Pat Robertson: Sinning In Video Games Is The Same As Sinning In Real Life

[Griffin Ceawlin]

---

Melita Magic wrote:

Not true - (ETA: some of those might be removed) - but that's part of my point: What are "Christian things?" Who's to judge?

---

What is "un-Christian"? Like Justice Potter Stewart (re obscenity), "I know it when I see it."

[Deej Kasshiki]

Pat Robertson is an ultra-conservative, bigoted, ignorant, hate-filled old man who thinks his pronouncements are relevant. Who cares what that idiot has to say?

Also, it's best to remember that people like him represent only one (very narrow, IMO) branch of believers. He certainly doesn't speak for me or anyone I know.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Griffin Ceawlin wrote:

---

Melita Magic wrote:

Not true - (ETA: some of those might be removed) - but that's part of my point: What are "Christian things?" Who's to judge?

---

What is "

un

-Christian"? Like Justice Potter Stewart (re obscenity), "I know it when I see it."

---

Justice Potter later "recanted" on that oft taken out of context phrase and even later on in life said additionally that he regretted ever saying it.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potter_Stewart

"To the general public, Stewart may be best known for a quotation, or a fragment thereof, from his opinion in the obscenity case of Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964). Stewart wrote in his short concurrence that "hard-core pornography" was hard to define, but that "I know it when I see it."[12] Usually dropped from the quote is the remainder of that sentence, "and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." Justice Stewart went on to defend the movie in question against further censorship. One noted commentator opined that: "This observation summarizes Stewart's judicial philosophy: particularistic, intuitive, and pragmatic."[12] Justice Stewart later recanted this view in Miller v. California, in which he accepted that his prior view was simply untenable.

Justice Stewart commented about his second thoughts about that quotation in 1981. “In a way I regret having said what I said about obscenity -- that’s going to be on my tombstone. When I remember all of the other solid words I’ve written,” he said, “I regret a little bit that if I’ll be remembered at all I’ll be remembered for that particular phrase.”

About three years after Miller, in Ginzberg v. United States:

Ranked as one of the ten best statements on censorship, among his most quote worthy statements was in a dissenting opinion in Ginzberg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966): "Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.”

 

eta to add link

 

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Melita Magic wrote:

---

Sephina Frostbite wrote:

I dont think for one minute Christanity is bad or evil. I think the people who follow it can be. Just like any other religion. You can take the beauty out of it or the evil out of it. In the end its not the religion but the people who follow it. I dont for one second that think that by thinking something you have already have done it. I would be in jail by now if that were the case. 

---

But see that's the thing. 

Why is it that people so often mention "Christians who have done evil things" when it's simply humans who have done evil things. Only Christians sometimes do evil? Only relgious people sometimes do evil? Never an agnostic? Never an atheist?

So while it sounds generous, in fact it's in some way adding to the myth that Christians are all hypocrites. Or that they somehow by nature are twisted.

And there are those out there who believe exactly that. 

I'm not thinking of anyone here or anyone in particular. 

(This is in reply to the above quote though and to part of what Ceka said.)

ETA: This part:

"the reason christianity gets a bad rap is because the manipulators in it's history.."

Then that's the fault of the person with that view. A religion is not a person.

---

 

it's history is not a veiw..it's what happened..

and yes religion is not a person..it's an orginization based on a philosophy with many people following in the same philosophy..

spirituality  is much different than a religion..someone spiritual doesn't need a church..

spirituality is the persons view from belief..because they truly believe..where religion is not..religion whichever version has it's own rules and is aming to a view..

a true christian follows the book not the church..

if someone has lead an army to commit genocide and manilpulated in the name of some god and does it..that's not a view..that's history..

all you have to do is replace the word manipulator with man and you will see  i was saying pretty much the same thing..

it's not a view of why it gets a bad rap..it's why it gets a bad rap..because of men that commited terrible things  manipulating that orginization and the ones that fell for it....

now for someone to think that all christians follow a church or are manipulated by those men..that would be a personal view that would be wrong..

because of those men/manipulators is why you felt that history would repeat itself and this thread would head in the wrong direction to christian bashing..

thier history makes it easy for many to look at the whole as the same..

i'm just saying they are not..just as you were..

 

 bleh..sorry for the bad ipad skills hehehe

[Melita Magic]

Nicely and gently written Kelli.

Good points, everyone...interesting discussion.

I was feeling a bit defensive due to something I saw in the early days of the topic, and I apologize if I sounded reactionary or reactive or harsh in any way. It wasn't my intent to upset anyone (don't know if I did, but it wasn't.)

Kelli I'm glad you see "Christian things" that way...so often I hear that Christian things are - well, all negative. 

