Evolution

jdhdiggs

Demiurge wrote:

I really don't know who you're trying to convince here. The faithful that they're wrong, or reflecting on your own insecurities in knowing you are. Once again, you're the one who has everything to worry about. At least I'm operating with a percentage that's above 0%.

I don't think he's trying to convince anyone of anything beyond that how much smarter and more intellectual he is than anyone else and that's it. Just like every other thread he's in. :rolleyes: You can tell he's quoting other peoples material because he doesn't understand it.

unc2701

jdhdiggs wrote:

I don't think he's trying to convince anyone of anything beyond that how much smarter and more intellectual he is than anyone else and that's it. Just like every other thread he's in. :rolleyes: You can tell he's quoting other peoples material because he doesn't understand it.

No, I'm clarifying my point that the gospels (the accepted history of the teaching of christ) lack instruction on the nature of christianity... or evidence that christ wanted to establish a religion. As for quoting other people, well, I guess you just came off a dig in the dead sea... Me, I'm pulling from memory on the courses in early christianity and comparitive religion I took in college. Yeah, some of it's probably a bit off- it's been a few years. Maybe you can fill me in.

ps.
I like the way you say things like "Not too many errors which is good, lot of peices left out..." like you knew all this ****.

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

No, I'm clarifying my point that the gospels (the accepted history of the teaching of christ) lack instruction on the nature of christianity... or evidence that christ wanted to establish a religion.

Again, sounds like you've never even picked up a New Testament.

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

Again, sounds like you've never even picked up a New Testament.

Yeah 18 years of church just about every day does that :rolleyes:

But you've been reading the Gospels more recently, so enlighten me. I'm listening. The early christians were confused about this, too.

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

But you've been reading the Gospels more recently, so enlighten me.

I think it'd do more good for you to read it yourself.

unc2701

Damn! You are good at this! I should have seen it two days ago, I'm out. You win.

Demiurge

unc2701 wrote:

Yeah 18 years of church just about every day does that :rolleyes:

You're not the only person I know who had church shoved down their throats all during their formative years. I see a lot of people that react in the exact same manner as it seems you have. In fact, you might find we're not as far apart on that as you think, although I never denied the existance of a God. The hurdle was watching hypocrisy, lies, fear, and so on and seperating the religion from the error of man and accepting a spiritual relationship with God. I'm taking a risk in that, and I know it, but it's better than saying no God exists, and that everything is equal.

The more you post, the more clear it is that your enemy is the Catholic Church -- not religion. Instead of seeing the belief in a diety as ****, maybe see the Catholic church as ****. There's more out there than that. A lot of people have done that, which explains the raging popularity of the non-denominational churches. You're taking it to an extreme, which is fine, so long as you're not actually holding it against the faithful -- they're really no different than you other than that they believe they're actually living for something.

Man may always let you down, faith may only in death.

cmy330go

Let's try to keep our cool guys.:cool:

I for one would like to see this thread stay open and civil.:)

unc2701

That was a far more thoughtful post than I'm used to from you Demi, (I appreciate that), but ultimately wrong. Of christian religions, I'm align myself the most with the beliefs of the catholic faith (big surprise) and really don't hold anything against them. Oddly enough, it was mormonism that put me over the edge. The father of one of my friends in high school was a pretty famous biochemist (he was in lorenzo's oil, if you saw that movie) and also a mormon. They'll very unabashedly tell you their beliefs, if you ask... I'll leave it to you guys to look into that, but here was this very intelligent man who was totally down with some ideas that most people would call outrageous. Blew my mind. Then I started thinking about the stories of my own religion and well, from an outside perspective they don't hold up too well either.

Anyhow, as you've noticed I've put this discussion in terms of christianity & catholicism, because that's what I know well. Contrary to what jdh thinks, i restrict myself to things I know. As for my actual beliefs, I'm neither agnostic nor atheist. I don't deny god, and an agnostic would tell you that we can never know... but I imagine there's some **** that could go down that would make me a believer. In the meantime, I find it hard to believe that an all-knowing, all-powerful entity really cares if we believe in him. Sounds kinda special-olympics, if you know what I mean.

I don't think that most people really need commandments or religion to tell them what's right or wrong. A little introspective and 99% of the time you KNOW, without a bible or a preacher. Live your life doing right, that's all it takes.

