Religion: Why do you care?

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Like what the atheists do now, you mean?

Do they? Could you point exactly how?
Aren't you allowed to study the Bible?
Maybe you cannot visit church in fear of being arrested?
Was any of your religious friends in US you jailed for teaching their beliefs?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[narcimund 0]

Quote

When was the last time an atheist told you what to do in the bedroom, or what books you can't read, or which area's of science you aren't allowed to learn about, or what day of the week you can't go to work?

The problem with athiests is they don't listen when the christians tell THEM what to do in the bedroom, what books to read, etc.

Christians hate that.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[somethinelse 0]

I dont know about YOU but I am far from perfect, and dont expect nor assume perfection from anyone regarding anything whether it be from there beli8ef system or their life style.

People are not robots, and frankly most of us who frequent this website tend to be in some ways rebels.
No one force-feeds me to be or act any certain way,
and that comes out in choices, good bad or indifferent. jSometimes I'm a fool, some times Im cool.

But YES, I am a Christian- in that I believe that Jesus was and is Gods son, all that He taught and TRY to live my life right and keep my heart open to what God wants me to do/be...

But hey, I'm human, and dont ever expect anybody to say- hey look at that Chick, she's NOT perfect.
Wow.

Christainity- or becoming Born Again is a belief, acceptance, And God really does free your heart mind and the soul.

We all got to come to grips with God, and He will try to reach you if you quiet your mind and heart.

Whether we're talking about God or even other people, Ya know, its really up to you whether you accept or reject.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Like what the atheists do now, you mean?

When was the last time an atheist told you what to do in the bedroom, or what books you can't read, or which area's of science you aren't allowed to learn about, or what day of the week you can't go to work?

Please note that I have never posted anything in favor of "blue laws" or the like, tyvm.

I was remarking to the recent bullshit laws that are being pushed through on a bogus "separation of church and state" basis, or because some atheist was offended about something... never mind that non-atheist may be offended by the removal, since they obviously don't count, right?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Like what the atheists do now, you mean?

When was the last time an atheist told you what to do in the bedroom, or what books you can't read, or which area's of science you aren't allowed to learn about, or what day of the week you can't go to work?

unfortunately, as I mention, you got people like Mao and Lenin.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Please note that I have never posted anything in favor of "blue laws" or the like, tyvm.

I was remarking to the recent bullshit laws that are being pushed through on a bogus "separation of church and state" basis, or because some atheist was offended about something... never mind that non-atheist may be offended by the removal, since they obviously don't count, right?

Could you given an example?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[mnealtx 0]

Pretty much any "church and state" lawsuit thread that has been discussed here in SC, for example.

It's funny how some can take the words of the Founders as literal law in some cases (Jefferson's remarks about the First Amendment "building a law of separation between Church and State", which it does admirably well, as there are no laws stating what churches Americans have to attend, or that they have to attend at all - which was the point of the Amendment) but not in others (Jefferson again, "The great objective is that every man be armed").

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[livendive 8]

Quote

Pretty much any "church and state" lawsuit thread that has been discussed here in SC, for example.

It's funny how some can take the words of the Founders as literal law in some cases (Jefferson's remarks about the First Amendment "building a law of separation between Church and State", which it does admirably well, as there are no laws stating what churches Americans have to attend, or that they have to attend at all - which was the point of the Amendment) but not in others (Jefferson again, "The great objective is that every man be armed").

Why would a non-atheist be offended by the removal of religious objects from government buildings? Why would a non-atheist be offended by a prohibition on government-sanctioned prayer?

I think Wiccans should be free to place and appreciate whatever artifacts they want on their own property, but not on public property. They should be allowed to pray privately in public spaces, but I don't want my tax dollars going to any official sanction of those prayers, nor do I want my daughter to be forced to participate in them, be it active or passive participation.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Why would a non-atheist be offended by the removal of religious objects from government buildings? Why would a non-atheist be offended by a prohibition on government-sanctioned prayer?

Offense of a negative is possible. Someone could be offended by the absence of the thing they want to see.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

Pretty much any "church and state" lawsuit thread that has been discussed here in SC, for example.