But then it's also a lot of pressure and - I'm not sure - a strange form of compliment? That it seems Christians are held to such a(n impossibly?) high standard. 

If it's known someone is a Christian and they get angry, the retort comes "how about turning the other cheek?" If it's known someone is a Christian and they judge, passages are quoted about "judge not lest ye be judged." It can be exhausting at times.

No one alive measures up to any sort of perfect standard - usually doesn't even come close. It's one reason intent means (basically) everything to me. 

And these are all just my personal foibles and reactions and opinions by the way - not putting myself up as any type of representative.

Robertson puts himself up as a leader, and is very visible due to Tv, so I can understand why he gets criticism (and I don't watch him, but, I do see headlines when he says something bizarre which - has happened a few times. For sure.)

But it's when the circle then widens and it's "Christians this" or "Christians that" or "thought he was a Christian." Can begin to feel like people are talking about some other species. The poignant part is that we are all human. We have our different beliefs and ethical yardsticks. It's sad when divisions come up.

But what you said about 'if they are something more nebulous like ethical behavior' - isn't that what religions teach? Other than maybe the Indian Thuggees I can't think of one built on harming others.

In other words that was sort of what my point was really - why not judge all humans the same, without dragging their religious beliefs into it. Again with Robertson he puts himself up as a leader in his own religion so, I understand - he's up on a platform, he's more visible. 

I just want people to see others as humans first, and that religious doesn't mean hypocrisy is built in - it just means we're human above all else and all are fallible. No matter what one's beliefs on the afterlife.

Griffin you're right I don't hang out in those places! Lol. I was talking about mainstream sites though, I've heard it everywhere online really, and so often, over the years. But also here particularly. And for some reason it's always just the one belief that gets targeted. I'm not sure why that is. When I've asked elsewhere, people say that's because it's the most dominant one in their nation. Doesn't seem like much reason though really. If anything one would think exposure would create less fear about it, not more. People usually fear the unknown.

I think everyone here is smart enough not to see things like the Westboro gang as representing others, so it always makes me wonder what horrible person did someone meet in their past, who said they were Christian, that's made them abhor all of the same faith. That's always made me wonder. 

I suppose one is more sensitive to seeing and remembering things aimed against a group one is part of, which is one reason I think it's important to all listen to each other. FWIW if I see blanket hatred aimed at entire groups of other types I also speak up against that. Other places online mostly. I don't really see that, here.

Ceka my poor eyes found it hard to read without stops or capital letters but I think I see what you are getting at - that people base it on past experience. Or on history. But history is full of brutes - and they had all sorts of beliefs. So I think those people are still letting something else cloud their thinking. Just my opinion.

[Ted McGregor]

---

Melita Magic wrote:

But it's when the circle then widens and it's "Christians this" or "Christians that" or "thought he was a Christian."

Can begin to feel like people are talking about some other species. The poignant part is that we are all human

. We have our different beliefs and ethical yardsticks. It's sad when divisions come up.

---

If anything I find about this discussion you raised hypocritical, it's that paragraph of yours.

It is Christians themselves ( you and nobody else started this sidetrack to the OP original message as he mentioned himself ) who cause this distinction amongst humans in their arrogance that the 'master of everything alive and dead' will treat them as his favourite. It's the same Muslims and Jews do.

It's a them vs. us division. It's about dividing humanity into groups and to control those groups and only causes segregation. Religion will never unify mankind, because it will leave out those who can do without it but are still needed if only for humanity's sake, on forehand.

That first act of division religious people make when choosing either group,  is an aggression in itself.

Doesn't matter if you want to dress it up as 'moral' or 'law of God I'm free to fantasize about to surpress others' and call all others heretics or sinners or aggressors or outlaws.

 

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Melita Magic wrote:

Ceka my poor eyes found it hard to read without stops or capital letters but I think I see what you are getting at - that people base it on past experience. Or on history. But history is full of brutes - and they had all sorts of beliefs. So I think those people are still letting something else cloud their thinking. Just my opinion.

---

Ya sorry about that..

i have this tiny little spot that i can't see the whole post when i'm on my Ipad..So things seem to get mashed together more than usual..

 

The real problem is this..

It's not just religion..It's just about every kind of discrimination..

They all have the same thing in common.. Individuals being judged by the whole..Rather than themselves..

We see it real bad in politics..

Dem's and Reps wear each other out hard..Where there are Dems and Reps that actually do choose some of the things from each side..

Being a certain color or certain races.. 

Being a man  or being a woman or being gay or bi or trans..

The list goes on..

Discrimination is discrimination no matter what group or thing someone is being judged by..When someone has nothing else to go on about the individual..

