Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Christy Clark's Religion Comments Spark Criticism From B.C. Atheists


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
368 replies to this topic

#361 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 07 August 2012 - 02:37 PM

Okay this is getting out of hand.

We jump from topic to topic and there is no conclusive thought or idea for us to move onto anything.

Back track the posts if you wish. I refuse to continue mindless drubble with folk that take the word illogical and spew it at the end of every sentence as the basis for their own academic assertion.

Lastly, I don't believe in the supernatural powers of Zeus, but as for the people who started Zeus, they undoubtedly existed. They exist because of the concept of Zeus today. You have to admit that Jesus walked this earth because of the incredible following of the early church, and the church today.


Why do you believe in the supernatural powers of Jesus then? He didn't even do half the kick ass things Zeus was believed and written to have done.

Do you not see the parallels between those people who believed adamantly that Zeus was real, because of all the 'evidence' and 'faith' that say he was...........and you??

Think about it, logically and rationally. You're a smart person.....put 2 + 2 together.

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#362 Slaytanic Wehrmacht

Slaytanic Wehrmacht

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 11

Posted 07 August 2012 - 02:38 PM

One final comment on your assertion that we must "admit that this charlatan savior of yours walked on the earth because of the huge following of the early church."

"If fifty million people say a foolish thing...it is still a foolish thing." - Anatole France
Posted Image

#363 dajusta

dajusta

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,910 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 03

Posted 07 August 2012 - 02:45 PM

Why do you believe in the supernatural powers of Jesus then? He didn't even do half the kick ass things Zeus was believed and written to have done.

Do you not see the parallels between those people who believed adamantly that Zeus was real, because of all the 'evidence' and 'faith' that say he was...........and you??

Think about it, logically and rationally. You're a smart person.....put 2 + 2 together.


There is a difference between believing if Jesus actually existed, and Jesus being the Son of God.

Richard Dawkins believes Jesus walked this earth, because he is a rational Atheist. You should look deep inside of you to see if you are truly rational or not.

The belief in the divinity of Jesus will require an irrational leap of faith - something I have not even touched on. But before I can even speak on that point, I have to make sure I'm talking to rational people. I'm putting 2+2 together, you just keep adding 3, 4, 5, multiply, divide and logs.

I'll conclude it at that. People's have all their values when making decisions, and should not be forbidden to put certain values in the backseat just because they are seemingly "unoriginal".
I'm Christian
I won't judge you
No one is perfect
Only through Jesus
Will we find Truth

#364 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 07 August 2012 - 02:46 PM

An excerpt from the VanSun several days ago:

People could question whether Clark is playing the religious card (Christian, Sikh and other) to shore up her low poll numbers. But I would caution against reading too much into what she said on the evangelical TV show, which as The Vancouver Sun‘s ace Ottawa correspondent, Peter O’Neil, discovered, was:


“We learn … in the Bible it’s much easier to make a short-term decision that will make everybody happy or that will make your life a little bit easier, than it is to make a long-term decision that’s good for the future but may be tough in the short run.”


Even though Clark has identified herself as an Anglican, that does not mean a lot in today’s world because Anglicans are all over the map on social, sexual, moral and political issues. What kind of Anglican is Clark? It’s not particularly clear.


Some conservative Anglicans, for instance, are adamantly against abortion, homosexual relations and assisted suicide. Some read the Bible ‘literally.” Those would generally be the values upheld by 100 Huntley Street hosts, who have for decades promoted socially conservative positions.


But many liberal Anglicans in Canada, particularly in B.C., would support a person’s right to choose on abortion, homosexual relations and euthanasia. They would say they “take the Bible seriously, but not literally.” Many Canadian Anglican clergy, for instance, are gay or lesbian. And many Anglican priests formally bless unions between same-sex couples. In addition, Anglicans support political party of every stripe in Canada.


My main point is that by suggesting that anyone “inspired” by the Bible is not fit for public office, Bushfield (whose impressive bio says he has a masters degree in physics and a desire “to make the world a better place”) is in effect arguing the only people who can run for political office are atheists.


By logical extension, wouldn’t Bushfield be compelled to reject any politician inspired by writings by Christians (such as Martin Luther King Jr.), Buddhists (the Dalai Lama), Hindus (Gandhi), Muslims (Malcolm X), Jews (Eli Wiesel), Sikhs (Guru Gobindh Singh), neo-pagans (Starhawk) — or poets with a spiritual bent, like Shakespeare or Tennyson?


