Jump to content

'JN

Members
  • Posts

    259
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 'JN

  1. Facts? What do Christians know about facts? It's all about your "beliefs". Go ask a racist hillbilly why he hates black people. He won't have a single fact to back it up (unless he says that he is dimwitted and narrow-minded), but he'll be sure to spout off plenty of nonsense about "the good book" or his "faith".

     

    The basic moral codes of religion have been carried over into government and society through the ages to good effect, but other than that it's just a social hinderence. How many people have been discriminated against or persecuted by people who think that they are acting on behalf of God? Christianity has never been a true proponent of tolerance or appreciation. Far from it. Almost every religion alienates those who do not follow it, with results ranging from unfortunate to simply tragic. All of them, however, are needless.

  2. Max Payne would pwn as a movie.  We need more movies with tough guys just kicking ass, saving questions for later. :D

     

    This idea has actually been tossed around in Hollywood. They said they were going to make a Max Payne game starring Brad Pitt. In that case, I REALLY hope it falls through.

     

    If they ever do make a Max Payne game, Michael Madsen is the only real choice. He does work on games as it is, and has the perfect voice and look for the character. He'd just need to slim down a bit. A lot, actually...heh...

  3. None of those 'bibles' were subject to any divine influence, but adapted by People to life as it was/is for People. Otherwise, if they made totally unreasonable claims affecting the majority of people negatively, they would have been discarded ages ago, imho.

     

    The purpose of a religious document such as a "Bible" is to instruct people on how to live their lives. This is more or less the purpose of religion, and that is why governments have used it as a tool more than anything else.

  4. Goes kind of nicely with this thread:

     

    http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?showtopic=6410

     

    "A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he

    should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and

    damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her

    life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives.

    The man will not be eligible to marry the girls sister."

     

    "A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on.

    However he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not

    sell the meat to the people in his own village, however selling the meat to

    the next door village should be fine."

     

    "If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned."

     

    What a dumbass. How can he expect them to burn that many animals?

  5. The being "butchered" notion is one of perspective. Faith is supposed to transcend proof, that's the whole point of faith. So when an atheist demans solid proof of faith, the believer cannot provide it, and so another atheist will see that as being "butchered" in the arguement.

    I'm rather suspect of atheists who constantly demand proof. They strike me as either just plain antagonistic and smug, or perhaps not sure of their own atheism and fear that perhaps they are wrong, and so want proof.

     

    If they cannot provide that proof, then they would simply say so and leave it at that. That is not the case. Christians have a tendency to throw themselves into arguments that they can't win, because they think that the Bible is all the proof that they need. This is not the case. Take evolution for example. Christians challenge this notion all the time, and usually end up with a huge stack of evidence to which they can respond with nothing but Bible quotes. It is clear who has the stronger case.

     

    The smug notion does go both ways, but being smug is easier to justify when you have a solid foundation to back it up with instead of just your "faith". Faith can't prove anything to anyone else, unless you are trying to show that you are naive.

     

    What do you expect on a Christian board? They're not there soley to facilitate belief vs non-belief arguements.

     

    It's pretty much all that they do. It's like their weak spot. I don't expect anything different from them because they're Christians (when it comes to the boards anyway). I expect the same thing from them that I expect from any other board, a fair structure for debate, which doesn't include people abusing their power to prevent themselves from losing face. Banning someone because they beat you in an argument is childish and petty, no matter who does it.

     

    It shouldn't be, but it is. If you look at many of our laws, you'll see they have roots in religious teachings. Makes sense, sometimes, as those teachings are just good sense. But using religious ideology to dictate someone's private life and relationships is so wrong it makes my blood boil.

     

    Simple morality and religion are not one in the same. You don't need to be religious to have morals. Many of our laws do have religious roots, but you can't use that as a rationale for them. Even if you submit that religion does play a factor in government, there is more than one religion out there, so it's presumptuous of a Christian or anyone else to say that their religion should be the standard for the law.

