Why are christians so hated?

p.s.: Microsoft banned a gamer after she was harrassed by other players on Xbox because in her profile she wrote she was lesbian... and i bet they aren't using reason as their prime force to condemn sex orientation online.I somehow think (false)religion distorded their minds.What do you think?

 

Or Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

well,i hope i answered that question clearly ... see above ,it is quite a long text that i doubt most kids here will even consider reading

 

This is a debate forum, where 2 sides of an issue are discussed. When an answer is presented, its only natural for an opposition to be given. The original poster asked a general question, and answers were presented to him. By arguing against those answers with reason, I am merely fulfilling the purpose of this forum. There is nothing wrong with that.

Saying "well the Christians i know....." and "you can say the same about...." is exactly what I am disapproving of, we shouldn't be doing that because, just like I said, one individual does not represent a whole group. People in this thread (including yourself) are doing precisely what you have just described, so I wrote a response to show that a single person in fact can't represent a whole group. I don't see how your repeating of my own argument does anything other than helping me to strengthen my point.

 

Well...that can expand ideas from people who think in a similar fashion... i agree that debating on subjective matters gets you (most of the time) nowhere. Although a subjective matter can easily convert to an actuality or something that many others experience. Do i make sense? lol ... seriously now,im off to bed

p.s.: i hope you didnt include me...i dont think i talked in that long post of myne only in my own experience.i only stated facts that happened in history and then i tried to explain why hatred can be an occurance towards Christians. It certainly doesnt mean i support it

edit:i only noticed now you replied to somebody else...sorry ...this happens when you are too tired to think straight.im off to bed now,for real.

 

lol sorry i didn't include the quote earlier.

 

what are you arguing with me for?

i was saying to stay away from "well the Christians i know....." and "you can say the same about...." (this specific one aimed at you for the "you can say the same about the human race" bit)in a defensive role.
we are talking about why they are hated.

there is not really a second side to the discussion because it's asking why, the only thing that can be given is the answer to that question.

there is not room for the defense of the opinions posed on this thread because the question does not warrent it.

and we don't really need to go back in to it again on another thread, again and again those with religious views get offended, throw in their weak deffence get more upset and it descend in to a flame war between the arrogance of knowledge and the ignorance of religion.

 

Oh really? Here is what you wrote, and you clearly did not stay away from that:

So much for staying away from using a single person to represent a whole group huh?

Here is what I said:

I accomplished the above by using a similar example that you yourself have used:

Do you notice the last 2 sentences? Of course you didn't. In case you still have not seen it:

If you can't tell that I am against the using of few individuals to represent a whole group by reading the above, then there is nothing more I can say.

People write words for a purpose, they are not meaningless things that are argued over with for no reason. I said those descriptions of Christians also fit human race in general, because if that is true, then there is no logical reason to hate Chrisitans. If the Christians are no worse than your average guy on Earth, why such a special treatment?

Answer to the question can be given, but that does not mean any answer given is correct. Otherwise this thread shouldn't be even put into the debate forum, because any post in this thread would automatically become the absolute truth.

This is a debate forum, so it won't even make sense if there is no room to argue which "answer" is the correct one.

It's funny how some people can only resort to empty claims because they themselves know that they have absolutely nothing to back up their words.

 

I know what I said And if you notice it was an after thought as I saw the form this discussion was taking. And you have yet to deffend anything and currently your using age old tactics of throwing everything back in ones face and trying to pr evoke and argument by saying things like my argument is incoherent.

No one is saying it is absolute truth you'd be a moron if you thought that and all that has been said does not apply to all those with the same faith but are the general consensus of Christianity when we think of the issues surrounding why they are hated.

And it's getting to the point that this all becomes futile because we get one that wants a fight.

Are you really going to argue everything I say even if in agreement with you.

 

This is a personal attack. This type of statement can quickly turn a debate into a flame war, so keep the debate mature. Argue against another person's position, not the way he presents it. The latter will take an intelligent debate nowhere.

 

You yourself are responsible for what you write

Here are your points and my exact response to each of them. Notice the numbers? Yeah they are matched.
How exactly I have yet to defend anything when I have each of your points matched with a counter?

