|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted July 20, 2009 01:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You are spamming this board, Elodin. You are spamming it because the grounds on which you are arguing are DEFINED as being equal for everyone.
Your stated religious belief is that all beliefs are unreasonable. That is your religion. So how are you not "spamming" the board according to your definition?
For me there is no such thing as a "religious" belief and a "secular" belief. I live only one life. I do not live a religious life and a secular life. I believe in God. God is part of my life.
Moreover, I very often use arguments that no one can call religious. You seem to reject them too. Like it being a scientific fact that a fetus is alive (the cells of dead things don't multiply) and human (the product of human reproduction and has human DNA.)
Quote:
Therefore, if you for example believe that homosexuality is wrong BECAUSE GOD SAID IT'S SIN, than it's SPAMMING, because when someone else says MY GOD does NOT say it, therefore it's NOT wrong, both opinions are completely equally valid or unvalid (whether you believe different or not).
No, it is not spamming for me to express my beliefs. You certainly are free in expressing your religious beliefs. If me expressing my beliefs is spam you expressing yours is spam.
Oh, I don't go around condemning homosexuals. I have a friend who is a homosexual. I don't think I am better than he is. But when asked if it is a sin or not I will certainly say that the Bible says homosexual conduct is sin. We must all repent of our sins.
It is valid for any person to have any opinion but all opinions are not equally true. You can believe that 2 + 3 = 18 but that does make your belief equally valid to the answer "5." But it is your right to believe that the answer is 18.
Quote:
Therefore, since a decision will have to be found how we handle things in society we have to find OTHER reasons to allow or forbid it. Reasons that are valid NO MATTER of religion.
Society has a right to set moral standards. Most laws are based on the majority setting a moral standard. Not stealing, not killing, ect. Everyone is free to lobby for a change in laws. And laws do change over time. Adultery used to be punishable by prison (and still is in some places.) But many places have made adultery no longer a crime.
Quote:
So EVERYONE with a religiously motivated opinion about an issue is of course entitled to speak their opinion, but since it is ultimately based on the opinion the highest authority has about the issue, a debate makes no sense and continuing to hammer the same point over and over again is spamming.
It is your opinion that all beliefs are unreasonable and you certainly state that notion over and over again. I would call that opinion a religiously motivated opinion.
I have no idea what you mean by "it is ultimately based on the opinion the highest authority has about the issue." My beliefs are not based on what some religious authority figure's opinions are. I respect my spiritual leaders but I follow Christ.
Quote:
And my understanding should be as 'true' as any other persons
Everyone has a right to have his own opinion. But not opinions are equally true.
For example, Let's say you said the Bible says that we must all paint ourselves blue and dance naked in the moonlight. You have the right to believe that but your belief would not be true. Nowhere in the Bible is such a thing said.
Quote:
Maybe having a kid had a mellowing effect, maybe not. Maybe he just matured, maybe not. Why the change I don't know, but there was a change in attitude.
No, there was a change in Covenants. The Old Covenant was to be in place only until the Christ died for our sins. Jesus established the New Covenant. The Old Covenant prophets predicted the coming of he New Covenant.
The Old Covenant civil punishment for sin was because Israel was a nation. They were to be a holy nation of priests to spread the knowledge of God to the world. A theocracy. Jews did not travel around the world looking for sinners to punish. Sin was punished in the borders of Israel. All Israelites took a vow to obey the Law and recited the punishments for breaking the Law.
The church is not a physical nation and has no civil punishment for sin. The moral laws are the same, but the ceremonial laws of the Old Covenant have no New Covenant counterparts.
Quote:
Now keep in mind that although God is the most powerful, there was a force working against him. One almost as powerful. This entity was also very tricky and appealing. Again while God could have destroyed this force, if he did then mankind might never reach the full potential that he has.
You are right that trials help us to grow. But Satan is nowhere near as powerful as God.
Quote:
God doesn't care WHO you love, the two towns destroyed were not because of Homosexuality but because they had become dins of ALL inequity. Basically making Vegas look like the Vatican. Why would a being OF love care WHO you love? Makes no sense.
I am sorry but the Bible does not agree with your opinion. I have quoted the verses before and if you want I will quote them again. The principal sin Sodom was destroyed for was homosexual conduct. Homosexual conduct was deemed to be sin before, during, and after the Law given to Moses.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 01:04 PM |
|
|
You fail to understand that I fully understand the point. Regardless if you think it is spam or not, or why, is immeterial. The fact is that the CoC is pretty specific about it. Thread killing (bringing a topic into a thread that might KILL it, like religion or politics) is a violation of the CoC. As is insults, meant as insults or not.
You are allowed your own opinion on the matter Jolly, but people do NOT have to agree with it.
