Prop. 8 armageddon?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Levin

Your entire argument is premised on the fact that the Church will change its stance.

I don't think that will happen, and I think SU's argument assumes that it won't happen as well, at least in the short term.

So we're speaking past each other.

If the Church changes its stance, then of course you're right. That's easy.

The hard part is to predict what will happen if the Church doesn't change its stance, and I think the use of "centuries" is not glib -- in the next centuries, the Church will indeed be a pariah as the world comes to universally accept gay rights and gay marriage.

History tells me that the church is dynamic. Not static.

[Levin]

Reading Comprehension Syndrome -- sorry T-Blue and Flystripper suffer from it. Must be hard.

I don't think the Church will change its stance. I've said nothing, however, about whether I think it should (which makes Lebowski's name-calling ignorant).

[Levin]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

History tells me that the church is dynamic. Not static.

This is true. But your logical fallacy is that b/c the church has changed in some areas does not mean it will change in others. Issue by issue.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by Levin

Reading Comprehension Syndrome -- sorry T-Blue and Flystripper suffer from it. Must be hard.

I don't think the Church will change it's stance. I've said nothing, however, about whether I think it should (which makes Lebowski's name-calling ignorant).

How does changing two words from your post and reposting the results equate to a lack of reading comprehension?

[Levin]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

How does changing two words from your post and reposting the results equate to a lack of reading comprehension?

I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't think the Church will change its stance. There. Understand? Go read my previous posts and see if anything there is inconsistent, or whether the entire meaning of the posts could be altered by changing two words. Clearly Lebowski understood.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Levin

This is true. But your logical fallacy is that b/c the church has changed in some areas does not mean it will change in others. Issue by issue.

Had I stated it in those terms (which I didn't), then it might be a logical fallacy.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

If the Church has survived....nay...thrived.....with all of us knuckleheads on the rosters....I would dare say that the Church will be just fine.

No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing, my friends. I believe that to be true.

I disagree it's thriving now.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Levin

Reading Comprehension Syndrome -- sorry T-Blue and Flystripper suffer from it. Must be hard.

I got a good chuckle out of T-Blue's response.

Originally Posted by Levin

I don't think the Church will change its stance. I've said nothing, however, about whether I think it should (which makes Lebowski's name-calling ignorant).

OK, I'll bite. Do you think the church is on the wrong side of this issue?

If the answer is yes, go ahead and explain to me why you think they will never change positions. If the answer is no, explain to me how my name-calling is ignorant.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I disagree it's thriving now.

Of course you do, Mr. Unhallowed Hand.

(sorry, can't help myself today)

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I disagree it's thriving now.

You are just mad because the Church still loves you. And so do I.