Your points:
1. [What 709zzy said] is a usual diversion tactic
2. most the people i know don't either the only ones that do funny enough are Christians
3. a general question requiring a general answer
4. without having to argue over "well the Christians i know....."
5. "you can say the same about...." (this specific one aimed at you for the "you can say the same about the human race" bit)in a defensive role.
6. there is not room for the defense of the opinions posed on this thread because the question does not warrent it.
7. those with religious views get offended, throw in their weak deffence get more upset

My response:
1. You have nothing to back up your words.
2. What we see in a group do not represent the whole group. (You even agree with me here)
3. arguing against those answers with reason, I am merely fulfilling the purpose of this forum.
4. Saying "well the Christians i know....." is exactly what I am disapproving of.
5. I said those descriptions of Christians also fit human race in general, because if that is true, then there is no logical reason to hate Chrisitans.
6. This is a debate forum, so it won't even make sense if there is no room to argue which "answer" is the correct one.
7. Empty claims, You have nothing to back up your words.

Since you seem to forget what you have wrote, so I wanted to help you out by bring out what you wrote in your previous posts. If bring out your own words provokes you, then that is not my problem. I claim your argument is incoherent, because you didn't provide any evidence when you wrote how religious people

When I openly express my doubt about some of the given answers to the original poster's questions,

You said: "the only thing that can be given is the answer to that question"

So apparently you wouldn't let me express doubt in any answer posted. So that means the answers are absolute truth.










Post Merge: [time]1265081564[/time]

I am sorry, that was in response to the following:

"those with religious views get offended, throw in their weak deffence get more upset"

I apologize and I will endure it next time when something similar happens.

 

No 709zzy, that is a non-sequitur logical fallacy. What equitypetey said (in his quote) is exactly as it is, nothing more. Just because equitypetey 'wouldn't let you express doubt in any answer posted' (which is utter nonsense by the way) doesn't mean that the opposite of what equity said is true.

 

You are right, what I said was wrong. I will change that to:

"So apparently you wouldn't let me express doubt in any answer posted. Unless you think I have no right of expressing doubt, you are giving me an impression that the answers are absolute truth"

 

I don't understand what's still being debated. Haven't we already established that all people generally hate arrogant pricks?

 

again you twist and misquote me.

i said i know what i said and i was not being hypocritical, again it was an after thought you can (mis)quote me all you like i will stand by my words and responses to specific posts.
could you stand by your words? i could sit here quoting you and all your hypocrisies but i won't as it serves no purpose in this discussion.

go and pull everything i say out of context, you only futher my point of age old tactics, just like every thread based on religion someone comes along with their nickers in a twist and starts a flame war to get it locked down.
part of the tactics is to point the finger, focus on one person and try (badly) to insult them and criticise posts.

also again NO ONE IS SAYING IT IS THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH but just an opinion based on what they have seen and experienced and it does hold truth when speaking of those people that present them selves in that manner.

no one especially not i, is saying you can't have an opinion and you can deffend Christians all you like. i merely pointed out that the question is asking why are they hated thus needs no deffence, we all know not everyone can be put under the same label and we all know that the same can be said for many other people. the answers given are not for the intention offending they are simply just any criticism that can be repeatedly observed and thus answers the question why are they hated.

the reason i say your argument is weak is because since the start you have played the finger pointing diversion game, first it was to do the "you can say the same about the human race" and then it was to argue me and divert the discussion completely away from the subject.

just some of the defensive answer you could give are.

1. the general views given so far can mostly only be attributed to christian extremists most notably American evangelical Christians.

2. (like you said but in better and simpler form) the things said can be attributed to many other people and groups not just Christians.

3. the bible depending on your interpretation of it tells you to act in the ways described so they are only acting on what they believe in.

there are many more and I'm sure no one can argue those points but they are still as i said redundant because the original question does not warrent it.

but whatever I'm sure you will for some reason attack me again and get this whole thing locked down.
although saying that i think all issues have been cover and the question answered so can be locked anyway i could even do it my self but i won't, I'll let the section mod do it if he sees fit.

 

This topic makes me want to head-desk.

Christianity, like most (if not all) religions, has some good and not-so-good parts to it. It also has a lot of great ideas that are not practiced by its followers. It's better to judge or attack the beliefs instead of the people, since all you'll do is anger others and put yourself in a bad mood. If you approach the beliefs themselves in a calm and cool manner, then no-one who's rational will get in an upheaval over it.

I respect Christianity's core values but shake my head at the fanaticism and fundamentalism that has marred its teachings. If more Christians took a good, long look at the Bible and actually applied the lessons within its covers, they would find more harmony in their lives and less people "hating" on them for their beliefs.

As far as my beliefs are concerned, I follow a Chinese philosophy called Taoism.

 

What qualities have I pretended to have? And I don't recall ever agreeing with you, so why do I need real conviction? If you cannot provide the evidence, you shouldn't be calling my posts hypocrisies. Of course you can feel free to respond to what I said. This is a debate forum afterall. So I encourage you to quote me.

