Smart people don't believe in god...

[Darth Flatus]

what about anxiety of getting wet? that would be god punidhing you by urinating on you.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"Why doesn't this terrify the atheist? It is evidence that humanity is at its core 'corrupted', and yet you still think that humanity would be better off without any higher authority...your logic follows that any system will be corrupted by humanity."

 

Hum, exactly where does atheism say that "humanity would better off without any higher authority"? As far as I know, atheism believes there is no higher authority. There's a world of difference between the two.

[Cantousent]

"My self-determined purpose is the pursuit of knowledge."

 

My self-determined purpose is to have fun, become immortal and achieve godhood.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Full blown guffaws! This is funny. Of course, I don't aspire to Godhood, but the other two sounds pretty good. ...As long as the having fun accompanies immortality. I'd hate to find out that we're all immortal but the afterlife really sucks.

 

Disclaimer for the adoption discussion, I am adopted.

[metadigital]

Your analogy is flawed. You didn't go to nightclubs that were "immersed in the gay scene" while you were a child. Thus, you weren't impressed in the same way a child would be. And while I don't see homosexuality as a "disease" (thank you for yet another delightful attempt at putting me down as an homophobe), I think that children should be allowed to have clear, traditional, distinguished sexual roles in order to develop their sexual identity in a normal manner. And since a great deal of homosexuals were born in and raised by heterosexual couples, this is not an argument against homosexuality, nor an attempt to "contain" it. So spare me the demagogy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was not trying to insult you as a homophobe, so I apologise for any unintended insult: I was merely cautioning you against incidental and unintentional bias. I agree that children need good role models and (failing that) strident warnings of the consequences of poor choices.

The "clear traditional role models" can be provided from close relatives. In fact, current research shows that during the rebellion of early teenage, a boy will look to an uncle or someone else (other than the father).

 

I will concede that in the formative years (up to seven) a great deal of care is needed. A homosexual couple will adopt different roles and the child will be free -- possibly freer than under "normal" conditions -- but we need more research to know for sure. I think that is one thing we can agree on.

The primary concern for parents is to make sure that their children are happy and capable of living in society and thriving.

Following that definition, a parent who spent no time with their children but had plenty of resources to ensure their welfare would be a good parent.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not necessarily; financial support, though advisable, is not the only precondition to happiness. A loving parental relationship is more important, because (except in the case of crushing poverty) a well balanced individual is more capable of a prosperous life than a emotionally scarred rich one. You are misinterpreting me.

I understand your issues with the unknown long term effect on the wellbeing of children brought up in non-standard, non-nuclear families; I agree we should be exceedingly cautious about who can adopt children, but I don't see gender as a deal-breaker. (It presents a neat catch-22 impasse: sort of like testing medication of humans; how can you determine if something is safe for human consumption without testing it on them first?)

Another flawed analogy. Medications are tested on a wide variety of animals, ranging from rats to chimpanzees, before it's safe to test them on human beings. And, at any rate, those upon which the medications are tested are adult, willing individuals.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wasn't saying that the methodology for drug testing was deficient. I was saying that this line of logic conveniently ([/sarcasm]) prevents homosexuals from raising children until they can prove above and beyond any "normal" hetrosexual couple that they will harm children less.

I see good parenting skills as the most important -- and I've seen far too many heterosexual who were poor parents.

A rather blatant attempt to induce a logical fallacy. For starters, I have never denied that. And while many heterosexual parents are poor parents, the opposite isn't necessarily true. So, your point is?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was making the point that gender is an insufficient yardstick for competence in child-rearing. A stable, long term relationship has a much larger correlation than even money.

... So you Westerners please don't go around lecturing about things you don't know about, things you don't understand and regimes you didn't live in.....because you sound very ignorant, stupid and smallminded in the eyes of people who actually lived it through.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hildegard, the point Drakron made was that the form of communism employed in the Soviet state was not true communism. If anything, the Chinese have made a much better attempt at it than anyone else. And there is freedom of religion in China, if I'm not mistaken.

 

"My self-determined purpose is the pursuit of knowledge."

