| 284 posts found | |
|---|---|
Originally posted by AsprnBtl
Good work. You totally missed my entire point. If you didn't pick up that I'm extremely anti-religion I suggest you order a new brain or something, cause the one you got at the moment clearly doesn't work. It's nothing to discuss anyway. The bible say homosexuality is a sin, multiple times all over the place, both in the old testament and the new one. That some religious people, who claim they follow the bible choose to ignore what doesn't fit their lifestyle is their problem, and to be honest quite hypocrite. Religion fuck people up anyway, tear them in all direction till they become the mindless zombie I believe religion make them.
Let's keep the discussion civil, shall we? Keep the childish "your brain doesn't work" comments to a minimum. As for your position, it's been ambiguous at best. You state that you're anti religion, yet quote the bible or remind everyone of it's intent in every post. You call them mindless zombies, but refuse to concede the notion that there may be contradicting arguments, or ambiguities in the interpretation of the bible. You say, without question, what the bible's stance is. Wouldn't that be the definition of mindless zombie then?
I don't think that I've said in any post that the bible doesn't have anti-gay passages here and there. The bible has anti-gay messages in it. You know what it also has? Anti-drinking messages, anti-stealing messages, anti-other religions messages, anti-<you name it> messages. To lighten things up a bit, to quote the Simpsons: "have you ever actually sat down and read this thing? Technically, we're not even allowed to go to the bathroom." It's the FOCUS on these specific lines, quoted with absolute authority like you have in previous posts, that bothers me.
That quote you posted, with some quick research, revealed over 25 different English translations. In addition, there seems to be considerable debate over the translation of some of the words, evidence that translators have introduced their own prejudices, and blatant changes to the translation over time as some of the practices became somewhat acceptable in modern society (ie. masturbation). What's to say in 50 years, if gays became accepted by that Church, that those anti-gay passes won't mysteriously disappear as well?
Going back to my original post, "why not just follow the obvious message Jesus seemed to preach. You know, the big flashing neon one about not being dicks, about if someone is a good loving person then maybe they can be forgiven. Jesus seemed to be able to let that shit slide."
You don't have look hard find passages in the bible to support that stance. It's a very easy one. Luke 7:36-50 comes to mind. Personally I don't have anything against religion. Christianity has some good messages that I don't disagree with. What I don't like is when people wield it as a weapon in the name of intolerance.
Good points all over, but to be honest, you flamed me first. I just flamed back, maybe in a childish manner but who the hell cares? Ok, to make this thing simple, here is where I stand: - I don't like religion at all. I hate what religion do to people and the ignorance it spread. - I support gay marriage. I live in Norway where gays been recognised by the state for ages. More correctly, I really don't care much if they marry or not cause it doesn't have anything to do with me personally. - I'm quite sceptic to letting gays and lesbians adopt children. There are conflicting studies about the effect same-sex parents have on a child. - How can you misunderstand a sentence that say, lets say - You shall not be an adulterer for that is a sin in the eyes of God? Whatever translation you read, the message is the same. Anyway, translations have a tendency to lose the original message. To get the true meaning, you have to read the redsea scrolls and other scriptures dating from that time. The bible say homosexuality is a sin, and christian claim to follow the bible, that is they follow what they want and give a bugger in the rest. - While I like the Simpsons I don't use them as a source for anything, else than poking fun at the average american family. The bible got some set rules and it's every christian duty to follow it as best they can. With that said, the bible is full of conflicting verses, like you should kill homosexuals, disobedient teenagers, non virgin women who lost the virginity before marriage and so on as said in the old testament. While in another verse, actually lots of places it said god is love and loves all of mankind. It's cause of shit like that I look at the bible as a ridiculous scripture written by ignorant men, and only men. Men wrote the bible, not women. Makes you think of the actual value of the entire book and all the 'wisdom' in it. The child adoption issue is my only real issue though. Religion doesn't belong in a discussion like this, but somehow it always manage to put it's slimy tentacles all over these kinda discussions. |
|
Originally posted by slask777
Let's keep the discussion civil, shall we? Keep the childish "your brain doesn't work" comments to a minimum. As for your position, it's been ambiguous at best. You state that you're anti religion, yet quote the bible or remind everyone of it's intent in every post. You call them mindless zombies, but refuse to concede the notion that there may be contradicting arguments, or ambiguities in the interpretation of the bible. You say, without question, what the bible's stance is. Wouldn't that be the definition of mindless zombie then?