How exactly did I pull everything that you have said out of context? By making that empty claim, you have not countered any of my points. And no, your point of "age old tactics" that I was responding to came from here:

Your quote: "his post summed up nothing especially not well, it's usual diversion tactics"

I was responding to the above sentence which you wrote back in post #47. So even though I did not pull anything you said out of context, the act of "pulling things out of context" is not your point of "age old tactics" which I was arguing with. Thus, your statement: " [by pulling] everything [equitypetey] says out of context, [709zzy] only further [equitypetey]'s point of age old tactics" is invalid.

I was accused of doing a personal attack on you because I claim that your argument was incoherent. Even though I clearly stated which part of your argument was not backed up with support, I still went a bit too far. So I apologize for going a bit too far. I mentioned this a couple of times, this is a debate forum. Discussions are suppose to be encouraged here as long as there is no personal attack or trolling going on. Other than calling your argument incoherent and providing support for that claim, I don't see how I have almost started a flame war. I know you didn't state that I have tried to start a flame war, but you shouldn't assume every post (in this thread) would.

Unless the owner of the finger mentioned below is not referring to me, I don't agree with the following:

"part of the tactics is to point the finger, focus on one person and try (badly) to insult them and criticise posts."

I did not insult you, so when you say that I have, please explain where have I insulted you, and how. Otherwise the above is just an empty claim that serves no purpose for this thread other than, like you said, "start a flame war".


I wish you have read my response to Hyper.

Here is what Hyper said:

"No 709zzy, that is a non-sequitur logical fallacy. What equitypetey said (in his quote) is exactly as it is, nothing more. Just because equitypetey 'wouldn't let you express doubt in any answer posted' (which is utter nonsense by the way) doesn't mean that the opposite of what equity said is true."

And here is my reply to him:

"[Hyper] is right, what [709zzy] said was wrong. [709zzy] will change that to:

So apparently [equitypetey] wouldn't let [709zzy] express doubt in any answer posted. (Since according to equiptypetey, people are only suppose to post answers for the original poster and they are not suppose to question the validity of the answers) Unless [equitypetey] thinks [709zzy] has no right of expressing doubt, [equitypetey] is giving [709zzy] an impression that the answers are absolute truth."

In the above, I have explained what I meant when I said the words "absolute truth". So I didn't intend to call your opinions the absolute truth. I meant the impression you gave when you said how posters in this thread are only suppose to give answers, and how posters are not suppose to question each other's answers.

I understand that the original poster's question is asking why Chrisitans are being hated. But if we only give our own versions of the answer without any kind of discussion with each other, what exactly is the point of this thread existing in the debate forum? I am not required to argue against you. I can also completely agree with you and give the similar kinds of answers that you gave the original poster. There are two sides, I can take either one of them. I chose the side which many people in this thread are not on because I was trying to provide some kind of balance to the discussion. A debate shouldn't be something personal, you take a side, I take a side. and we go at each other. I don't want to insult you, that is not the purpose of my posts. This is a debate, and thats all there is to it.

You need to understand that Christians are within the human race. If I am playing the finger pointing diversion game, I wouldn't be pointing at a group that still contains the Christians. Plus, how is arguing with you a diversion for the discussion? Is the discussion only limited to one side? I don't think so. If it is, then get a mod to come out and get him to clearly state that: "There can be no argument in this thread, because arguments diverts the discussion here."

You have provided me with some possible defense which you suggest me to use in my argument. The first one is basically repeating what I said about "few individuals cannot represent a whole group". The second one, which you have admitted yourself, is also what I have said (apparently you argued against how I presented my view, but according to the mod, that is a personal attack, so I will pretend that you didn't say it). The third one is a funny one. The original poster asked why Christians are so hated, and you suggest me to give him an answer in the form of teaching him how to act? I don't know what to say man.

I don't want any thread to be locked down, but to have a debate, arguments should be had. If everyone take one single side, that's not much of a debate.

 

the thing is you came across as another christian, especially when you started calling my points incoherent when they weren't so the in all purposes you looked indistinguishable from the sort i described. that's one of the issues with taking a diffusive stand and not stating where you stand.

you tell me what debates consist of but i feel you are still yet to learn the finer details of debating, as your all to pumped for it to turn to an argument. also as we have seen in other debates that go tits up you should only debate from your own perspective and not try to deffend others unless what is being said is grossly incorrect.

it may have been posted in the debates section (most likely should not have even been asked) but with a subject that is a question the logical thing is that there can be there is only answers, if we choose to debate anything it should be challenging opinions that are false, as of yet all that has been said about Christianity is true to some extent maybe not across the board but we have all seen those things or debating what makes them hated not why they shouldn't be.
this is not so much a place for defence for religion he wanted an answer and he got it, I'm sure no ones intention was for an all out attack on religion merely nothing more nor less then answering the question posed.

