Guard Dog

Faith is a funny thing. I believe everything that Blank said, and I believe everything I wrote in post 32. And they do contradict each other, but not to me. That is why I avoid religious discussions because I prefer rational arguments that are based on provable facts. And when the subject is religion those are few. It's why they call it faith. I believe Jesus was divine, and do not believe any evidence to the contrary. But at the same time, I cannot fault anyone who has a different view, and it is not my place to tell them they are facing eternal torment if they do not believe as I do. Because I do not KNOW that. No one but God can make that call. Christianity is unique among religions, because you cannot be born into it. You must choose to follow it. Even Jesus himself said so. And when you give people a choice, sometimes they will choose another way. That is free will. I do not like cramming my faith down someone else's throat because it really is not my place to do so. The bible charges us to spread the word, but it it has been heard and rejected then there is nothing you can or should do. I seriously doubt that there is anyone on this board who has not been exposed to the Christian faith. If they have chosen not to follow, then they should not be badgered for it. However, the reverse in not true it seems. Posters who profess Christian faith here are often insulted, taunted, treated with derision. Calax, Lucius, Withteeth and even Sand have done that. I do not ever remember anyone being treated so for NOT being Christian. Sometimes I get the sense that a lack of religion IS a religion. And it is an intolerant one at that.

Hmmmm.... So you say most people cannot rise above their experiences. But when I told you that in another thread you said: So which is it??? Here is the link http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?sh...15&start=15

The Campaign Finance Reform Act (McCain-Feingold) changed the way politics and campaigns are paid for in the US. For example, it is now illegal for me (as a private citizen) to buy and pay for a newspaper, TV, or radio ad that advocates a certain candidate or political issue in the months before an election. It is a breach of the 1st Amendment IMHO but that is another issue. It seems once again the internet is changing the way we live communicate for the better. This ad was produced by an anonymous user and is getting a lot of talk. And since it does not fall under McCain Feingold there is nothing anyone an do about it and that is a good thing. Unbridled free speech. The internet is a beautiful thing. I bet Apple is a little ticked, it was their ad after all. But since nothing is being bought or paid for, there is nothing they can do.

You realize by saying that is is more important that someone is thinking correctly than if they are acting correctly, you are advocating a kind of "Thought Police". Sounds very Orwellian to me.

I've avoided this topic because I prefer rational discussions and my faith is not something I can easily rationalize. But there are three things that I know to be true after spending the last 33 years thinking this over. 1) There is a God 2) I'm not him 3) When you die, you will find out the real truth behind all things (one way or another). I do believe in heaven and hell and I do not know who is bound for which. I am not qualified to make that judgment. Nor is anyone else for that matter. Most churches would tell you that non Christians are bound for hell, but I think there is a heck of a lot more to it than that. Jesus said "no man may come to the father but through me" which to me means "follow my example". Jesus had one core message behind everything he said or did. It was simply "Love one another". I do not think there is anyone here who does not think the world will be a better place if we actually did that. How can the most hateful and corrupted self professed Christian get into heaven if the the agnostic who actually follows that principle cannot? It is a popular thing around here to trot out all of the injustices and atrocities committed by people who are Christians or worse, done in the name of Christianity as a means to indict the faith as a whole. But the truth is, all those things (like the inquisition for example) were done by people for their own reasons. If I were to commit a crime and say I did it in Jesus name, it does not mean I got His endorsement and it does not mean other Christians would do the same. Sometimes I really feel that God is a sympathetic character. How would you feel if generations of people you never spoke to, who did not follow your instructions committed some of the worst crimes in history in your name?

Gotcha. So what angers you is not what they do but how they think. On that note, what do you think of hate crime legislation? Do you think one murder is more heinous because it might be motivated by racism, homophobia or some such?

Wait an sec... has a secret.

I'm with Taks and Raven. It is a nice and harmless escape from reality. I have a very high pressure job and it's nice to do something that takes it off your mind altogether.

????? Did they confirm next season is the last?

Exactly, they would be dead meat in an election. That said, nobody is cramming God down your throat now. Bush did not (and can not) outlaw Stem Cell research. He simply said the government will not fund or participate in it. That does not stop private firms or even individuals from doing it. Actually I agree with him. Not because I think stem cell research is wrong or immoral, but because I believe the federal government has no business in participating in scientific research. Point that clause out to me!

Heh, too bad Weiser Cain isn't here. He'd start doing his bit about Civil War II. Seriously though, why has no open atheist ever made a run for president?

Ok, thats Tigh, Anders and Tori who heard the music. Who was the fourth?

