Renewed Faith - Secret to our recent success?

[Joe Bagadonuts]

How heartwarming that Big Al can let down his defenses both on and off the court.

/thread
Repped!

 

[Deleted member 848]

What is he? Jewish?

Read in an article that he is Muslim, like Memo. Article could be wrong though, for all I know. Dont remember the link off of the top of my head

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Read in an article that he is Muslim, like Memo. Article could be wrong though, for all I know. Dont remember the link off of the top of my head

Hmmm, didn't know that about Okur.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Damn .. and I thought he was Kentuckian .. goes to show ya'.

 

[Xsy]

The thought of god being involved with sports cracks me the **** up.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I'm not a religious person myself, but if religion in this case is a source of bonding/camaraderie, I'm all for it. In my experience, however, religion is as often, if not more so, a source of divisiveness than harmony. As long as, I suppose, they have a live and let live perspective on belief/faith, then it might work. But throw in an aggressive, holier-than-though evangelical in the mix, then it's more worrisome. (As an aside, I'm heartily sick of agressive evangelicals showing off their 'faith' in sports culture and sporting events. I don't care about people's religious beliefs (as long as they don't try to impose them on me), and I don't want to hear about them or see showy ostentatious displays. To anyone out there who believes that the creator of the universe--to the extent he exists--gives a crapoloa about the outcome of a sporting event, grow up, get some perspective, and quit being so damn ego-centric.)

 

[NAOS]

this explains Jefferson's turn-the-other-cheek defense.

 

[Double Negative]

I'm not a religious person myself, but if religion in this case is a source of bonding/camaraderie, I'm all for it. In my experience, however, religion is as often, if not more so, a source of divisiveness than harmony. As long as, I suppose, they have a live and let live perspective on belief/faith, then it might work. But throw in an aggressive, holier-than-though evangelical in the mix, then it's more worrisome. (As an aside, I'm heartily sick of agressive evangelicals showing off their 'faith' in sports culture and sporting events. I don't care about people's religious beliefs (as long as they don't try to impose them on me), and I don't want to hear about them or see showy ostentatious displays. To anyone out there who believes that the creator of the universe--to the extent he exists--gives a crapoloa about the outcome of a sporting event, grow up, get some perspective, and quit being so damn ego-centric.)

What I REALLY don't want is this to become part of this team's greater narrative. Like Tebow and Lin, where I feel like the religious thing has overshadowed their accomplishments/shortcomings on the court/field.

This team is awesome to watch, and has played well as of late without a "superstar." That should be how the public/press view them. Not as a "christian-based" team as one poster referred to them, which made me a lil' queasy.

 

[franklin]

Read in an article that he is Muslim, like Memo. Article could be wrong though, for all I know. Dont remember the link off of the top of my head

That explains both of them praying to the East on the sidelines...

 

[BluesRocker]

Are they Mormons now?

 

[Jazz Spazz]

He needs to pray harder.

It's not always about praying harder, sometimes we need to pray smarter.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I've always felt that a team that prays the most to a Christian God to help them, and make the other team lose is, 100% the winner of the championship every year. God hears every prayer, adds them up, and the top 8 praying teams from each conference make the playoffs, then God takes the 2 best praying teams from each conference and pits them in a best of seven Finals Playoff, or "Pray-off game", if you will.

The team that spends the most minutes per player praying then wins the championship. This has happened since the dawn of time. It's nice to see we're starting to finally figure it out as a team.

The team that prays together, stays together.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Everyone is different and have the right to believe in whatever they feel is right. All I ask is that you be respectful.

I'm with Nick on this one. No need to be rude, when you know for a fact it will offend many people, let alone one person on the board.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I'm with Nick on this one. No need to be rude, when you know for a fact it will offend many people, let alone one person on the board.

I agree in principle with the observation that we ought to be respectful of other's beliefs.

I disagree, however, that one should refrain from saying something because it will offend many people, let alone one single person (especially not one single person--that's virtually impossible to achieve, unless you want rote, boring, superficial discussion--we can only reasonably control it so far if someone chooses to take offense).

In my view, criticizing benign characteristics that say nothing about what or who a person is by themselves (e.g., race, ethnicity) is always inappropriate. On the other hand, beliefs/actions are totally fair game. (Unless one uses beliefs/actions as thinly veiled code words for race--hear that CJ?) This doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to be respectful when commenting on other people's beliefs, but beliefs have far too great an impact not only on those who share the beliefs and on those who do not share them, to make them off limits to criticism. Just because a belief emanates from a religiously based faith, does not privilege it from other beliefs emanating from other sources. Again, however, mutual respect is generally preferable, but it cuts both ways. I'll respect your religious beliefs to the extent you keep them to yourself or discuss them when appropriate, but make a ostentatious show of them (e.g., Tim Tebow) or try to impose them on me (e.g., Rick Santorum or Utah Legislature), then I feel less constrained by rules of forbearance and politeness.

 

[NUMBERICA]

What I REALLY don't want is this to become part of this team's greater narrative. Like Tebow and Lin, where I feel like the religious thing has overshadowed their accomplishments/shortcomings on the court/field.

This team is awesome to watch, and has played well as of late without a "superstar." That should be how the public/press view them. Not as a "christian-based" team as one poster referred to them, which made me a lil' queasy.

Thank you.

