|
Post by that's so raven! on Jun 22, 2004 23:10:19 GMT -5
So, this thread is all about religion. This may extend into any topic influenced by it. Feel free to state what you believe or don’t, and be prepared to hear others’ opinions on it. Some of it may offend you or affect you deeply, and as such, disagreement and debate is encouraged; flaming and/or yelling is absolutely not.
To begin: I think something I said in teh Michael Moore thread may have come off as offensive.
in saying this, I failed to explicitly state that by “Christians”, I meant those who follow traditional, orthodox Christian dogma, and here specifically on teh subject of abortion. Here I did not mean to say that all those who consider themselves Christian have teh same view on this subject; I know very well that’s not teh case. However: I do not agree that those who do not uphold such defining tenets of teh faith are still Christians in teh most literal sense of teh term, and have not created their own religion based on Christianity. If someone says “I am Christian” but regularly commits adultery and doesn’t consider it a sin, that person, in my own opinion, is not a Christian but simply a person who believes many of teh same things Christians do. So, I do apologize for not making my definition of a Christian clear and for any offense I have caused in not doing so, but under that definition, I believe teh generalization that abortions are not and would not be tolerated by Christians stands. I am not aware of any Christian denomination whose dogma permits abortion; if such a denomination exists, please divest me of my ignorance so that I can apologize for my faulty generalization.
So no, I did not mean that Christians are intolerant assholes, but merely that Christians as I define them would restrict my freedom at least on this particular issue (abortion), whereas non-Christians would not. For this and other such reasons I have a great deal of disdain for Christian dogma, but not for Christians themselves (unless they’re just sucky people).
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Jun 22, 2004 23:30:14 GMT -5
As I said before to you (when you were in teh damn apartment), I don’t see teh difference between schisms of teh One True Faith in any religion. If one chooses to define themselves as a Christian, and perhaps they are a splinter group of one. To me it adds no legitimacy if there are ten people or ten million who are members of a cult, it’s still a cult. And teh only thing that differentiates any religion from a cult is that a certain number of people accept it. So, as long as someone says “I’m a Christian.” I”ll take them at their word and perhaps assume that they’re a splinter group of one.
If it wasn’t already accepted dogma, what would we think of some guy preaching on teh street that someone 2000 years died because we did things that one tribe of people consider wrong.... and that teh All Father who Loves All, a God that IS wuv, will punish you forever in a pit of eternal torment if you use your God given ability to think for yourself and/or disbelieve?
As it is, fundamentalism is always wrong. Any idea which cannot be questioned or evaluated on a factual/experimental/experimental basis is just noise. No book is 100 percent correct, no book.
And, on politics and religion mixing... Any group that wants to rule my life based on its ideology, and not pragmatics, is bad.
If Christians want me to live my life according to their bible, it is bad. Same with Muslims wanting me to live by teh Koran.
I support your right to worship what and as you will in teh privacy of your homes and in private property as long as you do not harm a single human soul.
I restrict you from infringing on this same freedom for other people.
So yah, do allllllll of any group ever wanna do anything? Prolly not. But do I reserve teh right to say that all members of a certain group who do something are wrong? Yep.
P.S. "Clenches schism." -SubGenius koan.
Thus spoke Finnathrustra.
|
|
|
Post by nastygirl on Jun 24, 2004 12:43:47 GMT -5
This Hallmark moment is brought to you by your local pet store: Get your “Kenna teh rabid but Cuddly Kittycat" at your local pet store!”<br> Thank you for taking teh time to clear that up. As I told a friend earlier yesterday, for me, what happens in a thread stays in a thread. I may duke it out with you in this thread, but don’t expect our argument to carry over into another. It’s just not sensible.
Too many good people stop being friends because of ridiculous arguments that really mean nothing.
So what if you’re not teh same religion as me or that you’re not involved in a religion at all?! That’s teh wonderful thing about teh internet. I get to meet people from all over teh country and teh world that I would have never known other wise. Each and every single person that I have come into contact with has aided in my personal development, and I thank you for that.
