Posted by longer_look on Oct 24, 2010 · Member since Feb 2010 · 369 posts
i don't.
Posted by dmarkd on Nov 07, 2010 · Member since Oct 2009 · 98 posts
Yet for some reason, this kind of fealty to the old ways and stories of the Bible seem all to pervasive within the U.S. and people with absurd world views are somehow given power. And God forbid anyone openly announce that they are atheist or even agnostic in a social political forum because we all know they will never get elected. In the U.S., those who do not believe in religion in any way shape or form constitute about 15% of the population - More than Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, and Buddhists combined, yet if you openly announce you are non-religious while running for office you WILL lose, without a doubt. For some reason, people demand respect for their silly fallacies and unjustified beliefs in silly stories and tales that make them feel all fuzzy inside, yet completely denigrate and disrespect those without religion. There is only one U.S. member of Congress who is Atheist; Rep. Pete Stark from the 6th District of California... The first and only person without a proclaimed religious faith EVER in the U.S. Congress. Even then, he was an incumbent in office for 34 years before he announced it openly out of fear from the backlash by the public. I find it completely ludicrous, irresponsible and reprehensible that a society as scientifically advanced and socially progressive as the Western World somehow still innately doesn't trust those who sensibly trust reason of faith.
In God we trust, eh?
0 likes
Posted by Skywalker7 on Nov 07, 2010 · Member since Jun 2010 · 89 posts
I like the direction this is going and I agree with much of the recent dialogue. I would only add that government and religion are so intertwined because the same members of secret societies control both to further manipulate and control people. Kinda like the two heads are better than one concept. People who think elected officials operate independently are as naive as many worshipers. Also, many pastors and preachers treat their job as nothing more than a hustle or a way to put food on their table, the majority of them honestly do not believe what they preach. If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters. They mislead and make fools of the masses and steal their money, lol, I almost have to respect their business model. The atmosphere of politics, religion, government, the economy, our omnivore society, the legal and correctional system, mis-informing media, and prescriptions that do more harm than good are all connected and orchestrated to turn us into zombie like zoo animals. It's kinda of like domesticating a wolf into a dog after generations and generations, it makes it easier to control them.
0 likes
Posted by humboldt_honey on Nov 07, 2010 · Member since Feb 2007 · 12529 posts
If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters.
Allegations are for historic abuse. The Catholic church never discussed celibacy during seminary. The seminary my friend went to changed their curriculum in response and included two semesters of how to be celibate. There's a certain point in time that's kind of the divide for "with allegations" and "without allegations".
0 likes
Posted by Skywalker7 on Nov 07, 2010 · Member since Jun 2010 · 89 posts
If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters.
Allegations are for historic abuse. The Catholic church never discussed celibacy during seminary. The seminary my friend went to changed their curriculum in response and included two semesters of how to be celibate. There's a certain point in time that's kind of the divide for "with allegations" and "without allegations".
Come again, you lost me. Are you challenging something in that quote?
0 likes
Posted by hotcooknmama on Nov 07, 2010 · Member since Sep 2009 · 848 posts
I like the direction this is going and I agree with much of the recent dialogue. I would only add that government and religion are so intertwined because the same members of secret societies control both to further manipulate and control people. Kinda like the two heads are better than one concept. People who think elected officials operate independently are as naive as many worshipers. Also, many pastors and preachers treat their job as nothing more than a hustle or a way to put food on their table, the majority of them honestly do not believe what they preach. If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters. They mislead and make fools of the masses and steal their money, lol, I almost have to respect their business model. The atmosphere of politics, religion, government, the economy, our omnivore society, the legal and correctional system, mis-informing media, and prescriptions that do more harm than good are all connected and orchestrated to turn us into zombie like zoo animals. It's kinda of like domesticating a wolf into a dog after generations and generations, it makes it easier to control them.