 

My self-determined purpose is to have fun, become immortal and achieve godhood.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Full blown guffaws! This is funny. Of course, I don't aspire to Godhood, but the other two sounds pretty good. ...As long as the having fun accompanies immortality. I'd hate to find out that we're all immortal but the afterlife really sucks.

 

Disclaimer for the adoption discussion, I am adopted.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

seeking knowledge makes me happy and feel fulfilled. You do whatever floats your boat.

 

Well, speak up Eldar! (I'm surprised you didn't mention your personal interest earlier.) Your musings are worth -- to my rough calculations -- approximately one thousand times the ruminations of those not priviledged enough to have been overtly sort after by our parents, through innumerable hurdles, rather than just almost accidentally appearing by default. "

[FaramirK]

Hildegard, the point Drakron made was that the form of communism employed in the Soviet state was not true communism. If anything, the Chinese have made a much better attempt at it than anyone else. And there is freedom of religion in China, if I'm not mistaken.

 

China had an even worse purge than the Soviet Union, and few if any westerners know anything about it. In the last few years, China has been trying to seem more "free" but make no mistake, conversion to christianity is still a jailable/torturable offense. Also, the government has begun to to shut down internet cafes, because they can't moniter them. China is far from free.

 

The few international churches are guarded and require passport checks at the door, to ensure no chinese christian can enter. Sound free to you?

[Cantousent]

Well, my disclaimer was somewhat misleading. I am adopted by my father, officially. Even my birth certificate has been officially changed so that my last name is the same as my dad's. However, my mother is my natural born mother. I did know my biological father, who was married to my mother for quite some time. In fact, my biological father and mother had six children, of whom I am youngest. There is a long, sordid, and rather brutal history involved in all that, and I won't bore you with the details. Suffice it to say that I got the better end of the deal in having my dad.

 

Here's my take on adoption:

 

My dad is my dad. I claim no other father and he has put up with more than you could know from me. Sure, nowadays I'm a great son. I visit my mom and dad regularly, fix things around their house, take care of things for them, and basically make myself on call. When I was younger, they weren't so lucky. When I wasn't ditching class I was getting suspended for a variety of offenses. I was often somewhere drinking, smoking, and otherwise getting in trouble. My dad has the patience of Job, and there has never been any doubt that he loves me and that he would be there for me whenever I needed him. In fact, one of the first times I saw him was when he took my sister and me to see the first Star Wars in the theater. Even though I was already eight when I met him, I have a strong bond with my dad. If I need to talk to someone to clear my head, my dad is the first person I call. As time has gone by, these past 25 years or so, he's needed me a few times and I'm gladdened by the fact that I've been able, in some small way, to help him.

 

When I see these films where the child finds out he's adopted, goes through great inner turmoil, and then forsakes his adopted family to find his "real parents," I'm filled with a sort of illogical rage. I hate it. I look around at others who have gone through similar experiences and I shake my head. Friends whose mother remarried but the step-father didn't adopt them... Step-parents who don't treat their children equally... Children who are confused because they have a different last name than their parents... this all makes me shake my head. Why should the accident of birth make one person more suited than another? I've never had some sort of ridiculous internal conflict regarding my dad. If others do, then I pity them. At thirty-five, and not in the best of health, I'm willing to kick someone's ass for calling into question my relationship with my dad. ...And my dad and mom have been married for 25 years now. That's a worthy achievement in a world where we tend to see everything as disposable, even marriage. They just got lucky, I guess.

 

How does this relate to homosexuals and adoption? I honestly don't know. I will say this, however, children need parents. Sure, some go through a series of foster homes or institutions and they can come out and be very happy. That's their story to tell. For my part, I think the ideal for every child is to have a home with parents who love him or her. If that home is provided by a homosexual couple, so be it. If it is with a heterosexual couple, so be it.

 

I am a Catholic. I would be lying if I didn't say that I would rather a child go to a home where the parents were Christian. I would rather a child go to a home where the parents were "straight." ...But my personal preferences are not the issue here. The best thing is for the child to go to a home where the parents will love and care for them, providing not only food, shelter, and all that money can buy, but a lot of what money cannot buy.