PhantomOG

unc2701 wrote:

I don't think that most people really need commandments or religion to tell them what's right or wrong. A little introspective and 99% of the time you KNOW, without a bible or a preacher. Live your life doing right, that's all it takes.

I don't buy that for a second. You and practically everyone else in the world was raised in a society of religious beliefs, or at a minimum, a society of laws derived from religious beliefs. To think that has no effect on someone's "inherent" belief of right or wrong is ridiculous.

Just take a look at different societies today and you can see many examples of accepted or "right" behaviour in one society seen as horribly "wrong" in others.

brettw22

Demiurge wrote:

It's just a faith, and shouldn't be threatening to you unless it's infringing on you.

Religion/religious people encroach/infringe on peoples lives every day (both religious and non-religious people). It's also not a threat......it's irritating as ****......

My issue is a church/state one, but i'll leave that well outside this thread.....

Demiurge

brettw22 wrote:

Religion/religious people encroach/infringe on peoples lives every day (both religious and non-religious people). It's also not a threat......it's irritating as ****......

My issue is a church/state one, but i'll leave that well outside this thread.....

Speaking for America...religion doesn't, society does. Society deems what is right and wrong in public, not religion. The people within that society might (and do) use religion as a guide. You can choose to or not to subsribe to religious doctrine -- you can't choose to ignore societal law without going to jail or getting a fine. We don't have a state sponsored religion, but we certainly have a society built on many religious principles. If you don't like it there's always a stage for you to make the change, and if society agrees with you so it will be. Telling religious people they can't speak about their religion in public isn't the answer.

It's freedom of religion, not freedom from it.

brettw22

I'm not saying that religious people can't talk about it all they want.......but don't use those beliefs to govern against people because of what YOU subscribe to....

My freedom should allow me to live withOUT the mandate that YOUR beliefs trump mine......

PhantomOG

"Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."

John Adams
(1735-1826) Founding Father, 2nd US President
Source: Oct. 11, 1798; Address to the military


a seemingly unwelcome perspective by some

brettw22

That's not the issue........it's WHOSE belief system is trumpeted as being the supreme guideline that everyone should follow is what I have issue with......

audiobliss

brettw22 wrote:

Religion/religious people encroach/infringe on peoples lives every day (both religious and non-religious people). It's also not a threat......it's irritating as ****......

My issue is a church/state one, but i'll leave that well outside this thread.....

So you're saying that Christians infringe on the right of society in general? And that society in general suffers from having a Christian ideology shoved on them? That's interesting.

In today's world where numerous television shows promote homosexuality and same-sex marriages; every other show is chock full of extra-marital sex; the list of words banned from TV is rapidly disappearing (if it hasn't already); evolution is taught in public schools as fact while Christianity, if mentioned, is handled as myth or, at best, purely faith; children's books are full of content specifically designed to corrupt morals and values by making kids accept and embrace homosexuality without them even realizing they've been faced with the issue; social dress, conduct, and behavior are absolutely appauling, in general; and there is NO respect for ANYone over the age of 40, and authority is for the wimps....and I could go on and on....and you're telling me that in a world like this, that Christianity is infringing on society?!

Wow. I must have missed the news flash.

MacLeod

I think what Brett is getting at is the judgemental attitude you find so prevalant in religious people. Like I said earlier, if you dont agree with them, youre not just wrong but a bad person as well!

My in-laws are uberreligious and youve never seen a more judgemental group in your life!! They have turned against their own family because they werent living the "Christian way"!! I wont give details but trust me, this has happened twice since Ive been part of the family!

I have never understood why you cant have both. I am not religious but I firmly believe in the morals and values taught in Christianity. I think theyre the best in the world and a BIG part of why this country is what it is. But to Christians, Im a sinner! Im a bad person. Because I dont belive like you do. Thats crap.

Present company excepted of course.

Demiurge

MacLeod wrote:

I think what Brett is getting at is the judgemental attitude you find so prevalant in religious people. Like I said earlier, if you dont agree with them, youre not just wrong but a bad person as well!

My in-laws are uberreligious and youve never seen a more judgemental group in your life!! They have turned against their own family because they werent living the "Christian way"!! I wont give details but trust me, this has happened twice since Ive been part of the family!

I have never understood why you cant have both. I am not religious but I firmly believe in the morals and values taught in Christianity. I think theyre the best in the world and a BIG part of why this country is what it is. But to Christians, Im a sinner! Im a bad person. Because I dont belive like you do. Thats crap.

