agillot wrote:
Can a frozen embryo ride in an HOV lane , Now we can change the subject .
Hmmm, I’ll look into that. 🤔
Linda From Maine wrote:
Some folks have a hard time accepting that this
free-to-use website is not also
free to be you and me UHH owner "Admin" has made it clear that no nudity is allowed anywhere on UHH except the one section designed to display it. UHH owner "Admin" has made it clear that no politics are allowed in General Chit Chat. I couldn't find any specific reference to religious content, however.
Most volunteer-managed sections have guidelines relative to their specialty (such as Black and White not allowing color) and references to courtesy and constructive feedback. I didn't see the post being discussed here, and being a current manager of Digital Artistry and former manager of Post Processing Forum, I'm not going to second-guess the AI Creation manager's decision nor say what I "might" have done.
Admin has shown a willingness to create new sections when someone steps forward to volunteer to manage - hence, our 50+ forums to date
So, a new "AI Artistry and Photography - all religions welcomed" might be a possibility.
Bottom line is UHH is a
private entity. We are guests.
Some folks have a hard time accepting that this b... (
show quote)
==============================================
Cheers
Goldstar46
George Veazey
tommystrat wrote:
Clearly you have not visited the Christian Photography section in a long time. Even a brief look would show categorically that the posts there are affirming, positive, and express a love and longing for Jesus - exactly what the section was intended to present. There has not been one hateful, accusatory or hostile posting in well over a year (which is as far back as I looked) there. But I suppose that nowadays the issue of a Christian's faith is cause for immediate rejection, fear and hatred, as is so clearly expressed in your narrow post.
Clearly you have not visited the Christian Photogr... (
show quote)
Dunno if it's "fear and hatred" but "stay off my lawn" seems appropriate! ;0)
terryMc
Loc: Arizona's White Mountains
tommystrat wrote:
But I suppose that nowadays the issue of a Christian's faith is cause for immediate rejection, fear and hatred, as is so clearly expressed in your narrow post.
"Hartford Institute estimates there are roughly 350,000 religious congregations in the United States. This estimate relies on the RCMS 2010 religious congregations census. Of those, about 314,000 are Protestant and other Christian churches, and 24,000 are Catholic and Orthodox churches." From Google Search
I don't often participate in discussions like this for this very reason—characterizing any disagreement with today's Christian Nationalists as persecution, hatred, and fear is a very old tactic. Just as rushing to the side of the billionaires who own everything and have incalculable wealth and power and claiming they are victims because a large portion of the populace believes they should pay more in taxes, so is claiming that the largest faction of the religious population is being discriminated against, hated, persecuted and worse disingenuous (to be kind) inasmuch as their beliefs already dominate the culture in our society. We have Christian prayers before public events and meetings, Christian holy days are celebrated as national holidays, no one who calls himself a church is liable for taxes.
("Taxation without representation" has always been a big deal in the U.S. Well, what about representation without taxation? Churches seek an outsized say in government but refuse to pay the price of admission.)I don't hate anyone. You can define fear in many ways, but basically, while I don't fear any religious belief, I do worry about the blatantly obvious attempts to install a Christian theocracy in the U.S. which would then mean rule by Biblical law. I worry because of the vast number of interpretations of what that kind of law would mean. We can see what it means to the Islamists who rule in various Middle Eastern countries, and it seems that while the Islamists themselves are not idealized, their form government based on their view of God's law is highly regarded.
You can argue that Islamic law is barbaric and not at all like what a Christian government would be, but they are both Abrahamic religions with a basis in the God of the Old Testament. Government rule based on the "teachings" of Jesus, who could easily be called a socialist or humanist, would never fly with today's fundamentalists who are all about denying the things that Jesus said should be freely given.
terryMc wrote:
"Hartford Institute estimates there are roughly 350,000 religious congregations in the United States. This estimate relies on the RCMS 2010 religious congregations census. Of those, about 314,000 are Protestant and other Christian churches, and 24,000 are Catholic and Orthodox churches." From Google Search
I don't often participate in discussions like this for this very reason—characterizing any disagreement with today's Christian Nationalists as persecution, hatred, and fear is a very old tactic. Just as rushing to the side of the billionaires who own everything and have incalculable wealth and power and claiming they are victims because a large portion of the populace believes they should pay more in taxes, so is claiming that the largest faction of the religious population is being discriminated against, hated, persecuted and worse disingenuous (to be kind) inasmuch as their beliefs already dominate the culture in our society. We have Christian prayers before public events and meetings, Christian holy days are celebrated as national holidays, no one who calls himself a church is liable for taxes. ("Taxation without representation" has always been a big deal in the U.S. Well, what about representation without taxation? Churches seek an outsized say in government but refuse to pay the price of admission.)
I don't hate anyone. You can define fear in many ways, but basically, while I don't fear any religious belief, I do worry about the blatantly obvious attempts to install a Christian theocracy in the U.S. which would then mean rule by Biblical law. I worry because of the vast number of interpretations of what that kind of law would mean. We can see what it means to the Islamists who rule in various Middle Eastern countries, and it seems that while the Islamists themselves are not idealized, their form government based on their view of God's law is highly regarded.
You can argue that Islamic law is barbaric and not at all like what a Christian government would be, but they are both Abrahamic religions with a basis in the God of the Old Testament. Government rule based on the "teachings" of Jesus, who could easily be called a socialist or humanist, would never fly with today's fundamentalists who are all about denying the things that Jesus said should be freely given.
"Hartford Institute estimates there are rough... (
show quote)
My personal rule is, if they demand a specific headgear, I want nothing to do with them. That includes red Maga hats.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.