Which was a major cop out IMHO. They decided that since Newdow was not the girls legal guardian he did not have standing to press a suit in her name, which vacated the 9ths decision. It is a battle that needs to be fought and I think the SCOTUS only delayed the inevitable. I'd like to see it decided one way or another. Sand and Calax, you guys realize you are in the minority nationally speaking. If the SCOTUS came down and ruled "God" to be unconstitutional there would be a backlash like this country has never seen. And that will spurr Congress into action. Heck, the day after the 9ths decision to remove the wording the entire assembled Senate met on the steps of the capitol to recite the pledge. Even the democrats who have somewhat hostile to religion for some time now

You just cannot do that. All anyone can do is be the person they are. If you are a Christian you cannot stop being that for this one decision, then turn it on again for the next. Everyone in this country knew what kind of man GWB was. Most of those who voted, voted for him. It's no surprise he turned out to be exactly what he presented himself as. It's also no surprise those who did not vote for him don't like it. Clinton was the same way. Not one thing he did, good or bad came as a surprise to anyone who knew about him. What I pointed out before was dead on the money. Evey one is nothing more than the sum total of all of their experiences, education, preferences, and religion. If you do not like the man, do not vote for him. If he violates the Constitution then he will be checked by the Supreme Court (or actually Congress will since making law is its job). But you cannot fault him for being who he is.

That is just not a Constitutional issue then. It is an electoral issue. Don't vote for people who don't adhere to your religion. And try to persuade as many people as you can to see it your way. That is the American way. That sounds a little like "thought police". I don't think you really want that. Ever read 1984?

I don't know how it was in the Navy, but in the Marine Corps, you are never off duty really. In a rifle platoon, the men in your unit are right there with you when you wake up, you work with them all day, they are right there when you go to sleep. Military protocol is observed 24-7 when you are around them. Everyone conforms to a certain norm or the machine breaks down. Homosexuality is outside of the norm right now. That is changing however and it is becoming more widely accepted. Fifteen years from now it may be totally normal and people will wonder why there was ever a problem with it to begin with. But if history has taught us anything, change MUST be gradual. If you try to force it, society will force back. And as I said, the military is NOT the proper forum for social experimentation. Respond if you wish but we are wandering OT here.

GWB is a human and the decisions he makes are colored by his character, education, life experience, and yes religion. If you were in office you would do the same. It is impossible for anyone (you too my friend) to seperate the influence of you are on what you do. Everyone knew who this man was and most people voted for him despite of or because of that. Pure conjecture. You do not and can not know that. And you would be pretty hard pressed to convince me homosexuals are really being "discriminated" against in the same way minorities were . But that is a topic for another thread. The military is not a petri dish for social experimintation. Clinton tried to make it one and I hated him for it. The military is not like society at large. It must be run in such a way that is best enables it to do it's job. Right or wrong, homosexuality is just not widely accepted in the US. You know me, I think everyone should be left to do as they please and not be bothered for it but in the military that is out the window. Open homosexuality is bad for morale. I realize that says nothing good about us as a people, but it is true. You were in the military, you know I'm right.

Congress makes law, not the president. And Sand, side stepping the whole separation issue here, please point out where Bush has brought religion into the government or vice versa? Calax, when you throw out the Establishment clause, please do not for get to include the second part of it. If you have forgotten it, it reads: Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. A man named Michael Newdow was so incensed that his daughter had to hear the phrase "under God" in school every morning he actually sued to have it removed. The Supreme Court side stepped the issue and Congress passed the Pledge Protection Act last year making the phrase legal and suit proof. But he is still pursuing it. It seems to many atheists it is not enough to simply be atheist. They cannot stand the fact that there might be religious people somewhere in the world going on about their lives.

It's the music right? Only Tigh and Anders could hear the music.

I'd have to agree with you here. In the US the best possible scenario is when the two houses of congress are controlled by two different parties. The government can't hurt you when it can't do anything. I doubt anyone anywhere wants to see any one party take a super majority of the seats in any Parliament.

Well, if it was cancelled why not put us all out of our misery and tell us what it was!

Rebelling for the sake of just rebelling is pointless and more than a little stupid. But if he has any other motive, well, I've never figured it out. As Tale pointed out, he is not an idealist. Having him cross examine the president tonight made no sense. He pulls a gun on Tigh to defend her then attacks her on the stand to save a man he knows is guilty? Plus, the Colonial Fleet is supposed to be a military organization, Lee acts as though he has never had a day of training in his life. A major does not disobey an admiral over such a trivial thing as he did last week. It makes no sense. It's a bummer because they could have done a lot with that character

It occurs to me after watching Crossroads that the character Lee Adama has been pretty poorly written all along. This has nothing to do with the actor. His motivations never make sense to me. He does the wrong thing, takes the wrong side, makes the wrong decision every time. Either he is fundamentally self destructive or the writers just squandered a really potentially good character all along.

Totally opposite. In the US and Canada, Liberals are the biggest champions of welfare and socialism and usually care more about the "social contract" that about individual freedom. So the RKP is something of a poltical wild card? They do not have the numbers to win enough seats to matter but can tip the balance in one factions favor or another? Also, with so many factions are majority governments rare?

Heh, me too. I found my old 2600 a few weeks ago. As soon as I make or buy a UHF-RG6 adapter I am so going to hook it up and take a real nostalgia trip. I can still hear the sounds of Asteroids.... Da Dum Da Dum Da Dum