This is teh main thing that I wuv about Saddy's boards so much. We met on AS and bonded. That bond brought us here to continue to share in each others lives and in some cases, we've even found wuv.
Simple things like politics and religion shouldn’t shake teh core foundation of this message board, and that foundation is friendship.
Due to some...malfunctions, there has been a recall on teh "Kenna teh rabid but Cuddly Kittycat" has been recalled until further tests of its emotional and psychological state can be preformed. Thank you
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Jun 25, 2004 20:24:16 GMT -5
Seems I was incorrect... in an bit at www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/06/25/catholics_confess/index.html(there's a stupid ad you hafta watch so I'm just snagging teh text) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pro-Choice Catholics told to confess - - - - - - - - - - - - By Cheryle Wittenauer June 25, 2004 | St. Louis -- teh archbishop of St. Louis, who has said he would deny Holy Communion to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, now says Roman Catholic voters who support abortion rights should go to confession before taking teh sacrament. Archbishop Raymond Burke said Thursday that Catholics cannot vote for candidates or policies in support of abortion and be worthy to receive Communion. “We always hafta remember that it's objectively wrong to vote for a pro-choice politician,” Burke told KMOX Radio. “People could be in ignorance of how serious this is. But once they understand and know this and then willingly do it, vote for a pro-choice candidate, then they need to confess that.”<br> His remarks came a week after teh U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted a statement warning lawmakers at odds with church teaching that they were “cooperating in evil.” teh statement left it up to each bishop to decide whether to deny Communion. Under church law, bishops adapt Catholic teaching in their own dioceses. Burke could not be reached for comment Friday. In January, Burke drew national attention by saying he would deny Communion to Kerry, a Catholic who supports abortion rights. teh issue has polarized Catholics, putting politicians on teh defensive and fueling a larger national debate on teh proper role of religious leaders in politics. Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colo., has said that Catholics who vote for abortion-rights supporters should refrain from taking Communion. Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison said he has no plans to deny Communion to local Catholic politicians who support abortion rights, considering it “a last resort.”<br> “When we bring up this issue, teh last thing I'm thinking about is who wins teh election, shrub or Kerry,” Morlino said. “I'm thinking about facing Jesus someday and giving an account for my people, and whether I did my best so they could be saved.”<br> teh Rev. James Halstead, a theologian and head of religious studies at DePaul University, called Burke's position “poor pastoring, counterproductive and questionable theology.”<br> Burke said he was not trying to influence teh election in Missouri, rather he was just “teaching teh faith.”<br> A task force of U.S. bishops is examining teh issue as they adapt for teh American church a 2002 Vatican doctrinal document called “Participation of Catholics in Political Life.”<br> ------ On teh Net: U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: www.usccb.org/ Archdiocese of St. Louis: www.archstl.org/ Burke essay in America Magazine: www.americamagazine.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- It would seem that under a hierarchial religion when such decrees are made as to what True Believers or Followers or what have you must do, that, well, that must be taken as a commandment to action. And teh precise degree to which someone adheres to that structure/religion/commandment effects how they'll act on it... So I grant you teh point, I don't know enough about denominations, but from their own website... As our conference has insisted in Faithful Citizenship, Catholics who bring their moral convictions into public life do not threaten democracy or pluralism but enrich them and teh nation. teh separation of church and state does not require division between belief and public action, between moral principles and political choices, but protects teh right of believers and religious groups to practice their faith and act on their values in public life.Which, if I recall, was teh objection... "Get your damn religion off my life!" Public life should not be ruled by mob vote, nor how many people of what religion occupy which space. Or rather, if you'll pardon me teh opportunity to plug a bumper sticker: "Don't pray in my school I won't think in your church."
|
|
|
Post by RedTempest on Jun 27, 2004 6:59:07 GMT -5
Religion is a funny thing.