 

Well, you should have known better than to ask for a long explanation!

[Drakron]

China had an even worse purge than the Soviet Union, and few if any westerners know anything about it.  In the last few years, China has been trying to seem more "free" but make no mistake, conversion to christianity is still a jailable/torturable offense.  Also, the government has begun to to shut down internet cafes, because they can't moniter them.  China is far from free.

 

The few international churches are guarded and require passport checks at the door, to ensure no chinese christian can enter.  Sound free to you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You mean the cultural revolution and we know about it (expecialy in France) quite well, it was great mistake and the people behind it were dealt with.

 

China is trying to move away from the comunist model but we seen what happens when its done overnight and they dont want to end up as Russia.

 

The goverment attitude towards religion is going to depend on the religion, christianity is a imported religion in China and it have a central autority (the Pope) that does not sit well.

 

Its not like China is banning budism and taoism ...

[FaramirK]

The goverment attitude towards religion is going to depend on the religion, christianity is a imported religion in China and it have a central autority (the Pope) that does not sit well.

 

Christianity does not have a central human authority, only Catholicism, for your information.

[metadigital]

Hildegard, the point Drakron made was that the form of communism employed in the Soviet state was not true communism. If anything, the Chinese have made a much better attempt at it than anyone else. And there is freedom of religion in China, if I'm not mistaken.

 

It all depends how you define communism, I see it as an idea made by people who were very very unrealistic and I dare say stupid, a bunch of utopistic fools who tryed to undo the damage made by aristocracy to the people and especially to the working class, then they tryed to arrange a society based on a fiction that everybody would be fair and honest - because that would be the only way it could function - one word - utopia.

Then in communism, the unevitable happened, the aristocracy was replaced by the head people of the rulling communist party......and they were supposed to bring equality to all the people......one thing they did bring it is equality in poverty and represion of all basic rights of an individual because in communism the individual is subordinate to the society....and I can go on and on and on.....and if I continue I'm going to be sick... ....talking about the brainwashed people called the communist who, just behind the nazi, done more harm to mankind then all the sickness in the world put together.....

And that's excatly what communism is - A GIANT BLOOD-SUCKING PARASITE who feeds on people's desire for a just society and then decieves them with it's unrighteousness and corruption which is bigger then one in feudal system.....and that is excatly what communism is - THE BIGGEST DECEPTION IN WORLD HISTORY.

 

And to your post when you say China is much more closer to communism then CCCP was......what the hell are you saying, in the communist manifest all forms of religion are banned.......in China there is private property......in communism it is strictly forbidden - that's what communism is all about, there is no private sector, everything is in the property of the country and the "people" - read in the property of the communist party.......so China is now begging to be much closer to capitalism so it can prosper in the economic sense.

And to your claim that in China there is more and more religous freedom ....... tell it to the Chinese muslims in the west China who are , under the claim of war on terrorism, being imprisoned and killed......all we see in the media about China is the east China on the coast where all the biggest towns are situated - and that is only 300 milion Chinese, we know little about those 800 milion poor in the mainland - there you have it.....communism - equality. justice.....yeah right.. <_<

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep, no arguments about the inability of people to implement communism because it is an ideal, an impossible utopian dream that does nothing to keep the human foibles in check.

I was more thinking of the Maa-Tse Tung type communism, not the Deng post-Hong Kong communism. The current Chinese hybrid speaks more about their indominable zeitgeist than anything about communism.

 

I wasn't speaking from authority about Chinese religious tolerance, but I do note that there are Chinese Christians and Buddhists that seem to be okay (but anyone from China can correct me at anytime) -- unless you happen to be Tibetan... :ph34r:

 

Yeah, communism doesn't work, but then again Lenin was a middle class bourgeoisie just shaking the tree to remove those above and climb it himself, so it was just a cynical political manoeuver that was exploited by a ruthless psychopath in the form of Stalin -- who actually killed more Russians than Hitler.