Present company excepted of course.

Sounds more like hard line Catholics to me, and even then you don't need to be around them. There are hypocrites in every walk of life, and I think you know that. The Catholic church is full of problems, and people are (and have been) leaving in droves. Those that stay are either part of the problem or have managed to still follow their RELIGION rather than the guiding bodies (Men & Women) within it.

To put it in a better perspective it's like Islam -- there's a vast difference between Osama Bin Laden and that of a Muslim serving in our own military, wouldn't you agree?

If someone is judging you tell them to eff off. Why be shaken by someones judgement of you? How would you react to a member of the KKK calling you a piece of ****? The world requires a thick skin, and I'd definitely stand up for someone getting undue ridicule for things they can't help or didn't ask for.

aaharvel

My view on Organized Religion: You're a good person and are very special. As long as you think like me, and believe what I believe in. How convenient is that.. :rolleyes: And regarding Athiesm: How can you say you don't believe in something? Doesn't that mean you DO believe in something?

I'm proud to be Agnostic. I think there's a detrimental flaw in Atheism, yet on the flipside I don't think we're intelligent enough to prove that a higher power exists beyond manuscripts that we write ourselves. I think it's a security blanket we make so we don't have to feel lost and alone in life when bad things happen to us.

imo Truth doesn't equal Fact. Faith doesn't equal Reason. Beyond fascinating storytelling, I don't take the Bible, Quran, or any religous manuscript that seriously, and especially from a historical perspective. All good intentions aside, there's more flip-flopping in organized religion than there is in a John Kerry campaign drive. There's also just as much hate filled IMMORAL rheortic from organized religion as there was from the 3rd Reich and Stalin.

Religious people can have their opinions, the athiests can have theirs, and I'll have mine. And there's nothing wrong with that. Other than for the intention to provoke strong reactions from either side, this argument is pointless because no-one is going to convert anyone to anything, all it's going to do is piss people off about an issue that no-one here can manipulate, but for some reason they think they can.

If my beliefs or this person's beliefs or that person's beliefs chap your **** that much, I think it's time to take a long look in the mirror and find who it is that you are. Screw this moralistic babysitting charade. Last time I checked this country wasn't founded on a religious theocracy. From the perspective of God or a higher power, I'd prefer to worry about my own life then to go out of my way and tell the world how they should live theirs (conveniently the same way I do nonetheless). Imo There's nothing more facist or hypocritical.

brettw22

You can't argue for freedom of choice, then tell someone that you've chosen something for/against them. What you want is a mandate that YOUR decision is what's more important than mine........news flash......it's not.

AB, your examples of what's on tv or on the radio are ridiculous. If you don't like what you see on tv, or in a movie, or on the radio, you CHOOSE to change the channel. I also have the choice to flip right past the 700 club or any other channels that I don't want to watch. CHOICE. The bottom line is they're there, and your option instead of being "subjected to the content" is to choose content you wish to watch instead. I haven't sought out legislation to try and prevent you from watching your 'acceptable' content because it's not right for me to tell you what you can or cannot watch......get it?

I couldn't care less what peoples judgemental attitude is of me personally....What I do care about is why someone feels they have more of a right to mandate/legislate what I am or am not able to view, listen to, or do in my life based on THEIR particular set of morals, thoughts, or whatever. (no, this isn't an arguement for a higher speed limit)

aaharvel

right on.

Demiurge

brettw22 wrote:

You can't argue for freedom of choice, then tell someone that you've chosen something for/against them. What you want is a mandate that YOUR decision is what's more important than mine........news flash......it's not.

AB, your examples of what's on tv or on the radio are ridiculous. If you don't like what you see on tv, or in a movie, or on the radio, you CHOOSE to change the channel. I also have the choice to flip right past the 700 club or any other channels that I don't want to watch. CHOICE. The bottom line is they're there, and your option instead of being "subjected to the content" is to choose content you wish to watch instead. I haven't sought out legislation to try and prevent you from watching your 'acceptable' content because it's not right for me to tell you what you can or cannot watch......get it?

I couldn't care less what peoples judgemental attitude is of me personally....What I do care about is why someone feels they have more of a right to mandate/legislate what I am or am not able to view, listen to, or do in my life based on THEIR particular set of morals, thoughts, or whatever. (no, this isn't an arguement for a higher speed limit)

So perverts should be allowed to look at, watch, or participate in kiddie ****? Who said it was illegal? Aren't we infringing on the rights of the perverted? Like it or not it we live under the societal standards that the elected majority agrees upon, and we're the ones who send them there. What does that have to do with religion?