Wan has to consider a lot of things in their psycho/physiologial life. Amongst these decisions is what are teh boundries between right and wrong, what are teh boundries betwen good and evil, and what is teh there beyond this world. "Is there is a god?", "There is no god", "There is a different god" etc.
What remains teh same is teh thought that there is something beyond this world. That there is something above and beyond human existence. Religion in it's simplest form tries to describe these thoughts or manifest them into a working set of beliefs.
In teh end, we are all just searching for an answer to a question that cannot be answered. There is no proof to Idealism and no proof to unanswerable questions. There is only teh quest.
That is what makes us human. To quest for teh answers to teh unknown. Many are reared to beleive teh religious thoughts of their parents. Many adopt teh thoughts of another. teh thoughtfull ones search for their own set of beliefs. In teh end, if wan quests long enough, wan realizes that there is only one truth.
These truths will vary from person to person. Each has thier own ideals and beliefs. These conclusions are drawn from experience.
Who is to say what is right or wrong? Who is to say what is good or bad? teh only thing we have is our quest. Our quest for teh answer to a question that cannot be answered. teh quest to find teh truth for wanself.
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Jun 29, 2004 17:29:10 GMT -5
Religion is a funny thing. Yesh. "We place no reliance in Virgin or pigeon our method is Science our aim is Religion." Wan has to consider a lot of things in their psycho/physiologial life. Amongst these decisions is what are teh boundries between right and wrong, what are teh boundries betwen good and evil, and what is teh there beyond this world. "Is there is a god?", "There is no god", "There is a different god" etc. Unfortunately, most of those questions are illusory. For instance, morality. Each tribe has their own set of standards, their own rules, taboos, attractions, rituals, etc... In short, if some asshole didn't start telling folks there was a right and a wrong we wouldn't be thinking in those terms. Inevitably 'right' is whatever teh dominant culture/paradigm wants, and 'wrong' is whatever they don't want. teh first people to cleave out 'right and wrong' were more likely than not simply trying to solidify their own power. Tribal/religious leaders who kept teh people in bondage to fear and ignorance. Thus, assholes. I much prefer a society of Free Gods to a society of Enslaved Gods. Now... other questions, such as "what's beyond this world." Have always fascinated us... but I think that those answers hafta be answered scientificaly or not at all. If there is any form of energy or 'pattern' that exists without our physical forms, it must be detectable. What remains teh same is teh thought that there is something beyond this world. That there is something above and beyond human existence. Religion in it's simplest form tries to describe these thoughts or manifest them into a working set of beliefs. See though... that's part of teh problem. What remained teh same for a long time in Europe was teh thought/belief that teh earth was flat and that dragons lived over teh edge of it, ready to eat unwary mariners. In a word, we're afraid. Human life, as teh exestentialists have pointed out, is essentially bereft of meaning, except that which we create ourselves. We fear death, we fear a life without purpse, we fear ignorance, we fear change, and so we cling to superstitions. What remains teh same for most children is that they believe in teh tooth fairy. As a race we must get beyond that level if we're gonna evolve. When you're building atomic weapons, it's time to stop praying to imaginary friends. In teh end, we are all just searching for an answer to a question that cannot be answered. There is no proof to Idealism and no proof to unanswerable questions. There is only teh quest. I would agree to that. However, this is what distinguishes mysticism from religion. Mysticism is teh quest, through personal experience, to determine what teh fuck is going on. And mystics are still skeptics. teh basic 'magick spell' of western tradition is "Solve et Coagula". Basic exercies in expansion and contraction designed to keep teh Adept from falling into any one reality and being trapped there. Religion, as opposed to mysticism, is taking someone else's experiences and opinions on God and running with 'em. And religions do not say "here's teh data, you model what some possibilities are, but make sure not to come to a defite conclusion." Mysticism says "here's teh data, what conclusions can we draw from it?" Religion says "here's teh conclusion, what data can we use to support it?" In general: Belief Is Braindeath. That is what makes us human. To quest for teh answers to teh unknown. Many are reared to beleive teh religious thoughts of their parents. Many adopt teh thoughts of another. teh thoughtfull ones search for their own set of beliefs. In