oh and I'm not going to start the quoting game it's not that i can't but i choose to not bring my self down to that level, i know what i have said and how i have meant it and you know what you have said and how you mean it, it just seems we are on the wrong side of each other.

and don't worry about or apologizing for offence, i don't get offended as when i know I'm right i am

 

Like I said, I have provided support for my claim that your argument was incoherent. You have stated that people throw in their weak defense, yet you couldn't express exactly how the defense was weak at the time. So at the time, they were incoherent. Later on you provided support for that claim by saying I was playing the finger pointing diversion game, but I have stated that the human race also contain Christians, thus your support for your claim does not work. So right now you have yet to show that claim of mine to be wrong.

You call my stand diffusive, yet you obviously know my position is exatly the opposite of yours (since you keep on complaining about how I attack you). Lying to yourself just for the sake of flaming how I present my argument will get this topic no where.

Empty statements such as:
"i feel you are still yet to learn the finer details of debating"
does not strengthen your own argument.

Perspective is a way of regarding a situation or a topic. I have a free mind, so there is no reason why I can't look at something from different perspectives. I can defend anyone of those perspectives, it just happens to be that I chose to defend one that is opposite of yours. You are telling me that I shouldn't defend the original poster unless what you said is grossly incorrect, but if we already know something is correct or not, there would be no reason for a debate to exist for that thing.

Maybe the question in this thread should not have been asked. That is not up to us. It's up to the mods to decide if this thread should go in the trash can or not. But since its already here, there is no reason to not participate in a debate to exercise our mind. Of course with a question, the logical thing to do is to provide an answer. I think your answer is wrong, so I give you an explanation for why I think it is wrong. But you claim that I should only argue against things "that are false". Do you even realize that things to you that may seem to be true may seem to be false to others? It's because of this difference in opinions, that we have debates. You have no evidence to show that "what has been said about Christians [in this thread] is true to some extent" other than what you yourself have seen through your own eyes. And I have already showed you that "what you see in a group does not represent a whole group". If the reason for Christians to be so hated is because there are some Chrisitians who act in negative ways, then why is the human race not hated to the same extent? There is no reason to hate Christians just because the descriptions in my previous post fit some of the Chrisitians. So those descriptions are not the reasons for why Christians are so hated. And guess what, those descriptions are the kind of answers that you and some others have provided to the original poster. So I was telling you guys how those answers were not correct in my opinion.

I don't use quotes for fun. I use them because if I just write everything in long paragraphs, you would purposely ignore what I write (for example after I provided 7 counter points, you completely ignore them and claim how I have yet to counter any), so that's why I chose to bring them out while hoping you can recognize them.

Again you make empty claims by saying how I am in a level below you. And right after that claim, you are telling me to not worry about offending you. I don't want to offend other people, but I don't think that is true for you.

The apology was not aimed at you. It was for the mods, and I was telling the mods that I will try my best to endure personal attacks directed at me by not doing the same thing in response.

I really don't want to comment on your last sentence. There are things that I want to say concerning how those words does the opposite of strengthening your argument, but I will let it pass. All I am going to say is that it would be awesome if everything I say is true just because I said they are true.

Just to remind you, the need of supports in your argument are still present including the following.

-You have still not shown: How my words are hypocrisies.
-You have still not shown: How I pull everything you say out of context.
-You have still not shown: How I am using a diversion tactic.
-You have still not shown: How you did not mean to give an impression of your answers to be the absolute truth.
-You have still not shown: How my argument is weak.
-You have still not shown: How teaching the original poster how to act is the appropriate answer to give him for his question.
-You have still not shown: How I am on a level below you.
-You have still not shown: How I shouldn't have the ability to choose the perspective that I want to defend.
-You have still not shown: How the answers that I am criticizing in fact don't deserve the criticism.

 

OK man seriously give it up.
i have already answered half of those very coherently if you can't see it that's your issue.
you don't seem to understand anything i say and you twist it I'm not sure if that is intentional to serve your purpose or because you really don't understand anything and I'm getting sick of repeating my self.
I'm not playing your game.

that is how you are alevel below as instead of letting our differences be and have a civil discussion you are still determined to send this in to an argument between me and you rather then talk about the subject.

this thread is destroyed through your persistant eagerness to turn this in to an argument between me and you, i will not be pulled in to that.

the question has been answered and this is only getting worse.

i think it is a agreeable that this should be locked so LOCKED