their effectiveness aught not be determined by those who simply claim to be a Christian and yet do not adhere to their beliefs.

Why would you say that? Christianity/Bible is not allowed to be taught in public schools. It is pointless to look at the general public and judge their morals as if they were brought up in a Christian environment!

What do you think the abstinence only program came from? Do you seriously think that many christian families have never had their children stepped foot in a church or taught their children about the bible and God?

The abstinence program if anything seems like a compromise. Its some form of syncratic practice. Law without the gospel will always fail. as to your question, my (seperated) parents stepped into church maybe 3 times in my entire life, they never once mentioned anything about God (my mother would but maybe twice), and lived lives that would not distinguish themselves from any of my unbelieving friends. So Yes, many christian families have never had their children step foot in a church or taught their children about the bible and God- mine would be one.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2012 4:22:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 3:12:02 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/13/2012 2:11:31 PM, joneszj wrote:
That is a grossly ignorant statistic. Many people will claim to be of a certain religion and yes they should be called of that religion. However, for the sake of sanity and accuracy it would be healthy to distinguish them from those who actually practice their religion. Generally the media uses terms like fanatic, extremist, or fundamentalist....

Really? Cause both the religious and non-religious sides are agreeing that the USA is a highly christian majority country.

That is a rather vacumous statement. "Christian majority" is ambiguous as to who actually practices distinguished from those who simply claim by title the religion. It could also be referring to the historical aspect of the country..... Religions and non-religious is also ambiguous. To group all Christians (professing and following) and judge them on the actions of those who simply profess is to commit the composition fallacy (ty rational lolz).

Furthermore, are you kidding me? How are you going to decide who is ACTUALLY practicing their religion? Is it someone who visits church once a week? Daily? Once a month?

Perhaps to distinguish them from those who actually practice their religion.... Just saying..... Accuracy.... Validity.....

Again, there is no way to determine this. And, yes, if you ever take a drive down on the southern states, you couldnt pass a mile without passing by atleast one church, if not half a dozen. And since we can probably both agree that most christians have atleast read the bible, or actually discussed their religions, or actually stepped foot inside a chruch in their adult life, how are these people not practicing their religion?

Sure there is! Church attendance, prayer life, confession, time spent studying the Bible, time spent with other Christians, repentance. I live in FL and your totally correct. If I take okeechobee West into Loxahatchee I will find atleast 6-8 churches in about 20 minutes of driving. But that does not signify anything about the population their. Those churches have a very very small regular attendance rate and are generally populated by elderly folk. As for "most christians have atleast read the bible, or actually discussed their religions, or actually stepped foot inside a chruch in their adult life" I do not agree with the bolded.
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 1:42:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
1. That religion is a societal negative is no longer particularly controversial in sociological circles, it having been verified by a rapidly growing body of studies comparing both nations at large, and the situation within the US (gregspaul.webs.com/sciletter0415.pdf). This includes a new paper by Luke Galen in Mental Health, Religion and Culture that debunks the common wisdom that religious individuals tend to do better than their atheist counterparts. Article 847 (Source: http://www.infidels.org...)

&

2. To sum up:

In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies... The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so, and almost always scores poorly. The view of the U.S. as a "shining city on the hill" to the rest of the world is falsified when it comes to basic measures of societal health.
[…]
Although they are by no means utopias, the populations of secular democracies are clearly able to govern themselves and maintain societal cohesion. Indeed, the data examined in this study demonstrates that only the more secular, pro-evolution democracies have, for the first time in history, come closest to achieving practical "cultures of life" that feature low rates of lethal crime, juvenile-adult mortality, sex related dysfunction, and even abortion. The least theistic secular developed democracies such as Japan, France, and Scandinavia have been most successful in these regards. ((My Bold) Source: http://stupac2.blogspot.com.au...)
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:26:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 4:09:44 PM, joneszj wrote:
Sometimes I think you suffer from some form of NPD. The teen would need self-discipline and the know how to act responsible in the first place......... And, per your example, what is to say that by lacking self discipline the teen neglects the responsible decision to pass their keys over?!? Yes, its good to know what to do when sh!t hits the fan, but its just as good to prevent sh!t from hitting the fan.... JUST SAYIN....

Oh, i have NPD just for disagreeing with you?

Also, no. Getting yourself sh*t-faced drunk in the first place, is, what id call a lack of self discipline.

NPD agian? Responsibility does not teach self-discipline, it requires it. In order to be responsible one must be self disciplined.

God no.

First of all, unless youre a sociopath or your parents and your school completely f*cked up, it would be impossible for a single person to have an utter void of self discipline. When you do something wrong and you feel bad, that creates some measure of self discipline so that you dont screw up again.