I don't think that I've said in any post that the bible doesn't have anti-gay passages here and there. The bible has anti-gay messages in it. You know what it also has? Anti-drinking messages, anti-stealing messages, anti-other religions messages, anti-<you name it> messages. To lighten things up a bit, to quote the Simpsons: "have you ever actually sat down and read this thing? Technically, we're not even allowed to go to the bathroom." It's the FOCUS on these specific lines, quoted with absolute authority like you have in previous posts, that bothers me.
That quote you posted, with some quick research, revealed over 25 different English translations. In addition, there seems to be considerable debate over the translation of some of the words, evidence that translators have introduced their own prejudices, and blatant changes to the translation over time as some of the practices became somewhat acceptable in modern society (ie. masturbation). What's to say in 50 years, if gays became accepted by that Church, that those anti-gay passes won't mysteriously disappear as well?
Going back to my original post, "why not just follow the obvious message Jesus seemed to preach. You know, the big flashing neon one about not being dicks, about if someone is a good loving person then maybe they can be forgiven. Jesus seemed to be able to let that shit slide."
You don't have look hard find passages in the bible to support that stance. It's a very easy one. Luke 7:36-50 comes to mind. Personally I don't have anything against religion. Christianity has some good messages that I don't disagree with. What I don't like is when people wield it as a weapon in the name of intolerance.
Good points all over, but to be honest, you flamed me first. I just flamed back, maybe in a childish manner but who the hell cares? Ok, to make this thing simple, here is where I stand: - I don't like religion at all. I hate what religion do to people and the ignorance it spread. - I support gay marriage. I live in Norway where gays been recognised by the state for ages. More correctly, I really don't care much if they marry or not cause it doesn't have anything to do with me personally. - I'm quite sceptic to letting gays and lesbians adopt children. There are conflicting studies about the effect same-sex parents have on a child. - How can you misunderstand a sentence that say, lets say - You shall not be an adulterer for that is a sin in the eyes of God? Whatever translation you read, the message is the same. Anyway, translations have a tendency to lose the original message. To get the true meaning, you have to read the redsea scrolls and other scriptures dating from that time. The bible say homosexuality is a sin, and christian claim to follow the bible, that is they follow what they want and give a bugger in the rest. - While I like the Simpsons I don't use them as a source for anything, else than poking fun at the average american family. The bible got some set rules and it's every christian duty to follow it as best they can. With that said, the bible is full of conflicting verses, like you should kill homosexuals, disobedient teenagers, non virgin women who lost the virginity before marriage and so on as said in the old testament. While in another verse, actually lots of places it said god is love and loves all of mankind. It's cause of shit like that I look at the bible as a ridiculous scripture written by ignorant men, and only men. Men wrote the bible, not women. Makes you think of the actual value of the entire book and all the 'wisdom' in it. The child adoption issue is my only real issue though. Religion doesn't belong in a discussion like this, but somehow it always manage to put it's slimy tentacles all over these kinda discussions.
Religion ended slavery, brought about liberty, gave us the notion of the sanctity of rights, gave us the idea of human equality, and even the scientific method itself. Could these things have happened another way? perhaps there is another universe where such things developed secularly -- but not our universe. Knowledge throughout the past two thousand years has been preserved by religious people. The MOST devoted religious -- monks of all denominations. Good people will use religion and learn from it and help to make the world a better place. Good secular people will use reason to do the same. Bad people will use religion, or their secular ideology to do evil. It's not whether one is religious or not, it is how one uses that sentiment. That is a function of character and the sum of the choices made by the individual. Most of us are a mix -- we use our philosophy or religion to justify some of our bad actions, but not all. We also choose philosophies and faiths which represent the best within us and attempt to act upon it in the world as best wecan. Most of us use a mix of reason and faith to do what we will do, and whether we will be saints or sociopaths involves something a good deal more mysterious and complex than simple determinism based upon whether one holds to a diety or goes to a church or mosque. |
|
|
kimmar
 Apprentice Member
Joined: 11/13/05
Always know the prospects |
Originally posted by Fishermage
Let's keep the discussion civil, shall we? Keep the childish "your brain doesn't work" comments to a minimum. As for your position, it's been ambiguous at best. You state that you're anti religion, yet quote the bible or remind everyone of it's intent in every post. You call them mindless zombies, but refuse to concede the notion that there may be contradicting arguments, or ambiguities in the interpretation of the bible. You say, without question, what the bible's stance is. Wouldn't that be the definition of mindless zombie then?
I don't think that I've said in any post that the bible doesn't have anti-gay passages here and there. The bible has anti-gay messages in it. You know what it also has? Anti-drinking messages, anti-stealing messages, anti-other religions messages, anti-<you name it> messages. To lighten things up a bit, to quote the Simpsons: "have you ever actually sat down and read this thing? Technically, we're not even allowed to go to the bathroom." It's the FOCUS on these specific lines, quoted with absolute authority like you have in previous posts, that bothers me.