 

I'll go into some political forums now and then..

OMG! It's like a free for all of being able to say the most hateful things you can about a whole group or to a person..

If you are a Rep then you are this and that and this..

If you are a Dem you are this and that and this..

It reminds me so much of racism that it's not even funny..

 

The second someone say's they like this idea..They get labled to a party..

I've been called a Dem and a Rep more times in one week than i can count..

Only because of being honest in the ideas i liked..

I'm neither..I'm the undecided voter..

The second you think freely..They rip you apart lol Dems and Reps..A lot of them that i have seen anyways..Not all of them hehehehe

 

 

I feel that just as we would want to look at a person of any color as an individual..We have to look at all people of any group as individuals..

Be it in thier beliefs or race or politics or whatever..

There is just way too much shooting from the hip to judge in so many areas in the world today..

 

 

ok i tried to work on my Ipad skills a little more..so we'll see how this one works out hehehehe

 

 

 

 

 

[Hermione Lefevre]

if people werent killed by religion this would be funny This god made his creations with many faults and then punishes them for it lol

What a monster

Floods, Storms, Plaques, famine..now get on your knees and praise him

I find myself a kinder imaginary friend if I needed one

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Hermione Lefevre wrote:

if people werent killed by religion this would be funny

This god made his creations with many faults and then punishes them for it lol

What a monster

Floods, Storms, Plaques, famine..now get on your knees and praise him

I find myself a kinder imaginary friend if I needed one

---

i think i hear our avatars calling hehehehe

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Melita Magic wrote:

It's too bad that critics who hate Christians or Chrsitianity so often do not understand it, despite memorizing so much about it. Doesn't mean you understand it from within. It just doesn't. 

---

Melita, I think the problem isn't that critics don't understand Christianity, but that many self-professed Christians do not understand Christianity .  

Hence people like Pat Robertson, who gives Christians and Christianity a bad name.  (In my opinion)

 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

She's probably referring to these forums, which skew disproportionately toward athiests, libertarians, argumentative contrarians (raises hand) and Those Utterly Lacking in Social Skills.

---

Oh..yay!  I'm here!  *raises hand*   

Oh..wait...  *scowls*

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Griffin Ceawlin wrote:

---

You haven't been going to the right wingnut web sites or watching the right wingnut "news" programs where all MUSLIMS are evil

. And all atheists are evil because communism!!!

---

Yes, damn those communist for making atheists look bad!  Grrr!   (kind of like the *Nazi's made eugenics look bad)  Hard to shake old stereotypes.    But, the communists did make capitalism look pretty good in comparison, so there was that trade off. 

 

*Sorry about enacting Godwin's Law, but that analogy just seemed to apt to me.  (which is, of course, how Godwin's law came to be..)

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Melita Magic wrote:

In other words that was sort of what my point was really -

why not judge all humans the same, without dragging their religious beliefs into it.

Again with Robertson he puts himself up as a leader in his own religion so, I understand - he's up on a platform, he's more visible. 

I just want people to see others as humans first,

and that religious doesn't mean hypocrisy is built in - it just means we're human above all else and all are fallible.

No matter what one's beliefs on the afterlife.

---

Melita,  I highlighted what I think is an issue, and why it's nigh impossible for non-Christians (or those without religion in general) to see Christians in that light, and it's because the Christian faith teaches that those who do not believe, are going to roast in a fiery hell for all eternity.  But,we're told,  just "believe" and then you're granted a key to the promised land of happy afterlife.   We're told that..all the time.  Our children are told that. 

So, I seriously wonder how you can expect us, those who are non-believers to accept the " why not judge all humans the same, without dragging their religious beliefs into it."?    Your religion precludes us from being not judged, and being seen the same as other humans.  We, by the very act of your "faith", we're are seen as condemned to hell.  Can you understand how that it's your religious beliefs, which means your way or looking at us, and judging us, that separates us from you? 

I see you the same as me, another human who was born and will die. The end.  But, if what you say is true, and you really believe in what the New Testament says, then you see me as someone who is going to hell..to burn for all eternity.  You also see my two sons that way.  So, sorry, if I'm not particularly open to the idea that you see all humans the same, and don't want to judge us.

You want people to see others as humans first?  Then religion needs to disappear.  Because, as long as there are ancient mythos around, that say that some of us will burn in hell for an eternity, while some others who profess to have "faith" in ancient historical stories, will be "saved", there's a problem.

[Storm Clarence]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

Melita, I think the problem isn't that critics don't understand Christianity, but that many self-professed Christians do not understand Christianity .  