____________
Message received.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 01:26 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Fetus is alive (the cells of dead things don't multiply) and human (the product of human reproduction and has human DNA.)
Actually, the checklist for something being "alive" extends far beyond the ability of the cells to multiply.
Also, many things have human DNA without being human, such as blood, semen, saliva.
I'm not arguing for or against your point I'm just saying your logic is flawed.
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 01:34 PM |
|
|
|
But, Mytical, in that case we agree, aren't we? Because if you discuss for example homosexuality then any discussion of the RELIGIOUS take on it that goes beyond a simple statement of the official stance WOULD kill it, right?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 02:05 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
You are spamming this board, Elodin. You are spamming it because the grounds on which you are arguing are DEFINED as being equal for everyone.
Your stated religious belief is that all beliefs are unreasonable. That is your religion. So how are you not "spamming" the board according to your definition?
It's in accordance with the constitution. All beliefs are EQUAL in that no one is defined as being better or worse than the rest. Whether I think that they are unreasonable or not is no RELIGIOUS belief, because I don't base my opinion on a holy book or a higher authority and magical insight, but on logic and reason.
Quote:
For me there is no such thing as a "religious" belief and a "secular" belief. I live only one life. I do not live a religious life and a secular life. I believe in God. God is part of my life.
Well, that may or may not be fine for you, but my wife and child are part of my life as well, but you don't see me posting in their name, do you?
Quote:
Moreover, I very often use arguments that no one can call religious. You seem to reject them too. Like it being a scientific fact that a fetus is alive (the cells of dead things don't multiply) and human (the product of human reproduction and has human DNA.)
Alibi-science. If it was science or god you'd take god, you made that abundantly clear, so when you use science it's purely accidental. You don't need scheince to know you are right, and if there is an issue where science is contradicting you, you won't let stand science in the way of your believe.
Quote:
Quote:
Therefore, if you for example believe that homosexuality is wrong BECAUSE GOD SAID IT'S SIN, than it's SPAMMING, because when someone else says MY GOD does NOT say it, therefore it's NOT wrong, both opinions are completely equally valid or unvalid (whether you believe different or not).
No, it is not spamming for me to express my beliefs. You certainly are free in expressing your religious beliefs. If me expressing my beliefs is spam you expressing yours is spam.
You can express your religious beliefs alright. But those with other beliefs don't care about yours - and vice versa. And all with an equal "right" not to care. So discussion based on that that is futile.
Quote:
Oh, I don't go around condemning homosexuals. I have a friend who is a homosexual. I don't think I am better than he is. But when asked if it is a sin or not I will certainly say that the Bible says homosexual conduct is sin. We must all repent of our sins.
No, we don't.
Quote:
It is valid for any person to have any opinion but all opinions are not equally true. You can believe that 2 + 3 = 18 but that does make your belief equally valid to the answer "5." But it is your right to believe that the answer is 18.
You see? You are WRONG. You cannot compare religion with arithmetics. Why? Because it can be PROVEN that 2+3=5 and not 18. However, you cannot prove that your religion is true - you are just BELIEVING it.
Quote:
Quote:
Therefore, since a decision will have to be found how we handle things in society we have to find OTHER reasons to allow or forbid it. Reasons that are valid NO MATTER of religion.
Society has a right to set moral standards. Most laws are based on the majority setting a moral standard. Not stealing, not killing, ect. Everyone is free to lobby for a change in laws. And laws do change over time. Adultery used to be punishable by prison (and still is in some places.) But many places have made adultery no longer a crime.
That is exactly what I am talking about. But if you have to give a reasoning because you want to have a law this or that way, you may try to name god's commands, but the times where that was accepted are over. As are the times over, where they are accepted as a reasoning for something being right or wrong.
Quote:
Quote:
So EVERYONE with a religiously motivated opinion about an issue is of course entitled to speak their opinion, but since it is ultimately based on the opinion the highest authority has about the issue, a debate makes no sense and continuing to hammer the same point over and over again is spamming.
It is your opinion that all beliefs are unreasonable and you certainly state that notion over and over again. I would call that opinion a religiously motivated opinion.
I have no idea what you mean by "it is ultimately based on the opinion the highest authority has about the issue." My beliefs are not based on what some religious authority figure's opinions are. I respect my spiritual leaders but I follow Christ.
What you CALL a religious opinion or not is irrelevant. You have to give REASONS for what you say, and I would says it's an opinion ABOUT religion, but no religious opinion.
For what "highest authority" means, should be obvious. You said yourself whose yours is.