 

[ONE LOVE]

I agree in principle with the observation that we ought to be respectful of other's beliefs.

I disagree, however, that one should refrain from saying something because it will offend many people, let alone one single person (especially not one single person--that's virtually impossible to achieve, unless you want rote, boring, superficial discussion--we can only reasonably control it so far if someone chooses to take offense).

In my view, criticizing benign characteristics that say nothing about what or who a person is by themselves (e.g., race, ethnicity) is always inappropriate. On the other hand, beliefs/actions are totally fair game. (Unless one uses beliefs/actions as thinly veiled code words for race--hear that CJ?) This doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to be respectful when commenting on other people's beliefs, but beliefs have far too great an impact not only on those who share the beliefs and on those who do not share them, to make them off limits to criticism. Just because a belief emanates from a religiously based faith, does not privilege it from other beliefs emanating from other sources. Again, however, mutual respect is generally preferable, but it cuts both ways. I'll respect your religious beliefs to the extent you keep them to yourself or discuss them when appropriate, but make a ostentatious show of them (e.g., Tim Tebow) or try to impose them on me (e.g., Rick Santorum or Utah Legislature), then I feel less constrained by rules of forbearance and politeness.

But not if it leads to conflicts/violence.. Love and acceptance should still be the common language in my opinion..

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I agree in principle with the observation that we ought to be respectful of other's beliefs.

I disagree, however, that one should refrain from saying something because it will offend many people, let alone one single person (especially not one single person--that's virtually impossible to achieve, unless you want rote, boring, superficial discussion--we can only reasonably control it so far if someone chooses to take offense).

In my view, criticizing benign characteristics that say nothing about what or who a person is by themselves (e.g., race, ethnicity) is always inappropriate. On the other hand, beliefs/actions are totally fair game. (Unless one uses beliefs/actions as thinly veiled code words for race--hear that CJ?) This doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to be respectful when commenting on other people's beliefs, but beliefs have far too great an impact not only on those who share the beliefs and on those who do not share them, to make them off limits to criticism. Just because a belief emanates from a religiously based faith, does not privilege it from other beliefs emanating from other sources. Again, however, mutual respect is generally preferable, but it cuts both ways. I'll respect your religious beliefs to the extent you keep them to yourself or discuss them when appropriate, but make a ostentatious show of them (e.g., Tim Tebow) or try to impose them on me (e.g., Rick Santorum or Utah Legislature), then I feel less constrained by rules of forbearance and politeness.

To me you are saying you agree in principle, but not in action.

I don't think someone should take the Lord's name in vain when they know it is very offensive to people that read posts here. That was my point. I agree that I don't think a person's religion should be shoved in someones face either, to go along with the whole Tebow and any other sports figure that makes a public display of it. Religions views and thanks can be given and shown in private.

My post was about this board specifically, and not the world in general though it could apply. I don't find it rote or boring, or superficial if a poster here decided not to take the Lords name in vain in a post, when they can choose to express themselves in a different manner. There are plenty of filtered words that would be less offensive to me.

That's all I was saying. There can be very good discussions, and have been, without the use of offensive words or language. I try for the most part not to be preachy on here unless it is part of the discussion. I don't hound people too much to keep their filthy and nasty talk and innuendo to themselves, and I don't post things if I know it will be truly offensive to them. I let most stuff go, but for me taking the Lords name in vain crosses the line.

Just my opinion, take it with a grain of salt I guess, because it seems it doesn't bother too many people.

 

[JimLes]

People get offended entirely too easily. The whole reason why we have the concept of a profanity is that some people just need words that will offend them. It's like some sort of a reassuring purification thing for them.

You can't say that your faith is strong and then get offended when someone makes fun of your religion. It's like saying you trust your wife completely, yet you get jealous when she shows too much interest in what a waiter has to say.

 

[Dr. Jones]

People get offended entirely too easily. The whole reason why we have the concept of a profanity is that some people just need words that will offend them. It's like some sort of a reassuring purification thing for them.

You can't say that your faith is strong and then get offended when someone makes fun of your religion. It's like saying you trust your wife completely, yet you get jealous when she shows too much interest in what a waiter has to say.

Damn good post

 

[Jazz Spazz]

People get offended entirely too easily. The whole reason why we have the concept of a profanity is that some people just need words that will offend them. It's like some sort of a reassuring purification thing for them.

You can't say that your faith is strong and then get offended when someone makes fun of your religion. It's like saying you trust your wife completely, yet you get jealous when she shows too much interest in what a waiter has to say.

This is very different than someone making fun of my religion. That doesn't bother me in the least. I can agree on that point.

I am 100% less offended by "swear words" or what people call profanity than I am by taking the Lords name in vain. You are also 100% wrong in that some people just need words that will offend them. Some people just feel the need to treat something others feel is sacred with abuse, irreverence, or contempt. You don't say that if you are not showing your disregard and contempt for that person/deity.

Your example is flawed. It's more like saying you love your wife, and standing up for her when somebody says bad things about her. I would say if you did not stand up for her you did not really love her, just as if I did not say something about taking the Lords name in vain offending me would show my lack of faith. I am showing my strong faith by standing up for something I think has high value to my faith. For the most part I let things go, but it does not lessen my faith to say something about it. There are times when you need to turn the other cheek (most of the time), but there are moments when you need to braid the whip.