Hence people like Pat Robertson, who gives Christians and Christianity a bad name.  (In my opinion)

 

---

I absolutely agree with your first statement.  However, the second is way too broad.  Yeah, I find him a bore, but I think *his* followers certainly don't think he gives Christianity a bad name; perhaps it is you (me included) that is ignorant to *his* kind of Christianity.  So much for followers.  I think anyone that does not like him or what he preaches and stands for then they should just scroll past.  I do.  I bet Kim Kardashian has more followers on twitter.  I scroll past her too.  I am thankful that at least neither have called on their followers to perpetrate a jihad on Americans.    

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Storm Clarence wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

Melita, I think the problem isn't that critics don't understand Christianity, but that many self-professed Christians do not understand Christianity .  

Hence people like Pat Robertson, who gives Christians and Christianity a bad name.  (In my opinion)

 

---

I absolutely agree with your first statement.  However, the second is way too broad.  Yeah, I find him a bore, but I think *his* followers certainly don't think he gives Christianity a bad name; perhaps it is you (me included) that is ignorant to *his* kind of Christianity.  So much for followers.  I think anyone that does not like him or what he preaches and stands for then they should just scroll past.  I do.  I bet Kim Kardashian has more followers on twitter.  I scroll past her too.  I am thankful that at least neither have called on their followers to perpetrate a jihad on Americans.    

---

Scroll past?  What ever are you talking about?  BTW, I don't own a TV or see stuff that comes from TV, unless it's posted to someplace like this forum (or elsewhere on the net), I don't do twitter, and I have no idea who Kim Kard..whatsit is.  

I also don't give a damn what Robertson's follows think of him, I was stating my opinion, which wasn't too broad, but rather narrow, and defined.  My opinion is that Pat Robertson doesn't really understand Christianity, and gives both Christianity and Christians a bad name by propagating the wrong message.   He may be able to quote from the bible, but he fails to grasp the the most basic of Jesus's teachings.   The New Testament and Christianity it self, rests upon those teachings, but many people with poor reading comprehension and spoon-fed hyperbole, simply do not understand.  I think Robertson falls into that category.  He's either not able to understand, or deliberately chooses not to. 

[Storm Clarence]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Storm Clarence wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

Melita, I think the problem isn't that critics don't understand Christianity, but that many self-professed Christians do not understand Christianity .  

Hence people like Pat Robertson, who gives Christians and Christianity a bad name.  (In my opinion)

 

---

I absolutely agree with your first statement.  However, the second is way too broad.  Yeah, I find him a bore, but I think *his* followers certainly don't think he gives Christianity a bad name; perhaps it is you (me included) that is ignorant to *his* kind of Christianity.  So much for followers.  I think anyone that does not like him or what he preaches and stands for then they should just scroll past.  I do.  I bet Kim Kardashian has more followers on twitter.  I scroll past her too.  I am thankful that at least neither have called on their followers to perpetrate a jihad on Americans.    

---

Scroll past?  What ever are you talking about?  BTW, I don't own a TV or see stuff that comes from TV, unless it's posted to someplace like this forum (or elsewhere on the net), I don't do twitter, and I have no idea who Kim Kard..whatsit is.  

I also don't give a damn what Robertson's follows think of him, I was stating my opinion, which wasn't too broad, but rather narrow, and defined.  My opinion is that Pat Robertson doesn't really understand Christianity, and gives both Christianity and Christians a bad name by propagating the wrong message.   He may be able to quote from the bible, but he fails to grasp the the most basic of Jesus's teachings.   The New Testament and Christianity it self, rests upon those teachings, but many people with poor reading comprehension and spoon-fed hyperbole, simply do not understand.  I think Robertson falls into that category.  He's either not able to understand, or deliberately chooses not to. 

---

Okay.

[Paul Hexem]

Wait, hold on, back up.

I killed demons, zombies, and this one floating skull last night with a chainsaw.

That makes me a sinner?

[Perrie Juran]

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wait, hold on, back up.

I killed demons, zombies, and this one floating skull last night with a chainsaw.

That makes me a sinner?

---

Those are all agents of the enemy and you may destroy them at will.

What you can't do is copulate with their corpses.

 

[Paul Hexem]

Oh, good. id software will be happy to know I can continue to play their games.

Wait... Do Nazi's count?

[Perrie Juran]

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Oh, good. id software will be happy to know I can continue to play their games.

Wait... Do Nazi's count?

---

This thread is about Religion.

That's a Political question.

[ValanStarbond]

What I find disturbing, is anyone even bothering to watch that segregated horse dung and then slinging it into a forum for trolling.

 

I believe you might recall someone saying; "you who are without sin, cast the first stone" ... and Robertson is by no means

a saint.