Could you give an example?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Why would a non-atheist be offended by the removal of religious objects from government buildings? Why would a non-atheist be offended by a prohibition on government-sanctioned prayer?

Why would an atheist be offended by them? They don't believe in them, after all, so why should their existence bother them?

"Government-sanctioned prayer"... now THERE'S a buzzword for you. Please show me the laws that state that prayer is REQUIRED at that place and we'll discuss it.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Why would a non-atheist be offended by the removal of religious objects from government buildings? Why would a non-atheist be offended by a prohibition on government-sanctioned prayer?

Why would an atheist be offended by them? They don't believe in them, after all, so why should their existence bother them?

Not being an atheist, I can't say for sure, but personally I don't have any interest in dedicating time and resources to recognizing all belief systems (including atheism) and thus would prefer that we recognize none.

Quote

"Government-sanctioned prayer"... now THERE'S a buzzword for you. Please show me the laws that state that prayer is REQUIRED at that place and we'll discuss it.

Sanctioned does not equal required, so why would evidence of such laws be a necessary component of the discussion? For what it's worth, I'm unaware of any government facilities at which prayer is required.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[quade 3]

Quote

"Government-sanctioned prayer"... now THERE'S a buzzword for you. Please show me the laws that state that prayer is REQUIRED at that place and we'll discuss it.

A law that requires it? You're probably not going to find that, but you certainly -will- find a number of occasions where religion and the government come together in ways that aren't -required-, but certainly government approved of none the less.

Most of these things were added into unofficial national policy in the 1950s during the start of the cold war in a (somehow) "patriotic" display of US vs. the "godless commies";

"In God We Trust"
". . . one nation, under God."
The National Prayer Breakfast

None of these things "belong" in government from a legally -required- point of view and yet, there they are.

Do -I- give a poo? Only from a historically accurate perspective. None of them really have any "meaning" whatsoever anyway.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Sanctioned does not equal required, so why would evidence of such laws be a necessary component of the discussion? For what it's worth, I'm unaware of any government facilities at which prayer is required.

I *did* overstate my case...my apologies.

You stated earlier that you don't care to have your daughter around that... If you lived near a mosque, would you cover her ears when they broadcast the call to prayers, as well?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DSE 3]

Quote

>a-the world came together in a big bang that began all life, and evolution has brought us here.
>b-A deity built the earth in 6 days complete with all life forms.

>Somewhere in the middle lies the truth, IMO.

One is a religious belief, the other is a n (incorrect) description of a scientific approach to things. There is no "middle" - they are different areas of study. It's like saying:

a - Joe is a carbon based organism whose phenotype is based on expression of the DNA he inherited from his parents, and modified by the environment he was raised in.

b - Joe is a devout catholic.

Is the 'truth' between those two extremes, such that neither one is 100% true?

That's exactly my point. Neither is true, or neither is provable as true, which means it also cannot be proven as false.
Of course the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
For all we know, aliens deposited cells in a petri dish called "earth." For all we know, the life form that many refer to as "God" is a green gangly creature with three fingers and an enlarged cranium.
At the end of the day, does it really matter?

Where it becomes an issue for me, is that so many "religionists" do what they do "in the name of God," a source they've never seen, touched, witnessed, nor had a rational communication with. They condemn those that do what they do for themselves.

ie; I choose to donate some time each month to charity. I do it for myself. I do it because it allows me to grow my sense of self-respect and it gives me silly tingles up my spine. It also happens to improve the lives of others. But make no mistake; I do it for myself.
There are those at the same charity that are doing it "for God." From my plateau, that's simply whacked.
I'm living my life for me while I'm here. They're living their life for something/someone that may or may not exist, but they're limiting their life experiences in *this* life, the only one they *know* they've got, in pursuit of something that may or may not exist.
All of which is fine by me. However, do not judge my actions, don't condemn my behaviours, simply because we have a different motivation. The end result is the same, isn't it?

That's one area where religion becomes problematic; it encourages others to judge, which is responded to by at least a categorical behavior, and more often, derision and disgust.
Religion has become a marketing tool to divide the masses of asses, and unfortunately, it's likely going to get far worse before it becomes much better.