Mytical Quote:
Quote:
God doesn't care WHO you love, the two towns destroyed were not because of Homosexuality but because they had become dins of ALL inequity. Basically making Vegas look like the Vatican. Why would a being OF love care WHO you love? Makes no sense.
I am sorry but the Bible does not agree with your opinion. I have quoted the verses before and if you want I will quote them again. The principal sin Sodom was destroyed for was homosexual conduct. Homosexual conduct was deemed to be sin before, during, and after the Law given to Moses.
A typical example for what I mean:
You: "Why would god do X?"
Elodin: "The Bible says HE DID, so HE DID."
You: "But WHY?"
Elodin: "Because Y was deemed SIN."
This is actually funny. 
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 02:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It's in accordance with the constitution. All beliefs are EQUAL in that no one is defined as being better or worse than the rest. Whether I think that they are unreasonable or not is no RELIGIOUS belief, because I don't base my opinion on a holy book or a higher authority and magical insight, but on logic and reason.
I disagree. The Constitution says you have freedom of religion. That means you can believe and practice any religion you want to and that the state can't impose a religion on you. It does not mean all religions are equally true. If your religion says 2 + 3 = 2,459 you are free go believe that and to say that. But it does not mean your belief is equally true to "5."
Oh, and I certainly classify atheism as a religion. And saying all beliefs are unreasonable as the expression of a religious belief. You are making a statement about the existence of God, angels, spirits, ect, by making that statement.
No, it is illogical to say "No God exists" or "no belief is reasonable." You have not existed for all time or observed all the universe. It is impossible for you to know that there is no God. It is equally impossible for you to say (logically) that no belief is reasonable.
So your belief that no belief is reasonable is not based on "logic and reason" and is in fact a statement of faith since you can't prove that all beliefs are unreasonable.
Quote:
Quote:
For me there is no such thing as a "religious" belief and a "secular" belief. I live only one life. I do not live a religious life and a secular life. I believe in God. God is part of my life.
Quote:
Well, that may or may not be fine for you, but my wife and child are part of my life as well, but you don't see me posting in their name, do you?
Perhaps you could point out where I've said, "In the name of Jesus I am making this post."
But everyone makes posts based on their beliefs. Your belief is no belief is reasonable and you make your posts based on that belief.
Quote:
Alibi-science.
Is alibi-science science that contradicts your beliefs? What I presented was scientific evidence, not an alibi. Feel free to accept or reject the evidence as you deem fit.
Quote:
You can express your religious beliefs alright. But those with other beliefs don't care about yours - and vice versa. And all with an equal "right" not to care. So discussion based on that that is futile.
Actually, I do care about the beliefs of others. I just don't say all beliefs are equally true. And I have always fully acknowledged the right of anyone to believe whatever they want to believe.
Quote:
Quote:
It is valid for any person to have any opinion but all opinions are not equally true. You can believe that 2 + 3 = 18 but that does make your belief equally valid to the answer "5." But it is your right to believe that the answer is 18.
Quote:
You see? You are WRONG. You cannot compare religion with arithmetics. Why? Because it can be PROVEN that 2+3=5 and not 18. However, you cannot prove that your religion is true - you are just BELIEVING it.
It is strange that you condemn others for saying they are right and yet you are quick to say they are wrong.
My use of arithmetic was very valid. It is obvious that Jesus can't be both the only way of salvation and David Koresh the way of salvation at the same time.
Moreover, a fact is a fact whether or not one can prove it is a fact. And some people accept no proof that contradicts their beliefs.
If I say "I think chocolate tastes good" I can't prove to you that I think chocolate tastes good. But it is a fact nonetheless.
And as I said, I do have proof of my beliefs. You just don't accept the proof that I accept.
Quote:
That is exactly what I am talking about. But if you have to give a reasoning because you want to have a law this or that way, you may try to name god's commands, but the times where that was accepted are over. As are the times over, where they are accepted as a reasoning for something being right or wrong.
No, society does not have to give a reason for setting a moral standard. Society has the right to set any standard it wishes and you have the right to lobby to try to change public opinion.
Quote:
What you CALL a religious opinion or not is irrelevant. You have to give REASONS for what you say, and I would says it's an opinion ABOUT religion, but no religious opinion
Your belief that all beliefs are unreasonable is a religious belief. It is a belief that you can't prove and is a belief about God, spirits, angels, ect.
Quote:
A typical example for what I mean:
You: "Why would god do X?"
Elodin: "The Bible says HE DID, so HE DID."
You: "But WHY?"
Elodin: "Because Y was deemed SIN."
Mystical gave a statement of understanding about the Bible. I gave mine. I also offered to give proof texts.
I am always willing to say WHAT I beieve and WHY I believe it.
Oh, and I would appreciate it if you would not put words in my mouth. Below is my actual response.