My dad's a preacher-man; TOTALLY believes in the shit, & thinks it's the right thing to do... well-intentioned; COMPLETELY wrong; lots of company! So, yeah: sometimes it's just a self-serving business model... but a lot of times it's honest conviction & belief, re: destructive & convoluted anti-thought dogma... that's the big problem with it, imo: tends to cause people to do harm DESPITE good/ kind intentions... consider: women as subservient lackeys, gays condemned, environment/ other creatures 'put here for us to use', mass annihilation of other religions/ cultures considered a *good* thing, etc etc etc... justified-- in the eyes of otherwise perfectly nice folks-- because jehovah says so.
Organized religion: just say NO!
0 likes
Posted by humboldt_honey on Nov 07, 2010 · Member since Feb 2007 · 12529 posts
Nope. Out of all of the examples you could choose, you chose Catholic child molesters. I assume they hold more interest for you than other examples, so I thought you might be interested in how they're addressing it.
0 likes
Posted by Skywalker7 on Nov 07, 2010 · Member since Jun 2010 · 89 posts
Nope. Out of all of the examples you could choose, you chose Catholic child molesters. I assume they hold more interest for you than other examples, so I thought you might be interested in how they're addressing it.
Cool, thanks for the info. I see a lot of the actions you describe the church taking in response to their pedophiles being for public relations. It seems like it shouldn't be necessary to teach grown men not to molest children, especially so called holy men. It is so ironic.
0 likes
Posted by dprince on Nov 08, 2010 · Member since Jan 2009 · 365 posts
No worries there is a time coming soon when all who do not believe will not have to put up with all those who do believe
0 likes
Posted by GFVegmom on Nov 08, 2010 · Member since Sep 2008 · 565 posts
No worries there is a time coming soon when all who do not believe will not have to put up with all those who do believe
Indeed. :)>>>
0 likes
Posted by hotcooknmama on Nov 08, 2010 · Member since Sep 2009 · 848 posts
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
0 likes
Posted by Skywalker7 on Nov 08, 2010 · Member since Jun 2010 · 89 posts
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
:-D
0 likes
Posted by veganhippie on Nov 08, 2010 · Member since May 2008 · 5810 posts
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
:-D
no need to be rude.
0 likes
Posted by hotcooknmama on Nov 08, 2010 · Member since Sep 2009 · 848 posts
What was rude? Please clarify. ???
0 likes
Posted by yabbitgirl on Nov 09, 2010 · Member since Apr 2006 · 14266 posts
I'm pretty sure they weren't talking about "annihilation of all non-believers." In fact I'm very sure they weren't.
DPrince said:
No worries there is a time coming soon when all who do not believe will not have to put up with all those who do believe
Not the other way round. As in, we won't be around to be a problem to you. You'll still be here.
0 likes
Posted by little2ant on Nov 09, 2010 · Member since Aug 2004 · 3055 posts
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
I did not find this rude. I also read the dprince thing the other way around, as if all who do not believe WILL have to put up with those who do. I was sort of confused until I read yabbit's requote. Either way its a crazy statement, imo.
When is that time coming, btw?
0 likes
Posted by veganhippie on Nov 09, 2010 · Member since May 2008 · 5810 posts
no, no! not you, hotcooknmama, i thought that the laughing smiley that skywalker used was rude.
0 likes
Posted by Skywalker7 on Nov 09, 2010 · Member since Jun 2010 · 89 posts
no, no! not you, hotcooknmama, i thought that the laughing smiley that skywalker used was rude.
Let me get this straight. The initial comment wasn't rude but my laughter was?? If someone tells a joke, the person that laughs at it is more involved or rude than the joke teller? First of all I don't think neither hotmama comments nor my laughter was rude and I did take the comment of non-believers putting up with believers referring to "judgment day". Non believers are already the minority so any further putting up with believers must mean further minimization of non-believer's already few numbers. It's not rude to wish me to a fiery burning hellified death but my laughter is.... rude. ;D Interesting, this logic is typical for many religions. They throw punches with brass knuckles and metal plates in their boxing gloves but have glass jaws. I simply thought some of the lines were funny in her posting but now you want to crucify me, but tell me, who was I being rude to and how? DPrince? Hotcooknmama? You? Please elaborate, if I thought I was being rude I would sincerely apologize but I'm completely lost on this one.
