The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums
-
Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community
In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
If you do not have an account, please register.
REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your InfoPLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.
Wisdom of Bill Maher
- Thread starter Rand
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2005
- Posts
- 36,124
- Reaction score
- 15,399
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,576
- Points
- 113
I fear he's making the same mistake the hater bigots do: asking that the actions of the government conform to some religion.
I watch Bill every week .........
this was IMO one of his weaker bits
hating on Christians is sort of a habit with him
and this wasn't good or funny
and categorizing all Christians as .........
is lame
he didn't get that many laughs actually
not as many as usual
and did he ever hear of ....... "an eye for an eye"
not one of Bill's finer moments
this was IMO one of his weaker bits
hating on Christians is sort of a habit with him
and this wasn't good or funny
and categorizing all Christians as .........
is lame
he didn't get that many laughs actually
not as many as usual
and did he ever hear of ....... "an eye for an eye"
not one of Bill's finer moments
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,576
- Points
- 113
Where was the hating?
Where did he categorize all Christians?
What does that have to do with being Christian?
He hit on points that Christians should be hearing from the pulpit. The triumphalism that passes for Christianity in many, if not most, of today's "evangelical" churches needs to be jabbed and made uncomfortable.
he belittle "Christians" constantly
by grouping them all as one - one minded - and his patronizing tone of voice
in the bible is "an eye for an eye" - just because christians might think taking out OBL is a good thing ........... an eye for an eye
he refers to all christians constantly as if they all believe the same thing
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,576
- Points
- 113
He didn't belittle anyone in that clip.
"An eye for an eye" is something Jesus specifically disses.
He didn't refer to all Christians as if they believe the same thing.
Next?
Not really.
He said "if you do this" or "if you are for this" a lot of times.
He does make fun of religion a lot but he did not generalize all Christians here by a long shot.
he did
he's a patronizing prick sometimes - and he was here
he refers to "christians" throughout - as if .......
an eye for an eye is biblical
and dead on
next?
is that the sound u hear when auditioning for the part of a true blue libertarian? *
* a distant memory
You must be hard of hearing. He refers to certain people calling themselves Christians that have certain viewpoints on the issues he was mentioning. That is a subset of all Christians.
Epic fail.
Matthew 5: 38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
"Eye for an eye" was the illustrated wrong thing to do.
laikaNYC
JUB Addict
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Posts
- 2,449
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Claiming that all Christians have a neurological disorder is considered belittlement
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6980984/ns/msnbc_tv-about_msnbc_tv/t/scarborough-country-feb/
Joshua_me
IntoxicatedwithHunkiness
Bill Maher is one of the last honest and intelligent voices we have on American television.
The above clip may sting a bit, but nothing he said was inaccurate, and at no time did he lump all Christians together.
Next...
The above clip may sting a bit, but nothing he said was inaccurate, and at no time did he lump all Christians together.
Next...
And as you can see for yourself, even on this thread alone, those very same people who are uncomfortable want to slam the messenger, while never examining their own hypocrisy. That's why those evangelical churches also don't talk about this from the pulpit. They know donations will dry up, and the lay class will demand a new messenger. A messenger that will tell them what they want to hear. Not all that different than American politicians really.
Um...that pretty much is the definition of a Christian, a belief in Jesus Christ.
The relevant point was that he did not lump them all together as people that believe the same thing politically on the point he was making, I don't see how you can be a Christian though if you do not believe in Jesus Christ.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,576
- Points
- 113
Precisely on target.
Hard-left?
What he did humorously is actually (theologically) conservative Christian preaching that ought to be coming from the pulpits of 'evangelical' churches on a regular basis. While Maher is occasionally an idiot, here he was a better Christian preacher than most who stand in the pulpits on Sundays.
As for most (self-proclaimed) Christians not being Christians, he's in excellent theological company there. In fact he's echoing a theme of St. Paul's where in a number of places he uses an "if" -- if you are in Christ, if you do have faith, etc. It's part of the point behind the Apostle's admonition to "examine yourself", and "let him who thinks he stands take heed, lest he fall".
On a more mundane level, Maher's critique is very much like that of a number of later church fathers against Christians who attended the gladiatorial games in Rome (and other cities). They are not themselves committing violence, but they are cheering it on -- and that carries with it the same guilt as doing it, according to Jesus. So while Maher is on questionable ground when he implies that the government ought to behave in a manner expected of individual Christians, he is on very solid ground when he targets what the New Testament calls "the lusts of the flesh", and tells Christians that they are not Christians if they eagerly ignore those teachings of Christ -- not that they aren't Christians, but that insofar as they submit to those 'lusts', they aren't, and thus fall into the group Paul says will be saved, but "as through fire".
To evangelical Christians and faux conservatives, the real offense here is that Maher is doing something that has been considered key by 9theologically0 conservative Christians down through the ages: calling people to account for their sins. Today's 'evangelicals' agree that they're sinners, in the abstract, but being called on their actual and specific sins generally infuriates them.
And that, too, is in aid of Maher's point: that fury is not of Christ. If you get furious at being called on your sins, you are not Christians. For all his joking, Maher, a non-Christian, has spoken here from the heart of the New Testament.
Was pretty good.
One of my favorites was:
"I'm not sure John Boehner is really a man. He wears a lot of makeup and cries all the time. I think I might need to see his long form penis to be sure".