You: "Why would god do X?"
Me: The Bible does not say. It could be that....
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 03:38 PM |
|
Edited by angelito at 15:45, 20 Jul 2009.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We must follow the light wherever it leads us.
No Elodin. YOU must follow...not WE. Keep in mind...thanks
Ok, I'll follow where the light leads me and you follow darkness if that is your desire.
You follow where your 2000 year old "diary of some old men" leads you, I follow my own ideas...that's a hugh difference
When I am dead, I am dead. I don't care what happens afterwards. "Ashes to ashes" like someone famous said
But as long as I am alive, I follow no one, because slavery isn't an option anymore in 21st century
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 03:43 PM |
|
|
@ Elodin.
I have forgotten an important point though:
If you follow the light only, it could cause your end!
Why?
Because the light in the dark could be the lights of a train coming out of a tunnel....be careful! Always keep your mind open for alternative solutions..
Too much light can blind you, you know.. (You can ask a doctor, he will underline that statement..)
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 04:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I disagree. The Constitution says you have freedom of religion. That means you can believe and practice any religion you want to and that the state can't impose a religion on you. It does not mean all religions are equally true. If your religion says 2 + 3 = 2,459 you are free go believe that and to say that. But it does not mean your belief is equally true to "5."
There it is again. Comparing religion with mathematics. Wrong. And freedom of religion means, I tell this for the umptieth time now, that every belief is equally VALID. VALID, for frag's sake. You say, God this, and I say other god that. Equally VALID. TRUTH DOES NOT MATTER HERE, SINCE NO ONE CAN PROVE THAT THEIR RELION IS TRUE. Ergo they are all equally VALID.
Quote:
Oh, and I certainly classify atheism as a religion. And saying all beliefs are unreasonable as the expression of a religious belief. You are making a statement about the existence of God, angels, spirits, ect, by making that statement.
Who cares what YOU classify as a religion and what not? And I'm not making any statements about anything, I just say that all beliefs are UNREASONABLE. Emotions are unreasonable as well. Is that a statement about their existance? In fact this is quoted out of context, since I was quoting Corribus who said that it didn't make sense to call one religion more unreasonable than another, which I agree with: the truth of the matter is that NONE of them can be proven, and in that respect all of them are unreasonable. This has nothing to with a religious belief whether you think so or not, but with the definition of the word "reason".
Quote:
No, it is illogical to say "No God exists" or "no belief is reasonable." You have not existed for all time or observed all the universe. It is impossible for you to know that there is no God. It is equally impossible for you to say (logically) that no belief is reasonable.
Yes you have an interesting idea of what reason and reasonable means. Thanks for that.
Quote:
So your belief that no belief is reasonable is not based on "logic and reason" and is in fact a statement of faith since you can't prove that all beliefs are unreasonable.
I just did.
Quote:
Perhaps you could point out where I've said, "In the name of Jesus I am making this post."
If you post something religious, isn't that based on the scripture and what Jesus said? So are you not posting IN HIS NAME? Are you not posting what you think is his and/or god's stance on things? Are you not in agreement with them, everywhere they do HAVE an pov expressed somewhere? Isn't the meaning of what you said about that he's part of your life, thatr you always consider what HE would want you to do? What is right in HIS eyes?
Do you see me posting about the opinions of my wife? Or do I explain my opinions with how they fit into being a father, since they both are part of my life?
Quote:
But everyone makes posts based on their beliefs. Your belief is no belief is reasonable and you make your posts based on that belief.
No, since no one can PROVE their religious belief, they are unreasonable in the sense as the word is defined. It's in the nature of religious belief to be unreasonable.
Quote:
Is alibi-science science that contradicts your beliefs? What I presented was scientific evidence, not an alibi. Feel free to accept or reject the evidence as you deem fit.
It's not a question of accepting or not accepting it. Is a question if accepting a definition and HOW IT IS INSTRUMENTALIZED. Life or not is a question that happens to fit in your line of arguing when it comes to abortion. It's not so important when it does not fit into your line of arguing, so whether you use science or not is basically irrelevant. You are just instrumentalizing it for your purposes.
Quote:
Actually, I do care about the beliefs of others. I just don't say all beliefs are equally true. And I have always fully acknowledged the right of anyone to believe whatever they want to believe.
You can say what you want, and you can believe what you want, but that doesn't give you special rights. Since every belief is equally valid (or unreasonable) everyone has the same RIGHT, to hold their beliefs true. So it doesn't matter what you think is true or not, because others will think the same about their religion. It's irrelevant, whether you say they are not equally true.
Quote:
It is strange that you condemn others for saying they are right and yet you are quick to say they are wrong.
