Evidence for God from Science

FL: Back in the day when I was working with prisonners, I had this Jamaican guy with me. The Jamaican listened to a lot of music that used "The N word". I asked him, "Isn't that a derogatory term?" He said that it wasn't as long as a black person was using it but that I could never use it because it would be racist. I told him that was idiotic reasoning. His parole officer, a black woman, overheard our conversation and told us, "You are both right." So, I told her that her comment was, "sophisticated idiotic reasoning." The same thing can't be both right and wrong depending upon whom is using it.

I understand Americans and their tendency to sanitize and cover up and pretend that all is well because that is an unfortunate trait of modern American culture. It's amusing that black humorists & singers use "The N word" with impunity but if I use the same word I am branded a racist.

Double standards! Hypoocrites!

FL

Yes, there most certainly ARE double standards across SOCIETY in how such words and issues are perceived and play out. Yep, people are often hypocrites. But we're not talking here about the often-inconsistent standards of society or how various individuals might inconsistently parse out their individual perceptions and reactions to various words. NO! We're talking about what is considered by those responsible for governing and keeping harmonious discussions on THIS FORUM as to be unacceptable or potentially inflammatory words. And words commonly perceived as racist expressions are just not going to be tolerated here! I don't think FL is a racist or that he meant it in such a way. But it was carelessly flippant and potentially harmful and destructive as to the stated purposes of this forum to use such words. Again, no Christian should EVER risk - even if unintentionally/humorously - using a word (especially one with racist overtones) that has the potential to greatly anger or alienate another on this forum - whether the person reading such a post is a Christian or not. It's not a big joke to be sincerely concerned about deliberately or potentially (and unnecessarily) insulting someone. And this is a far different issue from someone taking offense at one's position on a given matter of debate.


The above is to also serve as a warning - that future use of such words will result in a temporary ban (at LEAST!).

RickD wrote:I agree with you FL. It's bad whoever uses it.

It's not bad in and of itself. It's cultural, and that's all.

Audie has used several times the word Eskimo when referring to the people of the arctic. "Eskimo" is a derogatory term because it is an Inuktitut word meaning "eaters of raw meat". The white man called the people of the arctic "Eskimo" out of disdain. The newly sanitized term is Inuit. So, while the Inuit really do eat raw meat and fermented whale blubber, just don't let on that you know. And, please, Audie, use the correct term from now because...well, just because.

Oh...and did you hear that the Washington Red Skins may have to change their name because American Indians uh, no... First Nations peoples uh, no...aboriginals uh, no...Native Americans no...no...the-people-who-used-to-inhabit-what-is-now-the-USA-before-European-invaders-came-and-took-away-their-land...those people, well, they find "Red Skins" offensive.

FL

Fl wrote:


It's not bad in and of itself. It's cultural, and that's all.

While using the N word may be cultural, it's still inappropriate. Gang violence is cultural too. But that's inappropriate.

The N word is never an appropriate word to use.

Kids in my son's school seem to be throwing the n word around like it means nothing. It just makes me cringe. They don't understand how demeaning it is.

And flying the confederate battle flag is cultural. But in proper context, the confederate battle flag symbolizes treason, slavery and racism.

So, even if people use the n word in a different context, its meaning is still one of racism.

RickD wrote:While using the N word may be cultural, it's still inappropriate. Gang violence is cultural too. But that's inappropriate. The N word is never an appropriate word to use. Kids in my son's school seem to be throwing the n word around like it means nothing. It just makes me cringe. They don't understand how demeaning it is.And flying the confederate battle flag is cultural. But in proper context, the confederate battle flag symbolizes treason, slavery and racism. So, even if people use the n word in a different context, its meaning is still one of racism.

There is a VERY BIG difference between "the N word" and all the other words of the alphabet you Americans now seek to sanitize. The difference is in the form of slavery, oppression, unequal rights, state-sanctioned ghettos/segregation, unequal job opportunities, limited education opportunities, poverty, disease, longer jail terms for N-people as well as greater hurdles to overcome when applying for a loan...the list is very looooooooooong.

I just find it amusing that you white guys want to equate the C-word with the N-word. As far as I know, C-people in the USA are favorably considered. They are comparably well-off, educated and have great outlooks for the future.

Now this:

Philip wrote:The above is to also serve as a warning - that future use of such words will result in a temporary ban (at LEAST!).

I agree wholeheartedly with your post! Please, please, add the E-word to the list! Each time Audie has used the E-word, I have been insulted and deeply distressed. As a result, I've had trouble keeping my food down and have vomited compulsively. My toilet is all gooey now and the cleaning lady won't be here until next Friday. What am I to do?