Like always, outrage only exists when it's your "rights" being trampled on. People claim a lot of infringement of rights they don't really have, at least in this country.

unc2701

Hijack in 5...4...3..2...


So, this has been bugging me for awhile- why aren't there more titties on TV? Seriously. If you followed me around with a camera for a day, I'd get a NC-17 most days. I see full frontal nudity every time I take a piss, shower with the wife most mornings, get laid most evenings, but is any of this on TV? Nope. But if you want to show a shooting on TV, go right ahead. I've seen more dead bodies and nasty aftermath of violence than most (working in a hospital will do that), but I've seen waaaaaaaaaaaaay more ****, **** & ****.

We need more nudity and less violence- I'm starting a petition, who's on board?

cfrizz

To Andrew & Brett I say a big AMEN!!!!

cfrizz

Just move to Canada or any European country. They love nudity & get flipped out when they see our violence!:D

unc2701 wrote:

Hijack in 5...4...3..2...


So, this has been bugging me for awhile- why aren't there more titties on TV? Seriously. If you followed me around with a camera for a day, I'd get a NC-17 most days. I see full frontal nudity every time I take a piss, shower with the wife most mornings, get laid most evenings, but is any of this on TV? Nope. But if you want to show a shooting on TV, go right ahead. I've seen more dead bodies and nasty aftermath of violence than most (working in a hospital will do that), but I've seen waaaaaaaaaaaaay more ****, **** & ****.

We need more nudity and less violence- I'm starting a petition, who's on board?

aaharvel

Demiurge wrote:

Like always, outrage only exists when it's your "rights" being trampled on. People claim a lot of infringement of rights they don't really have, at least in this country.

I disagree with the first sentence. Last time I checked I'm not African American, ****, or a woman. Neither were millions of Americans who clamored for civil rights, equal rights for homosexuals based on the argument that the Constitution says "All men are created equal." Not "all straight white men are created equal." And let's not forget the big one: slavery. I remember a very tall white guy by the name of Abe Lincoln not only took a country to war with itself, but gave the ultimate sacrifice, his life to make sure that something as grotesque as slavery would never happen again in a country that calls itself a democracy.

As for your second sentence- you're absolutely right, and I think it's great. Often times, most of the time, those who are discriminated against don't have a voice. If others didn't step up to **** and hollar, we would still have drinking fountains, restrooms, bus seats and restaurant tables for white people and black people. Hell, maybe even Hispanic people too. Women still wouldn't be allowed outside of the home to do anything but cook and clean, which brings me to the subjective meaning of what is moral and what is not. The perception vs. reality. If Christianity is supposed to be about true, universal compassion and love (not just wanting to mold someone in their own image), then wouldn't most if not all Christians be outraged if injustices were done to people different from themselves? I would hope so.

brettw22

Demi, there's a HUGE difference between sociatal crimes and religious moral based. Don't go so far outside the lines to justify a point........

Airplay355

Comparing kiddie **** to TV shows is crazy guys. People aren't being emotionally scared as they make a movie, they are getting paid millions. That argument holds no water. You may have freedom of speech and freedom to watch what you want, but that doesn't make it right to hurt people (kids) and then watch it later on.

How come sex, T/A, spanking your monkey, and all that is immoral? Just wondering, because I honestly don't know.

Does it just make you a "bad" person or something?

unc2701

I know exactly what this thread needs:

http://attu.blogspot.com/2006/09/my-new-girlfriend.html

Demiurge

Airplay355 wrote:

Comparing kiddie **** to TV shows is crazy guys. People aren't being emotionally scared as they make a movie, they are getting paid millions. That argument holds no water. You may have freedom of speech and freedom to watch what you want, but that doesn't make it right to hurt people (kids) and then watch it later on.

How come sex, T/A, spanking your monkey, and all that is immoral? Just wondering, because I honestly don't know.

Does it just make you a "bad" person or something?

It's only immoral to you if you go against your own beliefs, right? You certainly may be viewed as immoral in the eyes of others, or more importantly society as a whole. There's certain sects of religions that believe they have the right to kill you for not being part of it, but you're so offended by thoughts, and verbiage? That's strange to me....