My use of arithmetic was very valid. It is obvious that Jesus can't be both the only way of salvation and David Koresh the way of salvation at the same time.
Moreover, a fact is a fact whether or not one can prove it is a fact. And some people accept no proof that contradicts their beliefs.
If I say "I think chocolate tastes good" I can't prove to you that I think chocolate tastes good. But it is a fact nonetheless.
And as I said, I do have proof of my beliefs. You just don't accept the proof that I accept.
That's the crucial point, isn't it? I agree with you that Jesus can't be the only way of salvation and David Koresh as well. But the problem is, you cannot even prove that Jesus is THE ONLY way to salvation, not to mention A way to salvation, not to mention there IS salvation.
If you say, I think that chocolate tastes good, than the only "fact" about it is that you THINK it does. I know people, however, who do NOT think chocolate tastes good because they find it too sweet. Their opinion is equally valid as yours, and what you can say is, that FOR YOU chocolate tastes good. Which is all you can say. Oh, and you don't need to prove to me that chocolate tastes good to you - I have no problem to believe that. I have no problem either to believe that YOU THINK that chocolate (absolutely and generally) tastes good. But that doesn't make it true.
Quote:
Quote:
That is exactly what I am talking about. But if you have to give a reasoning because you want to have a law this or that way, you may try to name god's commands, but the times where that was accepted are over. As are the times over, where they are accepted as a reasoning for something being right or wrong.
No, society does not have to give a reason for setting a moral standard. Society has the right to set any standard it wishes and you have the right to lobby to try to change public opinion.
Oh, you are again clouding the problem. Society has to give no reason only if all agree. If there is dissent about something, then "society" isn't unified. In that case you need a reasoning for doing something, because you need support. In earlier times "God commands it" was a very good reason in most or even all European countries. Today it is not. Now, see it the other way round: if there is a law that exists for 500 years, and you want to change it YOU NEED A GOOD REASON! If you are lobbying for a change, YOU NEED A GOOD REASON why to change it! And even if YOUR reason is, if you vote for me, I'll vote for you on the decision-making level, you STILL need a good reason to explain it to "society".
Quote:
Quote:
A typical example for what I mean:
You: "Why would god do X?"
Elodin: "The Bible says HE DID, so HE DID."
You: "But WHY?"
Elodin: "Because Y was deemed SIN."
Mystical gave a statement of understanding about the Bible. I gave mine. I also offered to give proof texts.
I am always willing to say WHAT I beieve and WHY I believe it.
Oh, and I would appreciate it if you would not put words in my mouth. Below is my actual response.
You: "Why would god do X?"
Me: The Bible does not say. It could be that....
Pardon???
Mytical says: As I see it, Sodom was destroyed because it was generally evil and depraved. Why should a loving being care about whom people love?
You answer: You are wrong, I've quoted the texts, homosexuality was considered sin throughout the times and it was the reason why they were eradicated.
You never answered the question WHY god would care. Just THAT he cares, because he declared it sin. I mean, we don't need to discuss that - it's spam. You - or more correctly Mytical - can of course make a new thread, "Why does god consider homosexuality sin"?, but there is no disputing the fact THAT he does, at leat if you believe the bible, as it is written.
*I* on the other hand would make a thread titled, "why would you believe in a god whose moral doesn't meet your standards", with the subtitle "sure, he might curse you with eternal pain for saying so, but in that case, we are all screwed anyway, because we can pick between a mindless executioner and a mindless torturer".
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 05:48 PM |
|
|
So elodin...
An areligious person is actually a religious person then? 
Do mind that the a in front of the word is no typo. It's a genuine adjective stemming from the latin prefix 'ab', which is used to create the antithesis of a word.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 06:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I disagree. The Constitution says you have freedom of religion. That means you can believe and practice any religion you want to and that the state can't impose a religion on you. It does not mean all religions are equally true. If your religion says 2 + 3 = 2,459 you are free go believe that and to say that. But it does not mean your belief is equally true to "5."
There it is again. Comparing religion with mathematics. Wrong. And freedom of religion means, I tell this for the umptieth time now, that every belief is equally VALID. VALID, for frag's sake. You say, God this, and I say other god that. Equally VALID. TRUTH DOES NOT MATTER HERE, SINCE NO ONE CAN PROVE THAT THEIR RELION IS TRUE. Ergo they are all equally VALID.
You are wrong in saying I am wrong. It is ludicrous to say I compared relgion to mathematics. I showed that although it is your right to believe whatever you want, your belief will not be equally true with the correct answer if what you believe is wrong.
It is ok for you to believe and practice whatever religious belief you want to, like your belief that there are no reasonsable beliefs. But that does not mean that all religions are eqully true.