Please serve Audie with a stern warning.

Thanking you, I remain,

FL

FL, please spare us your relentless and exceptionally BORING sociological/societal lessons about the history and nuances of political correctness and widespread hypocrisy, blah, blah, blah. For our purposes here, this issue just boils down to using common sense! We all know there are certain words that highly incense an awful lot of people - words that are UNIVERSALLY detested and tend to cause great anger. So, WHY EVER say them? With YOU, it appears that you care FAR more about expressing your supposedly superior take on things and your great disdain for all things politically correct than you do about LIKELY and UNNECESSARILY offending people - many of them non-Christians who you are only ticking off. Bottom line: You need to GROW UP! And if you feel compelled to spew out words you know are likely to cause offense - then GO DO IT ELSEWHERE! Do I need to remind you that this forum's MAIN purpose is for MINISTRY and influencing people to follow Christ! There's nothing wrong with silly banter and fun, but if you want to pointlessly argue cultural and political issues or continuously risk offending others, then I suggest you go call Rush Limbaugh's call-in number. Because your attitude is absolutely killing your witness here! I would hope that would matter to you?

Maybe FL thinks that political correctness is more damaging to the people he is supposedly offending than his words? I also don't think it's terribly fair to call into question his witness and to suggest it is being damaged. It is possible it is being attacked, but damaged? I doubt that. In whose eyes? I confess that I'd be rather surprised if any other unbeliever were thinking to themselves, "You know, Jesus was starting to make sense, but FL's humor has convinced me otherwise."

My common sense says let's not throw each other under the bus.

Jac: Maybe FL thinks that political correctness is more damaging to the people he is supposedly offending than his words? I also don't think it's terribly fair to call into question his witness and to suggest it is being damaged. It is possible it is being attacked, but damaged? I doubt that. In whose eyes? I confess that I'd be rather surprised if any other unbeliever were thinking to themselves, "You know, Jesus was starting to make sense, but FL's humor has convinced me otherwise."

SERIOUSLY, Jac?!!! The problem is that FL so often just DOESN'T CARE WHAT he says or how he says it. So, Jac, you think it doesn't damage one's witness when people are first outraged by racially charged words to the point that they aren't even listening to whatever spiritual content he might include? Ever hear Paul's words on how to conduct ourselves - especially with unbelievers? Did Paul go to Mars Hill and start telling racial jokes, but then settle down with a serious spiritual context? In the REAL world - not the theoretical/philosophical world you so often treasure - but in the real world, people don't care what someone whose words they personally find repulsive have to say about most anything. We're not speaking here of someone being offensive by talking about Christ or the Gospel, but of the use of racially insensitive words. I'd say you'd best pick a better horse to bet on!

Ok, philip. Now you're being dismissive and taking a mocking tone. I want to reiterate what I said before. We ought not be throwing each other under the bus. Yes, seriously. I also want to highlight the irony of the situation. You are chastising FL for potentially inflammatory language in light of the possibility that such language might prevent people from hearing truth, and you are doing so and defending your chastisement in actually inflammatory language and actual attacks, not on unbelievers, but on your brothers in Christ.

I'm asking you not to throw me or FL or Audie or anyone under the bus. It's not helpful. No one was offended or upset at all until someone felt the need to talk about how FL's comments MIGHT be offensive. So can we stop with the attacks? Again, if we want to have a serious conversation about the appropriateness of our tones and language, that's fine. But let's not censor one another with attacks based on what might be offensive to some people, especially when no one prior to that has expressed any such offense.

Jac: what might be offensive to some people, especially when no one prior to that has expressed any such offense

So the word "Chink" MIGHT be offensive? Did you not read what Audie wrote about her own experience, of how that incensed her? Please! Are you seriously defending such language on this forum? If so, you're as clueless as FL!

No, I'm not defending it. I'm pointing out that some people are definitely offended by it, and others are not, and that therefore the language might be offensive. On the other hand, you are blatantly attacking fellow Christians. Do you not see your inconsistency? You want FL to understand inflammatory language could obscure his message so that people like Audie are unable to really hear him (a statement that I actually find to be the more offensive, but let that pass). That is, inflammatory language makes communication difficult. And then in making your argument, you do so in highly inflammatory language. Perhaps I should tell you that if you can't see the inconsistency that you are clueless. Would that sort of language make you more or less likely to hear my point to you?

edit:

I would also like to highlight the actual point I was making rather than get off on the singular issue you focused on. I'm asking you not to throw FL under the bus here. It seems like you somehow believe that by publicly attacking the person using inflammatory language (using inflammatory language yourself) that you are "saving" the Christian witness, as if attacking a brother in Christ would make someone else more likely to place their faith in Christ . . .