In summary, I care about religion, because as a broad statement, religion is more responsible for the problems of our country and our world than any other singular social or economical component.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Of course the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

If I've ever seen a misuse of "of course", this is it.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

That's exactly my point. Neither is true, or neither is provable as true, which means it also cannot be proven as false.
Of course the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

I'm afraid it's safe to say that you have completely misunderstood Bill's point.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 2,404]

>That's exactly my point. Neither is true, or neither is provable as
>true, which means it also cannot be proven as false. Of course the truth
>lies somewhere in the middle.

Actually, I fear you miss my point. "He's a devout Catholic; of course he's not DNA-based!" is an invalid argument, because they are not opposites. They're not even in the same realm. (In the same magisterium of understanding, to use Gould's term.)

That's true of a lot of things. If someone is an A student, it does not mean they don't have cancer - even though most people consider good students good and cancer bad. If a chunk of rock is heavy, it does not mean it's a meteorite - even though many meteorites are heavy. You're not using the same basis for comparison.

The creation story is a religious story. Every religion has their own creation myth. Some are quite similar, others are quite different. All are quite old, and most have their roots in oral traditions of ancient storytellers.

Similarly, there are several theories on how the universe was formed, how the solar system coalesced, how life began, how the biosphere came to be. They have nothing to do with creation stories.

>For all we know, aliens deposited cells in a petri dish called "earth." For all
>we know, the life form that many refer to as "God" is a green gangly
>creature with three fingers and an enlarged cranium.
>At the end of the day, does it really matter?

Well, yes and no. It does indeed matter to scientists, but it shouldn't matter to most people.

[DSE 3]

No, I understood Bill's point, I'd believe he misunderstood mine.

According to some, no component of either statement can be true, and for others, no component of either statement can be false.

Joe can't be a devout Catholic and accept evolution vs creationism. He might believe in theistic evolution, but that would lie somewhere between the two positions I'd previously mentioned, no?

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Sanctioned does not equal required, so why would evidence of such laws be a necessary component of the discussion? For what it's worth, I'm unaware of any government facilities at which prayer is required.

I *did* overstate my case...my apologies.

You stated earlier that you don't care to have your daughter around that... If you lived near a mosque, would you cover her ears when they broadcast the call to prayers, as well?

I didn't say I don't want my daughter around it (edit to add: she was allowed to go to any church she wanted as a child, and took us up on that offer many times at several different churches). What I said was I wouldn't want her to feel compelled to participate. I think of a mosque's call to prayer as a form of advertising, and I'd mind it no more or less than a chuch ringing bells to celebrate a wedding. Not having lived near a mosque, I don't really know the specifics, but if it were something obnoxious and frequent, I probably wouldn't want to live near it for noise pollution reasons. School is a different matter. The facilities are government owned and operated and attendance is nearly compulsory. I haven't much quarrel with a moment of silence each morning for everyone to silently reflect on the day before them in whatever manner they see fit, but I would not want my daughter encouraged to subscribe to any brand of faith. I'd prefer she develop her own set of beliefs with logic, experience, tolerance, and respect, and frankly, that's a call that belongs solely in the hands of myself and her mother, not the school administration or the PTA.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

No, I understood Bill's point, I'd believe he misunderstood mine.

I'm afraid you are wrong.

And the truth doesn't lie somewhere between me thinking you're wrong and you thinking you're right - you are just wrong.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[DSE 3]

touche'

[mnealtx 0]

Thank you for the explanation, it was the 'active or passive' that threw me...FWIW, I agree with your post.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Royd 0]

Quote

I'm guessing that if you think the universe operates like clockwork, that you probably haven't studied it much.

Are you saying that our solar system is a fluke amongst all of the stars out there?

I can set my clock by the consistency of our solar system.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Thank you for the explanation, it was the 'active or passive' that threw me...FWIW, I agree with your post.

Cool. I just edited it to add that she was allowed to go to whatever church she wanted as a child, and she tried out several, a few of them lots of times. The thing is we didn't force her to go to any of them. I have no problem with other parents indoctrinating their own children, and I tried to never disparage any of the different theistic possibilities; I just preferred that she arrive at her own conclusions. She's now almost 19, and her beliefs differ somewhat from mine, and I am 100% cool with that.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)