Quote:
"We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Virginia Baptists, 1808. ME 16:320
"The constitutional freedom of religion [is] the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights." --Thomas Jefferson: Virginia Board of Visitors Minutes, 1819. ME 19:416
"Among the most inestimable of our blessings, also, is that... of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable to His will; a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to John Thomas et al., 1807. ME 16:291
"I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them, an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises and the objects proper for them according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands where the Constitution has deposited it... Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:429
"To suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2: 546
Quote:
Who cares what YOU classify as a religion and what not? And I'm not making any statements about anything, I just say that all beliefs are UNREASONABLE. Emotions are unreasonable as well.
Well, not you obviously since you say all beliefs are unreasonable. Yes, in saying all beliefs are unreasonable you are making statments about all sorts of things.
No, your statement that all beliefs are unreasonable is not being taken out of context.
Quote:
I agree with Corribus in the other thread. "Odd" is not really a fitting label for a belief because that would suggest there are reasonable ones.
Quote:
That's why I haven't heard a good reason for why I (or anyone else, for that matter) should BELIEVE in something unreasonable or illogical. Believing in illogical and unreasonable things ultimately doubts everything we - as a whole - have established as certain knowledgebase in the course of our history.
You have made you opinion of religion quite clear. You've made such statements as:
Quote:
-a child should be "protected" from "being brain-washed into separating peolpe into Jews, Catholics, Muslims and so on "
-that raising a child to be "a follower of any religion" is not ok.
- brainwashing is "if you teach ONE and only ONE claiming that one to be right."
-In response to Mystical statment that parents should be allowed to teach their child their religion he said, "Ah. So now you are advocating the right for parents to brainwash their children into everything they deem fit."
- "IF we ever want to have peace in this world, IF we want people to stop bashing in their skulls collectively, we must draw the line at indoctrinating children with "religious racism"." He defines religious racism as saying anyone is going to hell or that one religion is the true religion.
- "children should not be subject to membership [be allowed to join] of religious organisations or "churches".
- "My opinion is that society has to protect the children - and ultimately ITSELF - from all kinds of extremism, especially that of the religious fanatics. Since "real" believers think that THEIRS is the only right way, they necessarily believe that all the others are lost in error and damnation which isn't all too helpful in creating peace and tolerance as history shows."
- "RELIGIOUS "racism" is not only allowed, it's protected as well - every preacher can tell his community that the unbelievers are damned and will burn in hell." "And under the same umbrella it is allowed for adults to poison children with this venom [that one religion is true.]"
- "What I don't want is, if we keep to your example, that people who believe in WHATEVER won't teach their children, that there is only WHATEVER and everyone not believing in WHATEVER will ...[be] LOST.
- "There would be nothing out of the ordinary with laws protecting children from religious fanatism - mental rape is still rape, and rape is forbidden."
- " Protect the rights of religous people? Absolutely as long as they are within the LAWS (*plays broken record*). Is the hateful nonsense in the name of some god or another less then hateful nonsense? Is the hateful nonsense against some religions less then hateful nonsense?" Here is is advocating making it illegal to preach homosexuality is a sin or anyone is "lost" because he considers that as preaching hate.
- "In fact I would even go farther and ask, Don't we have the DUTY to try and make sure than children are raised in a way we approve of as a society, ....I mean, how are we going to change things, if we don't keep the children from being, well, indoctrinated with hate patterns?"
- "Now look at religion - are children taught "religion" as in "history and main 'points' of world religions, their historical relevance and so on and so forth", in a comparative way? Not as far as I know. As far as I know there is no "objective" social counterweight in terms of religion, who teaches children that all religions are equal,"
- " Do you think that would help racial integration, general understanding and so on? Do you think further that it would be helpful, if parents were making their children members of the local "AllWhiteSupremacy" order shortly afzer birth?
Quote:
Quote:
So your belief that no belief is reasonable is not based on "logic and reason" and is in fact a statement of faith since you can't prove that all beliefs are unreasonable.
Quote:
I just did.
Nope. Nice way to try to spin what you said though.
Quote:
If you post something religious, isn't that based on the scripture and what Jesus said?
It is not posting in Jesus name, as you claimed.
Quote:
No, since no one can PROVE their religious belief, they are unreasonable in the sense as the word is defined.
I'm sorry but you don't understand the English language. Unreasonable does not mean unprovable.
Quote:
You are just instrumentalizing it for your purposes.
Your claim is a false accusation. I presented scientific facts, whcih you rejected because you believe it is ok to kill fetuses and your mind seems to be quite unchangable in that regard.
Quote:
It's irrelevant, whether you say they are not equally true.