0 likes
Posted by veganhippie on Nov 09, 2010 · Member since May 2008 · 5810 posts
i don't want to crucify anyone, i don't perscribe to any religion, so please don't make assumptions about me.
i just took the laughing smiley to be mocking of hotcooknmama's comment. and that's pretty rude. if that wasn't your intent then sorry.
0 likes
Posted by Skywalker7 on Nov 09, 2010 · Member since Jun 2010 · 89 posts
I was talking more about the mood of society that sometimes want to publicly crucify non-believers instead of your personal intent. And I wasn't mocking Hotmama, in fact I was in agreement with her, some of her lines was funny or was it just me, the annihilation and Armageddon lines, it cracked me up. My apologies as well. ;)
0 likes
Posted by Allychristine on Nov 09, 2010 · Member since Dec 2007 · 15438 posts
Yet for some reason, this kind of fealty to the old ways and stories of the Bible seem all to pervasive within the U.S. and people with absurd world views are somehow given power. And God forbid anyone openly announce that they are atheist or even agnostic in a social political forum because we all know they will never get elected. In the U.S., those who do not believe in religion in any way shape or form constitute about 15% of the population - More than Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, and Buddhists combined, yet if you openly announce you are non-religious while running for office you WILL lose, without a doubt. For some reason, people demand respect for their silly fallacies and unjustified beliefs in silly stories and tales that make them feel all fuzzy inside, yet completely denigrate and disrespect those without religion. There is only one U.S. member of Congress who is Atheist; Rep. Pete Stark from the 6th District of California... The first and only person without a proclaimed religious faith EVER in the U.S. Congress. Even then, he was an incumbent in office for 34 years before he announced it openly out of fear from the backlash by the public. I find it completely ludicrous, irresponsible and reprehensible that a society as scientifically advanced and socially progressive as the Western World somehow still innately doesn't trust those who sensibly trust reason of faith.
In God we trust, eh?
I like the direction this is going and I agree with much of the recent dialogue. I would only add that government and religion are so intertwined because the same members of secret societies control both to further manipulate and control people. Kinda like the two heads are better than one concept. People who think elected officials operate independently are as naive as many worshipers. Also, many pastors and preachers treat their job as nothing more than a hustle or a way to put food on their table, the majority of them honestly do not believe what they preach. If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters. They mislead and make fools of the masses and steal their money, lol, I almost have to respect their business model. The atmosphere of politics, religion, government, the economy, our omnivore society, the legal and correctional system, mis-informing media, and prescriptions that do more harm than good are all connected and orchestrated to turn us into zombie like zoo animals. It's kinda of like domesticating a wolf into a dog after generations and generations, it makes it easier to control them.
If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters.
Allegations are for historic abuse. The Catholic church never discussed celibacy during seminary. The seminary my friend went to changed their curriculum in response and included two semesters of how to be celibate. There's a certain point in time that's kind of the divide for "with allegations" and "without allegations".
If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters.
Allegations are for historic abuse. The Catholic church never discussed celibacy during seminary. The seminary my friend went to changed their curriculum in response and included two semesters of how to be celibate. There's a certain point in time that's kind of the divide for "with allegations" and "without allegations".
Come again, you lost me. Are you challenging something in that quote?
I like the direction this is going and I agree with much of the recent dialogue. I would only add that government and religion are so intertwined because the same members of secret societies control both to further manipulate and control people. Kinda like the two heads are better than one concept. People who think elected officials operate independently are as naive as many worshipers. Also, many pastors and preachers treat their job as nothing more than a hustle or a way to put food on their table, the majority of them honestly do not believe what they preach. If they feared the wrath of God and going to hell maybe there would be less Catholic priest child molesters. They mislead and make fools of the masses and steal their money, lol, I almost have to respect their business model. The atmosphere of politics, religion, government, the economy, our omnivore society, the legal and correctional system, mis-informing media, and prescriptions that do more harm than good are all connected and orchestrated to turn us into zombie like zoo animals. It's kinda of like domesticating a wolf into a dog after generations and generations, it makes it easier to control them.