Jac3510 wrote:Maybe FL thinks that political correctness is more damaging to the people he is supposedly offending than his words? I also don't think it's terribly fair to call into question his witness and to suggest it is being damaged. It is possible it is being attacked, but damaged? I doubt that. In whose eyes? I confess that I'd be rather surprised if any other unbeliever were thinking to themselves, "You know, Jesus was starting to make sense, but FL's humor has convinced me otherwise."

meh..don't be concerned, Jac. I see Philip' words as nothing more than hyperbole They reek of Bollywood, not reality. He has put on his Policeman's hat and that is his right as moderator. He's just doing his job. Like the cop who gave me a ticket last week, he's more of an annoyance - on this subject - than anything else.

The USA seems to be going backwards in terms of both privacy and free speech. Political correctness is a pernicious form of censorship, far worse than the judicial kind found in most countries. With PC, the citizens shut themselves up, keep themselves quiet, pretend all is OK. And things have gotten worse under your present Administration. There is a danger here not just for the USA but for all Western nations, The rest of the Free world is in America's wake, so when you guys go down, we'll all sink.

We need a smiley of an ostrich with its head in the sand...

FL

No offense, I'm not concerned about you, FL. You're a big boy and can defend yourself. I am concerned, though, with the general tendency Christians have (including on this board) to attack each other in front of unbelievers to show how much more reasonable we are than them . . .

I'm not interested in scolding anyone. I don't want philip to attack you (or me), and I think we all--me, and you included--could be more prudent in our speech (making no comment on the rightness or wrongness of the speech itself). Yes, the US is on a dangerous trend with reference to political correctness. It's become little more than an excuse to silence opposition, a weapon of the left. Still, that doesn't make self-censorship necessarily wrong nor necessarily "giving in" to the PC garbage. You and I are responsible to Christ first and foremost. The question is what HE would say about our use of language--as we know through Paul, Jesus tends to appreciate it when we give up our liberties for the sake of others. That's not an absolute mandate, of course, but it is a guiding principle nonetheless.

And just for clarity, none of this applies only to you or philip or whomever. I fail here repeatedly, so this isn't intended as a lecture of any sort. I just don't want to see Christians brothers attacking and dismissing one another over what ought to be trivial matters.

edit:

nevermind. I am clearly the old wise one who knows EVERYTHING BOW TO MY WISDOM!!!

I'm offended when called Kiwi, or if called a GI Joe, Yank or Englishman.

Jac: "... you are blatantly attacking fellow Christians. Do you not see your inconsistency? You want FL to self-censor, and if not, you will censor him as moderator.
You want him to understand that the language he used could obscure his witness so that people like Audie are unable to really hear him (a statement that I actually find to be the more offensive, but let that pass). Your underlying premise is that inflammatory language makes communication of key points difficult. And then in making that argument, you do so in highly inflammatory language. Perhaps I should tell you that if you can't see the inconsistency that you are clueless. Would that sort of language make you more or less likely to hear my point to you?

No, Jac - what I'm attacking is FL's flippant and careless attitude that makes him think he can say whatever he wants and when he wants to ON THIS FORUM! But as this forum has rules of conduct and he has breached them. He has been warned. And I can tell you that the other mods agree. If someone finds assertively hearing what they should be told about their improper behavior, and they find that to be inflammatory, so be it. There's really not a way to sugarcoat the impropriety of such language on this forum, or criticism of the careless attitude behind it. The mods have a responsibility to how people interact on here. It's a pure no-brainer to not allow racist words to be used. Period! But FL won't own the inappropriateness of his use of the word that set this off. He wants to play it all off as some tempest over politically incorrect language, like it's all just a big joke. But it's not a big joke to some people - its really makes them very angry. And so it has no place here. It's disruptive and divisive. But he not only doesn't get that, he could totally care less. And when I initially brought up the issue, I did so rather mildly. But I got ticked off when he tried to play it off as if I am trying to be the politically correct policeman and wrongfully censor him, while acting like it's all just one big joke. And then you defend him over something so wrong? Apparently, you don't see the problem with what he did. But, so far, you are the ONLY one. Focus on what he DID, not on how he was criticized for it!

BTW, Jac, since when are you so concerned about another Christian being publicly criticized on this forum - I've seen you do that aplenty!

Ok