That quote you posted, with some quick research, revealed over 25 different English translations. In addition, there seems to be considerable debate over the translation of some of the words, evidence that translators have introduced their own prejudices, and blatant changes to the translation over time as some of the practices became somewhat acceptable in modern society (ie. masturbation). What's to say in 50 years, if gays became accepted by that Church, that those anti-gay passes won't mysteriously disappear as well?
Going back to my original post, "why not just follow the obvious message Jesus seemed to preach. You know, the big flashing neon one about not being dicks, about if someone is a good loving person then maybe they can be forgiven. Jesus seemed to be able to let that shit slide."
You don't have look hard find passages in the bible to support that stance. It's a very easy one. Luke 7:36-50 comes to mind. Personally I don't have anything against religion. Christianity has some good messages that I don't disagree with. What I don't like is when people wield it as a weapon in the name of intolerance.
Good points all over, but to be honest, you flamed me first. I just flamed back, maybe in a childish manner but who the hell cares? Ok, to make this thing simple, here is where I stand: - I don't like religion at all. I hate what religion do to people and the ignorance it spread. - I support gay marriage. I live in Norway where gays been recognised by the state for ages. More correctly, I really don't care much if they marry or not cause it doesn't have anything to do with me personally. - I'm quite sceptic to letting gays and lesbians adopt children. There are conflicting studies about the effect same-sex parents have on a child. - How can you misunderstand a sentence that say, lets say - You shall not be an adulterer for that is a sin in the eyes of God? Whatever translation you read, the message is the same. Anyway, translations have a tendency to lose the original message. To get the true meaning, you have to read the redsea scrolls and other scriptures dating from that time. The bible say homosexuality is a sin, and christian claim to follow the bible, that is they follow what they want and give a bugger in the rest. - While I like the Simpsons I don't use them as a source for anything, else than poking fun at the average american family. The bible got some set rules and it's every christian duty to follow it as best they can. With that said, the bible is full of conflicting verses, like you should kill homosexuals, disobedient teenagers, non virgin women who lost the virginity before marriage and so on as said in the old testament. While in another verse, actually lots of places it said god is love and loves all of mankind. It's cause of shit like that I look at the bible as a ridiculous scripture written by ignorant men, and only men. Men wrote the bible, not women. Makes you think of the actual value of the entire book and all the 'wisdom' in it. The child adoption issue is my only real issue though. Religion doesn't belong in a discussion like this, but somehow it always manage to put it's slimy tentacles all over these kinda discussions.
Religion ended slavery, brought about liberty, gave us the notion of the sanctity of rights, gave us the idea of human equality, and even the scientific method itself. Could these things have happened another way? perhaps there is another universe where such things developed secularly -- but not our universe. Knowledge throughout the past two thousand years has been preserved by religious people. The MOST devoted religious -- monks of all denominations. Good people will use religion and learn from it and help to make the world a better place. Good secular people will use reason to do the same. Bad people will use religion, or their secular ideology to do evil. It's not whether one is religious or not, it is how one uses that sentiment. That is a function of character and the sum of the choices made by the individual. Most of us are a mix -- we use our philosophy or religion to justify some of our bad actions, but not all. We also choose philosophies and faiths which represent the best within us and attempt to act upon it in the world as best wecan. Most of us use a mix of reason and faith to do what we will do, and whether we will be saints or sociopaths involves something a good deal more mysterious and complex than simple determinism based upon whether one holds to a diety or goes to a church or mosque. I'm not so sure religion did all those things so much as just a sense of order. That order can be setup by a lot of things; religion, organizations, governments and laws. They all give us a sense of order and allow us to pursue objectives. I think if religion were ended today people would still fall back on order in one way or another. It's something that is innate in us. Anywhere you have a group of people they begin to setup some kind of structure. It was just religion in history that we used for that. I think lately though it's changing and we're relying on other forms of order. And some of them work quite well and even offer more freedom and expression than religion did. I think that might be why a lot of scientists today are not religious. ============================= |
Originally posted by kimmar
Good points all over, but to be honest, you flamed me first. I just flamed back, maybe in a childish manner but who the hell cares? Ok, to make this thing simple, here is where I stand: - I don't like religion at all. I hate what religion do to people and the ignorance it spread. - I support gay marriage. I live in Norway where gays been recognised by the state for ages. More correctly, I really don't care much if they marry or not cause it doesn't have anything to do with me personally. - I'm quite sceptic to letting gays and lesbians adopt children. There are conflicting studies about the effect same-sex parents have on a child. - How can you misunderstand a sentence that say, lets say - You shall not be an adulterer for that is a sin in the eyes of God? Whatever translation you read, the message is the same. Anyway, translations have a tendency to lose the original message. To get the true meaning, you have to read the redsea scrolls and other scriptures dating from that time. The bible say homosexuality is a sin, and christian claim to follow the bible, that is they follow what they want and give a bugger in the rest. - While I like the Simpsons I don't use them as a source for anything, else than poking fun at the average american family. The bible got some set rules and it's every christian duty to follow it as best they can. With that said, the bible is full of conflicting verses, like you should kill homosexuals, disobedient teenagers, non virgin women who lost the virginity before marriage and so on as said in the old testament. While in another verse, actually lots of places it said god is love and loves all of mankind. It's cause of shit like that I look at the bible as a ridiculous scripture written by ignorant men, and only men. Men wrote the bible, not women. Makes you think of the actual value of the entire book and all the 'wisdom' in it. The child adoption issue is my only real issue though. Religion doesn't belong in a discussion like this, but somehow it always manage to put it's slimy tentacles all over these kinda discussions.