  6. I also don't give a crap whether gays and lesbians are allowed to marry or not.  As stated in the above, they for the most part don't believe in the bible, so there's no reason for them to take any stock in what it says.  I'm also not even sure what GOD thinks of the matter anymore, as I've recently heard some interesting translations as to what the word that we translated homosexual meant in the original text; it wouldn't be the first time organized religion reworked something for their own agenda.  Bush's whole constitutional ammendment on Gay marriage is bunk from the beginning...unless we want to take back the separation of church and state, as gay marriage is at it's heart a RELIGIOUS issue. 

     

    What if two gay atheists get married? How is that religious? Marriage can be traced back to a religious foundation in almost all societies, but it has since moved beyond that and is now a legal term more than anything else. Religion cannot be the deciding factor in the law.

  7. I'm looking forward to seeing it. The film's got all sorts of pulp science/fantasy hallmarks all over it - an Aztec-style temple, buried in the ice of Antartica, where space aliens have secretly met and fought for centuries, discovered by a team of explorers.

     

    This is what I don't understand. Why is there an Aztec temple in Anarctica? Couldn't they have done this in Central America? I don't get it.

  8. Let me ask you, would you change your views if folks on message boards were as intolerant of atheists as some of you seem to be towards religion?  Maybe you've been on such boards.  Did you think the group attacking someone for not believing was any worse than attacking me for my belief?

     

    This has happened before. What happens in almost every scenario is that atheists and agnostics populate a board that is run by Christians, and end up getting into numerous debates over spirituality, philosophy and even scientific things like evolution. Most Christians can hold their own when it comes to explaining their beliefs, but they get absolutely butchered when it comes to anything that requires solid proof. 9 out of 10 times, the disbelievers are banned to preserve the image of the forum. It's pretty ironic. Sad, but ironic.

  9. That's what I think Eldar means; magnifying the situation is making it more obvious. That they preach one thing and act in the exact opposite way is a magnification of the issue. Child molestation is wrong, and when you're in a position like a priest, the wrong-ness is far more obvious and apparent.

     

    The reason for it is more obvious and apparent, that's all. If the act itself were apparent, it wouldn't be in the closet for 30 some-odd years.

     

    As for basic human needs being ignored, my impression is that the priesthood is supposed to transcend that, to have more mental fortitude, and be strengthened by their faith. It's about dedication.

     

    Doesn't always turn out that way now does it?

  10. I don't understand the view, 'JN.  I'm sure you can elaborate.  Is it being Catholic that makes someone commit wrongful acts or is it that the Catholic church draws people who desire to commit such acts?

     

    I was born into a Catholic family.

     

    ...But this isn't about the horrors of what molested children faced, is it?  When the scandal hit the church a few years back, I was appalled.  I think any person, religious or otherwise, would have been appalled.  ...But I don't hear your talking about everyone who has molested children.  You bring up child molestation in a thread that has started to veer towards a discussion of religion.  Clearly, the acts were appalling but I do believe the nature of the offenders is what magnifies the incident with you.

     

    Don't try putting a spin on this. I made a joke, hoping that you would take the bait, and you did.

     

    Maybe you can write a play depicting me as a homosexual.  I hear you have a real talent for these sorts of things.

     

    If you want a play about homosexuals, go read the Old Testament.

  11. Plus, as 'JN gently indicates, moral lapses are magnified when the guilty party has built his life around preaching the good word.

     

    Magnified? Let's be realistic here. Molesting someone else's kid is not acceptable behavior from anyone. The fact that they are priests doesn't make it worse than it would be for someone else, at least not in my eyes. If anything, it just makes it obvious. They spend so much time preaching to everyone out of a book that outlines basically everything as a sin, that their basic human needs are ignored. This is what happens as a result. Lovely isn't it?

  12. I agree with this, the only way to stop terrorists from seeing the US as a target, is to quit supporting corrupt regimes in exchange for our precious oil and other amenities.  This is the real reason why Americans are seen as evil, not because we're 'better' than everyone else.

     

    I'm sure every terrorist keeps a list of gripes against America hidden in his pocket, right?

     

    Wrong. They are fanatics. They hate us because they are told to. They hate what we stand for, and they hate the fact that we have a presence in their "holy land". The "oil and amenities" line is just an excuse they use to try to justify their actions. You think every other country in the world doesn't do the same thing we do? Of course they do. We are just more powerful, and that is why we are always in the spotlight.

×
×
  • Create New...