The Bible. Myth or Reality?

[mona amon]

Anti white, racially motivated violence exists. Ask some of the murdered farmers in South Africa about "reverse racism" (a term I hate even more than affirmative action - there is no 'reverse racism' there is just racism).

Exactly! It doesn't matter which group of people is doing the attacking or discrimination, it's still just racism if it falls within our accepted definition of racism. I can only see the concept of 'reverse racism' as a discriminatory tactic to gag and silence the victims of discrimination. Actually this gagging, censoring, silencing aspect applies to any form of extreme political correctness. Making a big noise at every real or perceived offence merely trivializes the issue and is an insult to those people who actually suffer real discrimination and persecution.

If the universe is good then why did the early Christians see creation and women as such filth?

The second century St. Clement of Alexandria wrote: "Every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman."

The Church father Tertullian explained why women deserve their status as despised and inferior human beings:

"And do you not know that you are an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealer of that tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account of your desert that is, death even the Son of God had to die."

The sixth century Christian philosopher, Boethius, wrote in The Consolation of Philosophy, "Woman is a temple built upon a sewer."

In the tenth century Odo of Cluny declared, "To embrace a woman is to embrace a sack of manure..."

St. Thomas Aquinas suggested that God had made a mistake in creating woman: "nothing [deficient] or defective should have been produced in the first establishment of things; so woman ought not to have been produced then."

Regards
DL

In what way is all this even remotely connected to the Bible or Christianity?

[Pike Bishop]

Exactly! It doesn't matter which group of people is doing the attacking or discrimination, it's still just racism if it falls within our accepted definition of racism. I can only see the concept of 'reverse racism' as a discriminatory tactic to gag and silence the victims of discrimination. Actually this gagging, censoring, silencing aspect applies to any form of extreme political correctness. Making a big noise at every real or perceived offence merely trivializes the issue and is an insult to those people who actually suffer real discrimination and persecution.

This is funny, Mona makes the politically correct move of sanctimoniously criticizing my criticism of the term "breeder,' then hypocritically bemoans the "extreme political correctness" she, herself, practices. It is also "extreme political correctness" to equate criticizing racism practiced by minorities, and sexism practiced by women, as a "discriminatory tactic to gag and silence the victims of discrimination," when they are entirely separate things. Minorities do attack White people for being white, and women do assault and abuse men and boys; so, acknowledging those truths "gag" nobody

And Mona clearly doesn't understand what the accepted definition of racism is...and it certainly isn't hers. Racism has two accepted official definitions:

1. A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2. Racial prejudice or discrimination

Neither of these definitions say anything about "Whiteness" or requiring the participation of a member of the privileged class. So, people of ethnic minorities can be racist, just like women can be sexist. Only a sanctimonious, extremely politically correct person like Mona could think otherwise.

[Iain Sparrow]

This is funny, Mona makes the politically correct move of sanctimoniously criticizing my criticism of the term "breeder,' then hypocritically bemoans the "extreme political correctness" she, herself, practices. It is also "extreme political correctness" to equate criticizing racism practiced by minorities, and sexism practiced by women, as a "discriminatory tactic to gag and silence the victims of discrimination," when they are entirely separate things. Minorities do attack White people for being white, and women do assault and abuse men and boys; so, acknowledging those truths "gag" nobody

And Mona clearly doesn't understand what the accepted definition of racism is...and it certainly isn't hers. Racism has two accepted official definitions:

1. A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2. Racial prejudice or discrimination

Neither of these definitions say anything about "Whiteness" or requiring the participation of a member of the privileged class. So, people of ethnic minorities can be racist, just like women can be sexist. Only a sanctimonious, extremely politically correct person like Mona could think otherwise.

Jeeez, you're a mealy-mouthed curmudgeon.

We know and accept the definition of racism.
We do not accept, nor take seriously a straight white man living in a country where straight white men have most of the power and hold most of the purse strings, and make most of the laws, who then claims to be the victim of racism, or sexism, or whatever 'ism' you'd like to plug in. A black racist, or a sexist woman have an uphill battle if they really intend on doing some damage.
It is no coincidence that I find myself in my 40s and have yet to have my life meaningfully impacted by either a black racist or a sexist woman. Surely they exist, but to no consequence in my life or the lives of most people. They are next to powerless.

[Pike Bishop]

Jeeez, you're a mealy-mouthed curmudgeon.

We know and accept the definition of racism.
We do not accept, nor take seriously a straight white man living in a country where straight white men have most of the power and hold most of the purse strings, and make most of the laws, who then claims to be the victim of racism, or sexism, or whatever 'ism' you'd like to plug in. A black racist, or a sexist woman have an uphill battle if they really intend on doing some damage.
It is no coincidence that I find myself in my 40s and have yet to have my life meaningfully impacted by either a black racist or a sexist woman. Surely they exist, but to no consequence in my life or the lives of most people. They are next to powerless.

No. you're a mealy-mouthed clown who doesn't understand "mealy-mouthed" or "curmudgeon"...

Mona clearly didn't understand the term "racism" in her post to me, since she implied people couldn't be racist against white men. You continued that misunderstanding when you ridiculously compared my taking exception to the term "breeder" to Whites complaining about a "holocaust." And I never claimed to be a victim of anything. I just correctly said the term "breeder" is rude. The fact you erroneously and sanctimoniously portrayed that as "victimization" proves what a clown you are.

By the way, these words of yours from Delta's blog are the words of a true racist:

"He smiled and did nothing, gave me that "I don't speak English look". I grabbed his eldest boy and threw him out of line. I said, "who's next?". Then it got really ugly; they were Mexican and I let them know where they ought to go back to."

You actually assaulted 9-year old Mexican kids, who you actually said had a "I don't speak English look," and let them know "where they ought to go back to." Those are the actions and words of a 40-something White racist who has neither any clue about his White privilege nor any clue he's a racist who throws that privilege around.

[Logos]

GENERAL NOTE TO ALL:

It's been a long time since I've seen such immaturity in these discussion forums.

Please keep all of your petty squabbles and personal vendetta nonsense off of the discussion forums and private messages and blog posts etc.

I'm a few clicks away from adding infraction points or temporary bans to some members who have participated in this thread. Please acquaint yourselves with the Forum Rules. Again. Including #4:

4. In general, you may not use your membership privileges here via posting text or images in the forums, signature lines, tags, blog entries or blog comments, profile visitor messages, groups, photo albums, or private messages for:

a) flaming, baiting, trolling, or ad hominem (for example personally attacking or insulting other members),
b) maliciously hijacking discussion topics,
c) deliberately posting so as to circumvent the inappropriate word filters, or, not posting in the English language,
d) threatening, harassing, stalking, abusing or intimidating other members,
e) spamming -- posting commercial messages, overtly promoting personal or commercial websites or services, and/or promoting/advertising other forums,
f) flooding -- posting multiple posts or topics in a short period of time,
g) any illegal activity, and,
h) any other disruptive behaviour that negatively affects other members' fair use of this site.

If you're going to post your OPINION here you better be prepared for some contrary opinions.

If you can't discuss things without getting personal, stop posting. Please.

.

.

.