No it isn't. You have the right to believe 2 + 3 = 4,342 but that doesn't mean your belief is true. 2 + 3 = 5. That is the only correct answer to the equation.
Quote:
I have no problem either to believe that YOU THINK that chocolate (absolutely and generally) tastes good. But that doesn't make it true.
The idea that is that there are lots of things that are true that can't be proven. I can't prove to you that I think chocolate tastes good.
Quote:
Oh, you are again clouding the problem. Society has to give no reason only if all agree.
You will find almost nothing that every member of society agrees on. The legislatures certainly don't give reaons for all the laws they pass.
And no, you don't have to have a good reason to try to change the law. All you have to do is write up a legal proposition and get people to sign a petition to bring the proposition to a vote by the people. Well, of course the procedure would depend on what country you are in.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 06:46 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It is ok for you to believe and practice whatever religious belief you want to, like your belief that there are no reasonsable beliefs. But that does not mean that all religions are eqully true.
I'm fine with that as long as you understand yours is less true than mine
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 06:50 PM |
|
|
Your big mistake Elodin is, you think 2+3=5 is what YOUR religion tells ya, while 2+3=2,4... is what all other religions say.
You know what?
It is exactly the opposit
And no, a 2000 year old book won't convince open minded people from the opposit.
Go and live your religious life as you want, but stop telling others they are doing wrong. Because that IS kinda spamming, or even provoking.
Your belief is as valid as others. Because it is NOT you to judge that. You have no right to do so. You have no proof for anything you mentioned except an old book.
So please stop spreading YOUR belief.
Thank you.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 07:03 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 19:16, 20 Jul 2009.
|
Quote:
Go and live your religious life as you want, but stop telling others they are doing wrong. Because that IS kinda spamming, or even provoking.
So you are going to use the gavel of a moderator to silence my speech?
I have not told anyone how to live. I have spoken my beliefs and others have spoken theirs. Perhaps you can link to where I am telling people how to live?
It is interesting you consider me saying what I believe and why I believe it to be provoking but you don't consider terms like delusional, mental rape, brainwashing, ect used by atheists to be provocation.
Quote:
So please stop spreading YOUR belief.
Thank you.
But atheists are free to spread their beliefs and insult others, right?
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 07:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But atheists are free to spread their beliefs and insult others, right?
The agnostics here don't spread a belief...
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 07:44 PM |
|
Edited by angelito at 19:47, 20 Jul 2009.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Go and live your religious life as you want, but stop telling others they are doing wrong. Because that IS kinda spamming, or even provoking.
So you are going to use the gavel of a moderator to silence my speech?
No, this has nothing to do with "the gavel of the moderator", but with complaints of other members. They are tired of the way you try to convince everyone of the bible.
Quote:
I have not told anyone how to live. I have spoken my beliefs and others have spoken theirs. Perhaps you can link to where I am telling people how to live?
Check what I said, I didn't say you said "They are LIVING wrong", but they are "DOING wrong". Just a site before you said I am following the darkness. You have to accept the light is NOT what you define it. Light can be different for EVERYBODY. But this is exactly your problem. You tell us everything in the bible is right. And everybody who does things which are against the words of the bible is doing wrong. NO. This is not true. Because all these people don't care about YOUR bible. They have different standards of life. And it is NOT your right to judge that!
Quote:
It is interesting you consider me saying what I believe and why I believe it to be provoking but you don't consider terms like delusional, mental rape, brainwashing, ect used by atheists to be provocation.
Again wrong conclusion. I don't consider it provoking what YOU believe. I find it provoking if you constantly tell others what THEY have to do ("if you act different, God will judge you!"....). Only THIS has to stop. It is exactly how you probably "treat" your children. But we are NOT your children. No need to warn us. We are old enough to judge by ourselves.
Your kids are NOT old enough to judge (yet) I suppose. So in the same way boy groups like Take That or music superstars like Madonna, Michael Jackson have high influence on kids nowadays (you would wonder how many kids believe every word those stars say!), you have influence on your kids. And of course they will believe everyhting you say. So what else than brain-washing is that? They don't have free will I bet. Or are they allowed to NOT go to church on sunday?
Quote:
But atheists are free to spread their beliefs and insult others, right?
As I mentioned already, I don't care if the US court calls atheists a religion or not. In common sense, atheists (as the name itself already states) or agnostics do NOT believe at all. They don't believe in any other God, no...they don't believe in ANY God.
It was mentioned, the court only made that decision, to not give those poeple disadvantages refering to religious rights.
If you speak english, and I don't speak any word at all, this does NOT mean I speak a different language
Your way of seing the existance of a human life seems quite different from those who are atheists, agnostics or "normal" believers.