My dad's a preacher-man; TOTALLY believes in the shit, & thinks it's the right thing to do... well-intentioned; COMPLETELY wrong; lots of company! So, yeah: sometimes it's just a self-serving business model... but a lot of times it's honest conviction & belief, re: destructive & convoluted anti-thought dogma... that's the big problem with it, imo: tends to cause people to do harm DESPITE good/ kind intentions... consider: women as subservient lackeys, gays condemned, environment/ other creatures 'put here for us to use', mass annihilation of other religions/ cultures considered a *good* thing, etc etc etc... justified-- in the eyes of otherwise perfectly nice folks-- because jehovah says so.
Organized religion: just say NO!
Nope. Out of all of the examples you could choose, you chose Catholic child molesters. I assume they hold more interest for you than other examples, so I thought you might be interested in how they're addressing it.
Nope. Out of all of the examples you could choose, you chose Catholic child molesters. I assume they hold more interest for you than other examples, so I thought you might be interested in how they're addressing it.
Cool, thanks for the info. I see a lot of the actions you describe the church taking in response to their pedophiles being for public relations. It seems like it shouldn't be necessary to teach grown men not to molest children, especially so called holy men. It is so ironic.
No worries there is a time coming soon when all who do not believe will not have to put up with all those who do believe
No worries there is a time coming soon when all who do not believe will not have to put up with all those who do believe
Indeed. :)>>>
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
:-D
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
:-D
no need to be rude.
What was rude? Please clarify. ???
I'm pretty sure they weren't talking about "annihilation of all non-believers." In fact I'm very sure they weren't.
DPrince said:
No worries there is a time coming soon when all who do not believe will not have to put up with all those who do believe
Not the other way round. As in, we won't be around to be a problem to you. You'll still be here.
I like you both! but... eyeroll! I think there's prob'ly a way for us to get along anyhow, short of your long-wished for annihilation of nonbelievers! How 'bout... we just get along, and agree to disagree. Wouldn't that work, too?!
I respect anyone of any faith whose religion (a) helps them to be a kind person; and (b) doesn't harm people who don't share their particular beliefs. I expect the same respect for my freethinkin' nonreligious ways, provided I also meet guidelines (a) & (b). There... wasn't that easier than an apocalypse?! I think so...
I did not find this rude.
I also read the dprince thing the other way around, as if all who do not believe WILL have to put up with those who do. I was sort of confused until I read yabbit's requote.
Either way its a crazy statement, imo.
When is that time coming, btw?
no, no! not you, hotcooknmama, i thought that the laughing smiley that skywalker used was rude.
no, no! not you, hotcooknmama, i thought that the laughing smiley that skywalker used was rude.
Let me get this straight. The initial comment wasn't rude but my laughter was?? If someone tells a joke, the person that laughs at it is more involved or rude than the joke teller? First of all I don't think neither hotmama comments nor my laughter was rude and I did take the comment of non-believers putting up with believers referring to "judgment day". Non believers are already the minority so any further putting up with believers must mean further minimization of non-believer's already few numbers. It's not rude to wish me to a fiery burning hellified death but my laughter is.... rude. ;D Interesting, this logic is typical for many religions. They throw punches with brass knuckles and metal plates in their boxing gloves but have glass jaws. I simply thought some of the lines were funny in her posting but now you want to crucify me, but tell me, who was I being rude to and how? DPrince? Hotcooknmama? You? Please elaborate, if I thought I was being rude I would sincerely apologize but I'm completely lost on this one.
i don't want to crucify anyone, i don't perscribe to any religion, so please don't make assumptions about me.
i just took the laughing smiley to be mocking of hotcooknmama's comment. and that's pretty rude. if that wasn't your intent then sorry.
I was talking more about the mood of society that sometimes want to publicly crucify non-believers instead of your personal intent. And I wasn't mocking Hotmama, in fact I was in agreement with her, some of her lines was funny or was it just me, the annihilation and Armageddon lines, it cracked me up. My apologies as well. ;)
http://www.wonderday.ca/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/oh-my-gawd-posters.jpg
Pages