[Cantousent]

How these threads change. Now we're in to politics with a side order of religion. If our main entree is politics, then I'll order up a healthy serving of capitalism, with a side of Christianity, and globalization for dessert. It's a hearty meal, but it can cause indigestion.

[6 Foot Invisible Rabbit]

The goverment attitude towards religion is going to depend on the religion, christianity is a imported religion in China and it have a central autority (the Pope) that does not sit well.

 

Christianity does not have a central human authority, only Catholicism, for your information.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Catholocism is a branch of Christianity. Close enough for government work.

[Cantousent]

Catholicism is a part of Chrisianity. Christianity is not a part of Catholicism. Therefore, it does not follow that, since Catholics have a central religious authority, all Christian denominations have a central religious authority.

[Sophy]

Just want to mention something,after I read a lot on this topic....I guess that,basically,all the religions are non violent and good,cause I really don't think a religion can be base on violence and corruption.What cause them to become violent is only the human being.In fact,Christianity is good,buddhism is good,and others too,but at some point some of them became twisted by human.Some men want to force others to see THEIR vision of their religion,and not the religion itself.I don't think God asks us to do war in his name,and surely others gods in others religions also(If they're supposed to be "good" of course).The same with politic.Most of them aren't bad at all.Once again,it's human who corrupted what was at first a good thing.So maybe when someone says he doens't believe in God anymore,he just don't believe in humanity anymore...

[WITHTEETH]

As to purpose, I said a "world without purpose". As a species we have a purpose, continue the species.

 

Continue to let them live in a purposeless world? For what purpose?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My self-determined purpose is the pursuit of knowledge. No idea what yours is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My holy grail is to be happy. to try and set a good example so it might rub off on other people. Knowledge is essiential to being a good person in my belief. but then again doesn't everybody do everything to be happy either now or in the long run? thats what Plato stated i believe.

 

Whats everybody else's purpose?

[WITHTEETH]

Atheism is a cornerstone of marxism.  For a poltitical thinker concerned primarily with economics, Marx was particularly hostile to religion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Marx and Engells said the proletarians need to free themselves from the shackles of religion. i don't believe it says "athieism" itself. am i wrong?

[WITHTEETH]

Well you did not lived in the system either, what CCCP had was no true comunism ... it was simply another form of dictatorship.

 

Comunism is not a evil system, its a utopia that cannot be made a reality because humans are too selfish and corrupted in order for it to work.

 

And yes I realize why you think that since they pushed religion out as much as they could but that was a stategy based in control, organized religion is a problem to the control of the state since its something they cannot control, in russia case there were other issues since russia was still in medieval age (people still OWNED villages) and was moving into the industrial age, its no suprise there was a uprising against religious leaders as well since they were part of the system (that also happened in europe but not as deep since most of the church autority and power have been sized by the monarchy before the anti-monarcy movements started to take place) and it continued.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think your Naive to see people are selfish. people do not like to lose thats true. but selfish? I will never vote for a leader that will never strive for a utopia especially because he thinks its never possible. people aren't too bad if you get to know them. Look at bill gates, he stepped on people to get where hes at, but hes just a guy trying to make a living. Look at chrisitian radicals, They are trying to do what is right, they justify it by saying god said so. we may look at that as seeing the logic having a false premice, true but who are we to say their is no god? People try to justify just about everything they do, is that not a sign of goodness? i think people are generally good not selfish. Also have you seen communism rise the way marxist wanted it to? no. You can't rule it out quite yet. If you look close at the system, socialism is creeping in, free education for everybody, healthcare is handed out more oftern, welfare, retirement, ect... marxist version of the rise of communism is actually in the works so far. As the proletatians make themselves "aware" of whats goin on in reality they will make a better life for themselves. I think its beautiful.

[Cantousent]

Atheism is a cornerstone of marxism.  For a poltitical thinker concerned primarily with economics, Marx was particularly hostile to religion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Marx and Engells said the proletarians need to free themselves from the shackles of religion. i don't believe it says "athieism" itself. am i wrong?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Your statement is not wrong. Nonetheless, it is misguided. This is one quote from Karl Marx:

 

"The people cannot be really happy until it has been deprived of illusory happiness by the abolition of religion. The demand that the people should shake itself free of illusion as to its own condition is the demand that it should abandon a condition which needs illusion."