You have to go on what you know within yourself. Not what others are trying to tell you to believe in.

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Melita Magic wrote:

In other words that was sort of what my point was really -

why not judge all humans the same, without dragging their religious beliefs into it.

Again with Robertson he puts himself up as a leader in his own religion so, I understand - he's up on a platform, he's more visible. 

I just want people to see others as humans first,

and that religious doesn't mean hypocrisy is built in - it just means we're human above all else and all are fallible.

No matter what one's beliefs on the afterlife.

---

Melita,  I highlighted what I think is an issue, and why it's nigh impossible for non-Christians (or those without religion in general) to see Christians in that light, and it's because the Christian faith teaches that those who do not believe, are going to roast in a fiery hell for all eternity.  But,we're told,  just "believe" and then you're granted a key to the promised land of happy afterlife.   We're told that..all the time.  Our children are told that. 

So, I seriously wonder how you can expect us, those who are non-believers to accept the "

why not judge all humans the same, without dragging their religious beliefs into it."?  

  Your religion precludes us from being not judged, and being seen the same as other humans.  We, by the very act of your "faith", we're are seen as condemned to hell.  Can you understand how that it's your religious beliefs, which means your way or looking at us, and judging us, that separates us from you?

 

I see you the same as me, another human who was born and will die. The end.  But, if what you say is true, and you really believe in what the New Testament says, then you see me as someone who is going to hell..to burn for all eternity.  You also see my two sons that way.  So, sorry, if I'm not particularly open to the idea that you see all humans the same, and don't want to judge us.

You want people to see others as humans first?  Then religion needs to disappear.  Because, as long as there are ancient mythos around, that say that some of us will burn in hell for an eternity, while some others who profess to have "faith" in ancient historical stories, will be "saved", there's a problem.

---

the burning in hell is what a lot preach..but is also a key to fear people to faith in that religion..

but it fails right from the very first book in the bible..

genesis..the reason adam and eve were removed from the garden..

 

basically..they had eaten from the tree of good and evil..

so god and lucifer are there and god says ..

OMG they totally ate our apple!! we can't let them eat from the tree of life as well or they will become like one of us..

which is to live for all eternity and even worse.. without god..

so losing paradise ..god gives them clothes and sends them on their way..

because he promised them..if they ate from the tree of good and evil..they would surely die..

so now knowing good and evil..adam and eve are clothed set out and seperated from the tree of life..

the only way back to it is to enter paradise again through christ/god and eat from the tree of life..

 

the alternative is to be thrown away and taken out of the book of life ..to exist no more..

where satan/ex-lucifer and all the angels that followed him will burn forever..because they already were built to last..

where we were not..

 

 

[Paul Hexem]

Well, no. I'm not talking about Nazis politically. I'm asking if the religion thinks it's okay to kill 'em in video games.

[Sy Beck]

This only applies to Christianity (don't jump on my ass Melita - and you don't have to answer) , but if you are not allowed to bear false witness how can you declare there is a God when you can't prove it exists?  I'm no anti-christ and I acknowledge faith is a support or a crutch for some people and it has done good as well as evil, but my 3rd or 4th time in church I asked that question and I still haven't had a satisfactory answer and I did a degree in philosophy (as a module) as well.

 

[ETA] In the UK philosophy students are asked to argue and propose arguments for all beliefs and propositions, all religions are tremendously difficult to argue save Buddhism, but they never ask you to argue that  :-(

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Sy Beck wrote:

This only applies to Christianity (don't jump on my ass Melita - and you don't have to answer) , but if you are not allowed to bear false witness how can you declare there is a God when you can't prove it exists?  I'm no anti-christ and I acknowledge faith is a support or a crutch for some people and it has done good as well as evil, but my 3rd or 4th time in church I asked that question and I still haven't had a satisfactory answer and I did a degree in philosophy (as a module) as well.

 

[ETA] In the UK philosophy students are asked to argue and propose arguments for all beliefs and propositions, all religions are tremendously difficult to argue save Buddhism, but they never ask you to argue that  :-(

---

 

i would like to try a stab at it if that's ok?

 

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

that is one of the rules in that belief..

don't show up to court trying to get someone thrown in prison on a lie or untruth..

 

there is more than one type of truth in the world..

science proves this by things being a belief to be true until they are proven otherwise or until proven scientific fact or factual truth..

until then they are just a belief..which to the believer can be true to them..they have enough to go on to see it as true..

if we believe something to be true..then to us it is true.. until proven otherwise..

that is how i would try to answer that question..

 

for me it was proven otherwise..and i tell you..it is really hard to become an un-believer..it took years..