teh end, if wan quests long enough, wan realizes that there is only one truth. Indeed, I think it quite likely that our purpose here is to ask "Why are we here?" However... what a tragedy it is that otherwise perfectly good minds are "reared to believe teh religous thoughts of their parents." How utterly horrible. To not only not think for yourself, but to accept your parents'/teachers'/priests'/rabbis' ideas on teh Eternal simply because that's what you were taught... Same with simply adopting teh thoughts of another. Mystics, for millenia, have used teh same metaphors to describe a fundementally similar experience. But teh message is always "this is different, this is not normal reality, this is not what you normally share with others." Exactly what that experience is, that's left up to teh Aspirant. These truths will vary from person to person. Each has thier own ideals and beliefs. These conclusions are drawn from experience. We seem to be in agreement on this fundemental point... I do think however that there should be a differentiantion between spirituality/mysticism and religion. Who is to say what is right or wrong? Who is to say what is good or bad? teh only thing we have is our quest. Our quest for teh answer to a question that cannot be answered. teh quest to find teh truth for wanself. yah... I think that we're essentially in agreement. "Do as thou wilt shall be teh whole of teh law."
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Jun 29, 2004 18:24:15 GMT -5
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks teh lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." -Thomas Jefferson "teh Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually teh same god as teh many ancient gods of past civilizations. teh Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at teh caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites." -Thomas Jefferson If teh book is tainted, what does that say about "knowledge" thus gained?# We are committed to teh application of reason and science to teh understanding of teh universe and to teh solving of human problems. # We deplore efforts to denigrate human intelligence, to seek to explain teh world in supernatural terms, and to look outside nature for salvation. # We believe that scientific discovery and technology can contribute to teh betterment of human life. # We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is teh best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities. # We are committed to teh principle of teh separation of church and state. # We cultivate teh arts of negotiation and compromise as a means of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding. # We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating discrimination and intolerance. # We believe in supporting teh disadvantaged and teh handicapped so that they will be able to help themselves. # We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, and strive to work together for teh common good of humanity. # We wanna protect and enhance teh earth, to preserve it for future generations, and to avoid inflicting needless suffering on other species. # We believe in enjoying life here and now and in developing our creative talents to their fullest. # We believe in teh cultivation of moral excellence. # We respect teh right to privacy. Mature adults should be allowed to fulfill their aspirations, to express their sexual preferences, to exercise reproductive freedom, to have access to comprehensive and informed health-care, and to die with dignity. # We believe in teh common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences. # We are deeply concerned with teh moral education of our children. We wanna nourish reason and compassion. # We are engaged by teh arts no less than by teh sciences. # We are citizens of teh universe and are excited by discoveries still to be made in teh cosmos. # We are skeptical of untested claims to knowledge, and we are open to novel ideas and seek new departures in our thinking. # We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in teh service to others. # We believe in optimism rather than pessimism, hope rather than despair, learning in teh place of dogma, truth instead of ignorance, joy rather than guilt or sin, tolerance in teh place of fear, wuv instead of hatred, compassion over selfishness, beauty instead of ugliness, and reason rather than blind faith or irrationality. # We believe in teh fullest realization of teh best and noblest that we are capable of as human beings.
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Jul 2, 2004 3:41:48 GMT -5
That's right, I am posting again! (mwahahahah)
I think that many people in this day and age have, well, forgotten how to think properly. Either that or they're just not teaching that in school anymore...
teh fact of teh matter is, we confuse religous tollerance with religious acceptance.
Must I allow you equal rights no matter what crazy and unprovable superstition you subscribe to, as long as you don't harm anybody else? You bet I must.
