The Fremen Mirage
1 day ago
Random thoughts on the blue highways.
You never know what you will find on the blue highways. Particularly when the choice at an intersection is controlled by the roll of a die. About the only rule is that highway onramps don't count as an intersection. You don't even have to roll the die. If one road looks interesting, go for it.
...what does Saul-Paul state?
Rom 1:18-25[poor translation removed}
In your own words, what is Saul-Paul claiming? iamaYEC
If they are athiest murders they are clearly INSANE.
If they are christian murders its the religion's fault, - RCCU
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg
I'm ROMAN CATHOLIC. Your gonna tell me what my rules are "FOR ME"
HOW T F does that work? RCCan
The issue here between beliefs even buddhist and proper humanist will tell you. It aint that a humanist is better then a buddhist or more logical then catholic or smarter then a bible thumper. RCCanA little too much projection there. There is no humanist way. Humanists aren't better than any other human, which is what the humanism is about. At least conditional respect for all humans is part of humanism. Some humanists try to maintain radical respect for all. Humanists are different however in that there is no belief, not even belief in humans that is required, and humanists are not a group. They do form social groups, that is a human trait, but the social groups are based on a common interest rather than a belief and generally are inclusive.
I can’t believe that one would seriously suggest that a widely believed good found in the text doesn’t exist. “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” – the principal of empathy that many atheists on this board seem to think they have copyrighted and patented – is one such widely believed good. EOb
So, I'll ask you again: Can you think of any new insight gained from calling it the 'God meme' than we had when we called it the 'God concept?'freespirit
To many if not most biologists, the selfish gene approach is the best idea anyone ever came up with for explaining altruism in the animal kingdom. The only significant rival explanation, group selectionism, is extremely controversial by comparison. The issue is not yet settled. Faust
JC do you have ANY idea what the elements of this historical method even is? Fact is that your dimissal of people's lifelong work without knowing anything about it or them is your bias. Kwinters
The debate centers around how to criticize Islamic fundementalists who promote violent views. New atheists point to the role of religion as a motivating factor, but multiculturalists and theists on left don't want to hold religion accountable for the evil it motivates. Kwinters
Who was doing it, and for how long?Bottom line: For good or evil, the Bible didn't motivate people to do anything they weren't already doing. freespirit
Aug 16, 2015 -- 12:35PM, onefreespirit wrote:When the popes led their faithful to war, they didn't do it by changing human nature to suit their purpose. Warlike behavior satisfies the human need to prove ourselves superior to others.
The hard part for theists is admitting they have become the moral source they wanted to worship. In fact, they are now in a position to condemn their god as immoral based on secular principles of human rights. Kwinters
Yes this is what I think about. And you can go further than 'culture'. Science says men evolved to be violent. And our closest relatives in the trees are in male dominant hierarchy. So religion didn't create these things. Biology did. Curious
Your thesis then, is "the very existence of religion is an affront to womens' progress", correct? IronLDS
But until we have good evidence of their existence, they don't exist for us. The best an example can be is in the 'probably real' subset of the set of 'imaginary things'.
Thus for any specific candidate, like a real Donald Duck, a real teapot in orbit beyond Mars, a real Higgs boson or (if only we knew what a god is) a real god, it doesn't exist until we have good evidence of its existence. BlĂĽ
I find transcendence to be a perfectly good word for the natural ability of the mind to focus on a single task. Normally physical, athletes and musicians call it the zone, but can be purely mental. The mental state is harder to achieve but can be trained just as the physical state is trained. The problem is that it can be focused just as well on imaginary things as real ones, so it is important to recognize explicitly the focus of the transcendent state. The Transcendentalists focused it inward, to discover what it is to live meaningfully as a human, and atheists should acknowledge our debt to their efforts.(And I'm leery of that word 'transcending' - it's too often an attempt to smuggle nonsense into conversations.) BlĂĽ
Aug 13, 2015 -- 1:45AM, Kwinters wrote:The fear of death and loss are enough to turn some people's brains off and stop them from questioning the pure nonsense that religion spouts.
It might be helpful to some of us if you could illustrate what you mean by 'really supporting women'.....JewOne
Biological differences from a to z women gestate and nurture children. Women will do this no matter what their social status is. It is called survival of the species. Rape dolls or rich man's arm and bed candy children are born and raised.
So, let's discuss. How does a woman's biological makeup contribute to the actual physical requirements placed upon them?
In other words, there are two fountains in a village. Both men and women are free to drink from either fountain. One fountain is easily accessible and within the village center. The other fountain is at some distance away, though the walk is pleasant and scenic. In practice, most of people drink from the nearer fountain but more men than women travel to the far fountain, though both men and women drink from both. Jewsha
I suppose it would be ironic if that is what they did. While there are probably extremists who will personify their attack on the system that supports this choice and indeed forces it on many women. But they are really mad about the system that in some influential religions conditions women from birth into the brood mare role, and justifies higher pay for men because "they have to support their brood mare."I find it ironic that feminism is supposed to be about women being able to choose their lives, yet so many actual feminists get mad when women make choices that the feminists don't like.IronLDS
I could suggest that such feelings of moral outrage offer survival value, which is why we have them; in which case they offer no insight into "the value of the human." My point, which was about the inconsistency between an evolutionary point of view and ascribing worth to humans, remains unanswered.Thoughtfultheist
People have hypothesized that perhaps the issue wasn't the offerings of Cain and Abel themselves so much as the conditions thereof and the intent behind them. IronLDS
No, it does not. Only the most superficial and facile reading ( and one which leaves out most of the narrative) would support your contention. rocketJew
Archeological climate studies suggest that a major drought in the Levant beginning just before 2000 BCE with attendant famine, plagues, and cultural stress especially in agricultural communities (and in other fertile areas at different times) opened the way for marauding nomads to plunder the surviving stressed farming communities. Hmmm, rivers turning to mud or blood, locusts, death of first born and other children, frogs leaving the wetlands.... sound familiar?Something of great significance happened early on in the history the Middle East. Some life altering event left an indelible mark on the world view of the inhabitants as conditions went from very good to very bad. A pessimistic, hostile, anti-women and anti-nature world view emerged. Unlike any worldview the world has ever seen."
christine3
Kristi, it's interesting that you claim to be oh-so-rational - yet when I make a simple comment disagreeing with your tactics, you come out with all the emotional and exaggerated phrases.JewOne
Progress towards thinking about the prevailing misogyny in religion that spills over into the society dominated by those misogynic religions.Progress towards what?JewshaThe OP got your attention, that is at least progress.I think at this point the only thing being achieved with this thread is "people from various backgrounds coming together to tell the OP that their methods are unnecessarily offensive."LDS
Opinions on art and music are subjective. You tell me that your taste is better and criticize mine and I will treat you like something that just slithered out from under a rock.
Beliefs are not subjective. They are either true or false. If you criticise one of my beliefs, and do it respectfully, we can have an interesting debate. And, if you were persuasive, you might even change my mind. However, if your idea of debate is to ridicule my beliefs, then I'll treat you like something that just slithered out from under a rock. freespirit