Religion ended slavery, brought about liberty, gave us the notion of the sanctity of rights, gave us the idea of human equality, and even the scientific method itself. Could these things have happened another way? perhaps there is another universe where such things developed secularly -- but not our universe. Knowledge throughout the past two thousand years has been preserved by religious people. The MOST devoted religious -- monks of all denominations. Good people will use religion and learn from it and help to make the world a better place. Good secular people will use reason to do the same. Bad people will use religion, or their secular ideology to do evil. It's not whether one is religious or not, it is how one uses that sentiment. That is a function of character and the sum of the choices made by the individual. Most of us are a mix -- we use our philosophy or religion to justify some of our bad actions, but not all. We also choose philosophies and faiths which represent the best within us and attempt to act upon it in the world as best wecan. Most of us use a mix of reason and faith to do what we will do, and whether we will be saints or sociopaths involves something a good deal more mysterious and complex than simple determinism based upon whether one holds to a diety or goes to a church or mosque. I'm not so sure religion did all those things so much as just a sense of order. That order can be setup by a lot of things; religion, organizations, governments and laws. They all give us a sense of order and allow us to pursue objectives. I think if religion were ended today people would still fall back on order in one way or another. It's something that is innate in us. Anywhere you have a group of people they begin to setup some kind of structure. It was just religion in history that we used for that. I think lately though it's changing and we're relying on other forms of order. And some of them work quite well and even offer more freedom and expression than religion did. I think that might be why a lot of scientists today are not religious.
Well, the people who did them said they did them because they were trying to do God's will, or act out his commandments, or were seeking to better understand His creation. If one actually knows religious people, one finds that for many it is not something they "fall back" on, and to say so belittles the religious experience. The fact is, many religious people come to religious belief out of a lifetime of experience, and coming to the conclusion that the religion they choose to follow is true. To be sure, for some, religion is an escape, but certainly not for all. For some it is actually the beginning of a deeper engagement with reality. |
|
|
naldric
 Novice Member
Joined: 10/01/02
If anything is worth doing, do it with all your heart. (The Dhammapada, Buddha) |
I just wanted to share my story, yes, i m gay, i live in a relationship for the last 11 years, oh and we are very happy, i live in a country where it's not possible to marry yet, but they are talking a lot about it lately. My partner (since i cant use husban so i dont insulte the sanctity of marriage) was diagnosed Lateral Amyotrophic sclerosis (no idea if it's spelt this way in english) this year, meaning he will eventually end up in a bed without moving anything but his eyeballs. Since we CANT marry we have been busy running (well he cant run anymore but u understand...) from on place to another preparing for his death, while he is still alive, it's almost as if we were giving up hope while spending fortunes at the lawyer. The stranger thing is, by law, I will have to hand half the stuff in his name to a family who never cared for him and put him on the street when he said to them he was gay, and even the other half, that will be handle to me via a testament, can be contested... Who can honestly say this is fair, can the righteous Christian say my family is not worthy of protection, how can they say I dont deserve to marry the person i love, and not having him worry the last years of his life about if i m gonna be okay after he dies, or if I will be able to make his will happens when he will be so sick he wont be able to move. You guys against marriage dont understand we are humans, we have relashionships, i love my husband, and I will stay by his side whatever happens, it's probably more than most "traditional family" zealots would do. |
Originally posted by upallnight
Blah blah, whine whine. No one -cares- what happens to you. No one wants you to get massacred in a holocaust, no one wants you to get persecuted. We simply don't care.