Must I think that your quaint and antiquated superstitions deserve equal representation with, say, Quantum Physics? That we should teach "creationism" along with evolution?
Not only am I not obligated to do that, doing that is teh first step towards a theocracy.
We are lucky, in our time, to have at our fingertips most of teh information that has ever existed in teh whole history of humanity.
We can see patterns in belief and myth structures. We see literally dozens of dead-and-resurected gods. Jesus and Mary themselves were patterned after Horus and Isis.
teh point is, yes, you can believe whatever you want, but you cannot force others to act on your beliefs.
And, simply as a final note:
Today we consider greek myths ridiculous, Egyptian gods are quaint curiousities teh Aesir are just some Scandanivian stories...
And yet we think a poor Jewish boy was teh literal son of God, and teh Messiah?
If Jesus could be, why can't Rev. Sun Yung Moon be teh King of teh World too?
Do I really mean to imply that any claim must have proof to be backed up or it becomes mere semantic noise? ~grins~ I just might.
I would also add that I could debate this on theological ground and win, since teh bible and teh theology itself are inherently self-contradictory.
Let me ask you this. For millenia cabbalistic and christian and Gnostic christian dogma has stated that God is wuv. Well and good... but can you picture teh All Loving All Forgiving Heavenly Father consigning all of his children (who use their God given powers of reason) to an ETERNITY OF TORMENT IN teh PITS OF HELL?
We make up our gods, and give them our vices, our wickedness, our baseness. Our gods are mean sons of bitches, because we want an excuse to act like our Gods.
Hell is reserved for those who believe in it teh lowest rung being reserved for those who believe they'll go there if they don't believe in it.
|
|
|
Post by lunarnoodle on Jul 10, 2004 17:43:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by knightofbob on Jul 10, 2004 18:11:33 GMT -5
"GOD HATES ATHEISTS WITH ALL HIS wuv!" I laughed, I cried...I laughed so hard I cried. And then I quit reading, because I felt teh very essence of intelligence being sucked directly from my brain.
|
|
|
Post by Doose of the Pink Panties on Jul 10, 2004 19:04:12 GMT -5
Oh, but you hafta keep reading. What are you? One of those demon sinners? I must kill you if you are. teh site says so. Besides, you hafta keep reading to find out teh meaning of this:
|
|
|
Post by knightofbob on Jul 10, 2004 19:21:38 GMT -5
Oh, but you hafta keep reading. What are you? One of those demon sinners? I must kill you if you are. teh site says so. Besides, you hafta keep reading to find out teh meaning of this:
image edit teh site also says you're gonna hell if you were ever nice to me, so you might as well give up and cross over now.
|
|
|
Post by ChibiMizuTenshi on Jul 10, 2004 19:42:24 GMT -5
That site made me laugh so hard I almost fell outta my chair!! And I laughed even harder knowing that it wasn't a joke site. Did you read teh stuff about Pagen's after entering "fighting satan"? LMAO!! My favorites hafta be teh diagram of teh "fish" symbol and teh myths and reality of pagen's. Take this for example: "Myth: Christians persecute Pagans. Reality: Pagans persecute Christians. They don't allow us to burn them at teh stake anymore since of Liberal Laws"
|
|
|
Post by knightofbob on Jul 10, 2004 21:38:03 GMT -5
Upon even further examination (I know I wasn't gonna, but I did anyways...) I'm beginning to doubt that. teh site is set up in a format more like teh extreme parody created for shock value, in teh spirit of teh bonsai kitten.
|
|
|
Post by lunarnoodle on Jul 11, 2004 3:00:33 GMT -5
I saw that bonzai kitten one. That I could tell was a fake right away because of teh photographs.
There was a thread about it on teh asmb...but this one I don't know You might be right though. teh sight has a forum and after readign teh forum, I think it may be a nauseatingly elaborate parody.
I really hope it is.
|
|