You:
1. God
1.1 Bible
1.1.1 Life
1.1.1.1 Private issues
Others:
1. Life
2. Private issues
2.1 Religion
As long as you can't accept other poeple have other preferences in their life, discussion about the "view of the world" between you and them won't make any sense.
Accept religion as a PRIVATE issue. If you believe...fine. If others do not...also fine. But still both lives are worthy ones...
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 08:18 PM |
|
|
|
I posted my feedback in the feedback thread.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 08:22 PM |
|
|
Dang it, I've wasted time, it seems, by writing an answer since angelito's post makes mine pretty unnecessary. Still, at least a couple of points, so that not all goes to waste.
Quote:
Quote:
If your religion says 2 + 3 = 2,459 you are free go believe that and to say that. But it does not mean your belief is equally true to "5."
There it is again. Comparing religion with mathematics.
You are wrong in saying I am wrong. It is ludicrous to say I compared relgion to mathematics. I showed that although it is your right to believe whatever you want, your belief will not be equally true with the correct answer if what you believe is wrong.
What kind of a sentence is that: "I showed that although it is your right to believe whatever you want, your belief will not be equally true with the correct answer, if what you believe is wrong."
I assume that you try to say this: AS IN MATHEMATICS a correct answer will be true and all others will be wrong, so is the correct belief in religion true and all the others wrong.
Quote:
Quote:
That's why I haven't heard a good reason for why I (or anyone else, for that matter) should BELIEVE in something unreasonable or illogical. Believing in illogical and unreasonable things ultimately doubts everything we - as a whole - have established as certain knowledgebase in the course of our history.
You have made you opinion of religion quite clear. You've made such statements as:
Quote:
[Loong list of quotes]
This is now the, what? fourth, fifth, sixth time you quote statements of me from all kinds of threads. To what purpose? Shall I sign them for you with a personal remark, like, lest you never forget? Is that to be kind of a "criminal record", my personal record of unholy statements made against the one true belief? Or what?
Whatever I may have said, you prove everything wrong, simply by saying, yours is THE TRUTH.
Quote:
Quote:
You are just instrumentalizing it for your purposes.
Your claim is a false accusation. I presented scientific facts, whcih you rejected because you believe it is ok to kill fetuses and your mind seems to be quite unchangable in that regard.
You are wrong. I don't reject them - I just don't think they are not nearly as important as you would like them to be. Additionally, since I know you, I repeat that this is a case of you instrumentalizing science for your purpose - I don't do that with the purpose of devaluating the scientific facts (which I don't even check: I don't care whether life AS SUCH starts when the fetus reaches the uterus or 2 months later or 5 weeks later because "life as such" has no meaning "as such" for me); I do it simply to say that if YOU cite "scientific facts" you do it even though you are not interested in science as such, but only when you can use it to support the truth you already know. It smells of dishonety.
Quote:
Quote:
I have no problem either to believe that YOU THINK that chocolate (absolutely and generally) tastes good. But that doesn't make it true.
The idea that is that there are lots of things that are true that can't be proven. I can't prove to you that I think chocolate tastes good.
The idea is to say that no one cares whether you can prove something that you claim is true for YOU, but that you HAVE TO prove it as soon as you want to claim that something is true for everyone or in an absolute sense. If you THINK, something is true for everyone, but can't prove it - like the religious things you believe - then the fact THAT you believe it has absoluetly no relevance whatsoever. Just because you THINK you know the truth doesn't mean someone has to believe you just because you say so. Don't you see that? Can something be true, even though you can't prove it? It's even a certainty that there are true statements that can't be proven, for example the statement that the number of prime twins is infinite. BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE A RANDOM ASSUMPTION MORE LIKELY.
|
|
Kraken
Famous Hero
I just love being elemental
|
|
posted July 20, 2009 08:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You follow where your 2000 year old "diary of some old men" leads you, I follow my own ideas...that's a hugh difference
When I am dead, I am dead. I don't care what happens afterwards. "Ashes to ashes" like someone famous said
But as long as I am alive, I follow no one, because slavery isn't an option anymore in 21st century
OMG YES THANK YOU ANGELITO!
And Elodin If I said I love you, then does that make me Homosexual or Send me straight to hell?
____________
Vini Vidi Vici
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 21, 2009 12:56 AM |
|
|
@ JJ
As I said before it is impossible for all relgions to be true. You are entitiled to your beliefs and I am entitiled to mine. I have stated why I know my beliefs to be true. I'll not restate why here lest I be accused of spamming.
Quote:
OMG YES THANK YOU ANGELITO!
And Elodin If I said I love you, then does that make me Homosexual or Send me straight to hell?
Provoking others is against the rules. Please refrain from doing so.
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