 

However, it is clear, even from this passage, that his meaning of religion includes more than just the organized religions but also the illusory belief in a higher power.

 

Don't trust me, read some of Marx' treatises. If you can stay awake, you'll find out that I am correct and you'll have a first hand view of Marx' genius. He was wrong, but he was still a genius.

[Drakron]

I think your Naive to see people are selfish.  people do not like to lose thats true. but selfish? ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In order for comunism to work people would have to abandon the idea of property, we are a agresive possesive species right now and so it would not work.

 

True capitalism also dont work because of the same reasons, no system is perfect and its open to abuse.

 

You think people are good but I just point out for Germany of 1939 to 1944 as a example of what can happen, the vast majority of germans were not Nazis and did not belived in the nazi idiology and yet they gone to war and fought for just that.

[metadigital]

Just want to mention something,after I read a lot on this topic....I guess that,basically,all the religions are non violent and good,cause I really don't think a religion can be base on violence and corruption.What cause them to become violent is only the human being.In fact,Christianity is good,buddhism is good,and others too,but at some point some of them became twisted by human.Some men want to force others to see THEIR vision of their religion,and not the religion itself.I don't think God asks us to do war in his name,and surely others gods in others religions also(If they're supposed to be "good" of course).The same with politic.Most of them aren't bad at all.Once again,it's human who corrupted what was at first a good thing.So maybe when someone says he doens't believe in God anymore,he just don't believe in humanity anymore...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, strictly speaking there are a couple of religions that are baesd on cruelty, for example there are the Kali worshippers (who gave their name to our English word "Thug" -- that was for your benefit, FaramirK ). I think they believed that each life they took gave them more kudos with Kali nd a better re-incarnation.

[metadigital]

I think your Naive to see people are selfish.  people do not like to lose thats true. but selfish? ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In order for comunism to work people would have to abandon the idea of property, we are a agresive possesive species right now and so it would not work.

 

True capitalism also dont work because of the same reasons, no system is perfect and its open to abuse.

 

You think people are good but I just point out for Germany of 1939 to 1944 as a example of what can happen, the vast majority of germans were not Nazis and did not belived in the nazi idiology and yet they gone to war and fought for just that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not that I want to derail the discussion (any further ) but the National Socialists gained a popular vote greater than the Labour party in last week's election ...

 

Back on topic, some peoples of the world have managed to live in a world with minimal possessions: the Native Americans and Australian Aborigines lived off the land quite successfully (although this did preclude large groups forming city-sized population centres, but that is not necessarily a measure of sophistication, superiority or success).

[FaramirK]

[(who gave their name to our English word "Thug" -- that was for your benefit, FaramirK  ).

 

[Atomic Space Vixen]

I may be wrong in my atheism. I got involved in this thread and now have major tooth pain ("ache" doesn't quite do it justice). God is out to get his revenge on me! I'll see you all in a couple of days, unless the pain meds decide to work before I get to my appointment on Friday.

[metadigital]

I may be wrong in my atheism. I got involved in this thread and now have major tooth pain ("ache" doesn't quite do it justice). God is out to get his revenge on me! I'll see you all in a couple of days, unless the pain meds decide to work before I get to my appointment on Friday.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe it is equally likely that you have a physical psychosomatic manifestation of in internal (mind) anomaly. (Who knows the untapped power of the mind?)

 

But most likely is you have not attended to your physical upkeep and dental hygiene.

 

If I was in the Spanish Inquisition, I don't know if I wouldn't say it was a punishment from God to the unbeliever, though... "

[Cantousent]

I don't know what metadigital just said, but I'll pray for you. :D

[FaramirK]

I may be wrong in my atheism. I got involved in this thread and now have major tooth pain ("ache" doesn't quite do it justice). God is out to get his revenge on me! I'll see you all in a couple of days, unless the pain meds decide to work before I get to my appointment on Friday.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I hope you get better soon. I hate the dentist. Would you take offense if I prayed for your recovery?