Unless he is singling out the Bible (which is important to Jews, Christians and Muslims), Bushfield must believe people inspired by any form of spirituality would threaten the separation of what he anachronistically calls “church and state.”


That does not seem like a very tolerant, pluralistic or even humanistic approach; values for which Bushfield claims to stand.


The concept of the separation of religion and state, as one discovers reading legal history, does not preclude people who are religious from serving in public office.


http://blogs.vancouv...le-inspiration/



As unreliable as Wikipedia is, I'm quoting from there and from 01 census that 36% of BC reports no religious affiliation. (http://en.wikipedia....ritish_Columbia) Are we then to only allow those to serve as political leaders, thus excluding the majority of the province from having their voice heard in person in Victoria?

#365 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 07 August 2012 - 02:51 PM

I suppose as an aside, remember that fmr NDP leader and Premier Ujjal Dosanjh was and is a practising Sikh. Obviously, as a practising Sikh, he has values in his life that pertain to Sikhism.

Should he and his regime be held to the same scrutiny as Clark has here on CDC, or are we ignoring it because 1.) he's NDP, 2.) he's Sihk, and/or 3.) he's not Christian?

#366 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 07 August 2012 - 02:56 PM

There is a difference between believing if Jesus actually existed, and Jesus being the Son of God.

Richard Dawkins believes Jesus walked this earth, because he is a rational Atheist. You should look deep inside of you to see if you are truly rational or not.

The belief in the divinity of Jesus will require an irrational leap of faith - something I have not even touched on. But before I can even speak on that point, I have to make sure I'm talking to rational people. I'm putting 2+2 together, you just keep adding 3, 4, 5, multiply, divide and logs.

I'll conclude it at that. People's have all their values when making decisions, and should not be forbidden to put certain values in the backseat just because they are seemingly "unoriginal".



If Prof. Dawkins believes that there really was a Jesus, then I'd have to ask him as well on what basis he comes to that belief.

Since he's not here, and you are......i've been asking you.

You've said it was because people died for him months after him, in their belief of him.

I've suggested that people did as much for Zeus, and there's no argument to the validity of that.

So the question then turns back to you, in inquiring as to why you don't logically believe in Zeus 'real existence' based on your parameters for believing in the reality of Gods? Even if we kept the supernatural power aspects out of the discussion. Why isn't one reasoned belief parameter for Jesus' existence not good enough for you when it comes to Zeus?

I don't think i'm being illogical or even disrespectful is inquiring.

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#367 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 07 August 2012 - 03:00 PM

I suppose as an aside, remember that fmr NDP leader and Premier Ujjal Dosanjh was and is a practising Sikh. Obviously, as a practising Sikh, he has values in his life that pertain to Sikhism.

Should he and his regime be held to the same scrutiny as Clark has here on CDC, or are we ignoring it because 1.) he's NDP, 2.) he's Sihk, and/or 3.) he's not Christian?


Did Mr. Dosanjh ever openly suggest or intimate that he makes tough decisions outside of ones that affected the consequence related to his own life and circumstances, and not those such as public policy ones that could affect others, based on the Guru Granth Sahib or other Sikh scriptures?

If he did, then I'd have been just as concerned and would like to have known and know still, which ones were and how.

Edited by Sharpshooter, 07 August 2012 - 03:02 PM.

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#368 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,536 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 07 August 2012 - 03:07 PM

The legitimate concern has arisen that she has, does, or might, based on her own admission that she looks to the Bible to help her make tough decisions. Logic dictates that she has and will...since many tough decisions are part and parcel in occupying the seat of Premier of B.C.

Your general agreements with me are irrelevant.


It's still an improvement over the failed socialist theories we can count on the NDP implementing. At least with the bible thumpers there's a hope that luck may prevail instead of the certain direction (the results of which are on display around the world in tragic clarity) the failed logic of the NDP and it's impact on policy decisions will be taking this province.

Expect to see a lot of people turnig to religion - with the NDP in power it's going to be all a lot of people are going to have left!

#369 canuck2xtreme

canuck2xtreme

    Canucks All-Star

  • Assistant to Regional Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,948 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 06

Posted 07 August 2012 - 03:13 PM

I think this thread has run it's course and gone far enough. Too many rules being broken and it's going too far off course too easily.

CDCGML Commissioner/Winnipeg Jets <---Click For Roster!
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Support Canuck Place Childrens Hospice - http://www.canuckplace.org/

This is what hockey should be. A lot of chances, a lot of hitting, no cheap shots, no chirping after whistles."





Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.