You will forever be nothing more than an insult thrown at straight people in MMOs. For that, I pity you. I also think it kicks ass. Homosexuals have a legacy that will never die. That's almost as good as getting married and having a family, right?
"I can't marry my boyfriend!" "That's okay. Another newbie just got called a homo" "We will never die!"
Hats off to you. You make this country more interesting. |
|
Originally posted by Fishermage
I am afraid you are only partially correct. The... groundwork laid by religion was a catalyst that eventually led to these notions. Unfortunately, each and every one of the concepts above was actively suppresed by religion in one or more ways. Slavery was justified by religion for centuries, and technically still is supported by the Old Testament. Likewise, leaders of the Catholic faith supported the European monarchies, and denounced America's "heresy" in declaring rights for themselves. As for the scientific method, ever heard of the Dark Ages? For nearly a millenium, the Church made scientific advancement, and indeed any attempt at improving the quality of life for humanity, effectively illegal. The justification there was that the problems Europe was facing were punishments from god, and that attempts to allieviate them were against his will. (For instance, a group of farmers beginning to design and build a crude irrigation system that would have nearly doubled their crop capacity were set upon. The work was deemed heresy and the ringleaders executed.) As for the preservation of knowledge, you are largely correct, but only by default. The church was the only place with enough scholars to preserve it. But unfortunately, the religious don't make particularly neutral keepers. They tend to have a few bonfires now and then, with anything they don't like going up in smoke. Even today, Vatican City is squatting over a small mountain of history, much of which they absolutely refuse to reveal to anyone but their own. Give me a few days, some helpers, and appropriate page scanning equipment, and I could literally rewrite the history books if even a tenth of their hidden material proves valid. Not playing MMOs, and hating every minute of it. |
|
Originally posted by Aelfinn
I am afraid you are only partially correct. The... groundwork laid by religion was a catalyst that eventually led to these notions. Unfortunately, each and every one of the concepts above was actively suppresed by religion in one or more ways. Slavery was justified by religion for centuries, and technically still is supported by the Old Testament. Likewise, leaders of the Catholic faith supported the European monarchies, and denounced America's "heresy" in declaring rights for themselves. As for the scientific method, ever heard of the Dark Ages? For nearly a millenium, the Church made scientific advancement, and indeed any attempt at improving the quality of life for humanity, effectively illegal. The justification there was that the problems Europe was facing were punishments from god, and that attempts to allieviate them were against his will. (For instance, a group of farmers beginning to design and build a crude irrigation system that would have nearly doubled their crop capacity were set upon. The work was deemed heresy and the ringleaders executed.) As for the preservation of knowledge, you are largely correct, but only by default. The church was the only place with enough scholars to preserve it. But unfortunately, the religious don't make particularly neutral keepers. They tend to have a few bonfires now and then, with anything they don't like going up in smoke. Even today, Vatican City is squatting over a small mountain of history, much of which they absolutely refuse to reveal to anyone but their own. Give me a few days, some helpers, and appropriate page scanning equipment, and I could literally rewrite the history books if even a tenth of their hidden material proves valid. Remember I am writng what I am writing in the context of people claiming religion is bad, and using a catalogue of the evil things that religious people have done, or the evil things that have been done in the name of religion as their evidence for their position. I did not come on here and proclaim, rteligion is great because... I am trying to show how badly this style of reasoning is. As I said, evil people use religion to do evil; good people use religion to do good. The facts are that the people who did good in the name of religion are the people who have given us everything we hold dear today. They did NOT do so by default, but specifically BECAUSE of the religion they practiced -- at least that is what they ahve said time and again throughout history. The church's were not scholars by default -- the church preserved and protected scholarship -- period. It preserved and promoted literacy -- gave us the first printing press, which brought literacy to the masses and sparked every religion of the modern age. All that from decisions to translate and print the Bible. It's what it did as part of what it was. At the same time it was also systematically used as suppression, but that goes along with exactly what I am saying. If bad people doing bad things in the name of religion counts against religion, then good people doing good things in its name counts for it. If we look at the two in this way, we find almost everything good we have today came from some religion, and some of the bad things too. That being said, if we use the same style of thinking to look at the bad -- we find the worst things in histpry have come from people who have rejected God and placed reason on a pedestal -- Mao, Stalin , and all the communists brought supression to new levels under their atheist regimes. This shows quote clearly that it is the PEOPLE, not the religion or ideology. Good people choose good ideologies, bad people choose bad ideologies. |
|
|
Locked: Raising dead threads just isn't the same as raising dead humans. The views expressed in this post are entirely my own and do not represent the views of MMORPG.com, its associates, or affiliates. |
|