Secondly, no, as per the above comment, getting yourself majorly drunk is lacking in self discipline.

If self discipline is refusing to get drunk, refusing to take another drink, responsibility is there in case that self discipline FAILS.

...Really...? So you pick someone who best fits your crucible and then blanket the rest of that persons religious adherents based on that persons actions......

No, i pick someone who clearly fits the criterion for whether they believe and are devoutly religious to the bible, and use it to show you that, yeah, the bible doesnt seem to work very well.

Christian morals have not been instituted. Their effectiveness aught not be determined by those who simply claim to be a Christian and yet do not adhere to their beliefs.

You keep saying "Yet do not adhere to their beliefs". And i asked you how the HELL do you make this distinction. What exactly about Palin and the rest of these bible thumpers shows that they are not adhering to their beliefs?

Now that i look, i see that you have dodged this question in the second comment. So please, answer it.

The abstinence program if anything seems like a compromise. Its some form of syncratic practice. Law without the gospel will always fail. as to your question, my (seperated) parents stepped into church maybe 3 times in my entire life, they never once mentioned anything about God (my mother would but maybe twice), and lived lives that would not distinguish themselves from any of my unbelieving friends. So Yes, many christian families have never had their children step foot in a church or taught their children about the bible and God- mine would be one.

First off, how is the absitnence-only program a comprimise. I will assume you meant absitinence only.

Secondly, Why only the gospels, what about the rest of the bible, and what do you mean by "Law without the gospel will always fail". Abstinence-only isnt supported or rejected by the gospels. Jesus never talked about sex before marriage.

Thirdly, how many is many?
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:45:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 4:22:11 PM, joneszj wrote:
That is a rather vacumous statement. "Christian majority" is ambiguous as to who actually practices distinguished from those who simply claim by title the religion. It could also be referring to the historical aspect of the country..... Religions and non-religious is also ambiguous. To group all Christians (professing and following) and judge them on the actions of those who simply profess is to commit the composition fallacy (ty rational lolz).

Again, god no. When did i ever say that all christians are like this? I know there are fraction of christians who call themselves christian but dont do squat with their religion, or have never picked up a bible.

But well get into this in detail in the next section.

Sure there is! Church attendance, prayer life, confession, time spent studying the Bible, time spent with other Christians, repentance. I live in FL and your totally correct. If I take okeechobee West into Loxahatchee I will find atleast 6-8 churches in about 20 minutes of driving. But that does not signify anything about the population their. Those churches have a very very small regular attendance rate and are generally populated by elderly folk. As for "most christians have atleast read the bible, or actually discussed their religions, or actually stepped foot inside a chruch in their adult life" I do not agree with the bolded.

Again, no. The 2010 statistics showed that 40 percent went to church weekly, if not more frequently and 60% prayed daily. So what we have here is atleast 40% who go to church weekly, with probably more people if we count in those who attend it once every 2 weeks, once a month, once a year...

You claimed that your parents only attended church 3 times. Are you saying that your parents were not truly adhering to their religion, and therefore do not count as being christian? If not, then, again, what are you using to determine if someone is a real christian who is adhereing to their beliefs? Is it someone who visits church once a month? Once a week? Who discusses it once a month? Who has discussions daily?

And, i suppose the most important question is, who died and made you king? What gives you the right and ability to make this decision about who is a real christian and adhere to their beleifs, and who isnt?

Good luck answering.
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2012 1:56:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 10:16:31 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 3/13/2012 9:56:44 AM, GreatestIam wrote:
At 3/13/2012 8:59:27 AM, drafterman wrote:


Hey, if you Christians want to take the blame for society's ills, I'm not going to stop you.

I am not a Christian but I see that like most of them, you are quite eager to put your share of the blame on others.

Family values and our national moral status includes all of us. Religious or not.

Regards
DL

I'm not putting anything anyhwere. I'm simply not objecting to someone taking it.

How benevolent of you.

Not only do you shunt your responsibility to others, you also give up the pride of knowing you stepped up.

Good social consciousness that. Not.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2012 2:00:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/13/2012 10:24:38 AM, GenesisCreation wrote:
At 3/13/2012 10:11:31 AM, GreatestIam wrote:



I'm not sure you're talking about Christianity here. If other democratic countries have less statistical moral issues, I doubt religion (or the lack thereof) can be used to justify those stats. Perhaps culture, economy, law enforcement, judicial due process, education and politics have a bigger hand in the statistics.

It seems like you want to attack Christians (even the fake ones) for something that simply cannot be traced to them.

These are all factors for sure.

In Christian nations like ours, they are all basically controlled by Christians.
We are all responsible for sure and the vast majority of us are Christian.

Shall we blame the non Christian more?

Regards
DL