Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbarossa
Ok let's change crime to simply bad shit.
Printable View
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbarossa
Ok let's change crime to simply bad shit.
Uh dude...you ever thought that he was just a nutcase?Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
If he wasn't religious, it could have been anything else.
No shit.............Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
:dry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
So predictable. I'm surprised you didn't bring up the guy who killed seven people in a church.
if you wish to say that having no god will make the world worse then you have to accept that there is a valid opposite.
If you wish to say that having god in the world makes things better then you can't dismiss those that do bad things when they have faith as just being nutters.
You can't have your cake and eat it.
I put that example up for a reason and I even pointed out the reason I did.
This man had religion in his life, does he think he will burn in hell? no...because he messed up and looks now to god for forgiveness and knowing that he is sorry for what he did he knows he will be forgiven.Quote:
every day believers commit crime and god is no deterrent....why? ... because they believe god will forgive them. So I say having religion is just as likely to make things bad.....just look at where this religious world is today.
Pity he didn't look to god before he did it, but then the end result for him is the same as far as "the afterlife" is concerned.
So don't tell me that the world would be worse without god and expect me to ignore REAL cases in REAL life that go against your "theory"
People hope they will be forgiven. If everyone believed what you say then they would believe they absolutely wouldn't go to hell ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Very funny that you bring up a nutjob to prove your point which actually detracts from it. :lol: :lol:
I don't believe your "opposite" because man is too primal.
It takes less effort to take than to give. Just because you may think that being kind to another will get what you want doesn't mean the masses will.
There are many things that an atheist may not find immoral that most religions do.
Prostitution, drug use, premarital sex, drunkeness, womanizing, etc.
As long as it's not hurting anybody..right?
btw no one dismisses the bad things that people do while professing God.
People fuck up. I say there will be more fuck ups otherwise.
People lose sight of God just like they do with man's law.
I can't tell how many times I've heard a quote like "an eye for an eye" when justifying revenge but they never read on to the "turn the other cheek" part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
:rolleyes:Quote:
btw no one dismisses the bad things that people do while professing God.
Just how is that making the world worse?.....Quote:
There are many things that an atheist may not find immoral that most religions do.
Prostitution, drug use, premarital sex, drunkeness, womanizing, etc.
As long as it's not hurting anybody..right?
I would never visit a prostitute, I bet many of faith have though.
I have never used "drugs"...I bet a fair few people of faith have.....
premarital sex? WTF?????????Drunkeness...I am teetotal but have nothing against boozeQuote:
Originally Posted by busyman
Womanising..... I refer to the famous "I have sinned" preacher...remember those tears?
I am a non believer yet I don't approve of your examples, with the exception of sex before marriage and a single man can chase as many single women as he likes. And seeing as those things wouldn't "destroy civilisation" ..... just what is the validity of your point?
It has been said in this thread many times. It is up to each individual as to what they want to believe or dont want not to believe. Live and let live.
The one thing I have issue with are people coming to my front door expounding their particular religion. I dont go to their place of worship and tell them I think 'The king has no clothes'. It is even worse when you are half way through 'setting up' a DVD Recorder and you have to start from scratch again. :lol:
...oh just something I pointed out...you know....the premarital sex and all and what not. :whistlingQuote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Regarding your first quotes of yourself and I, your right....I don't dismiss it. Other's don't either. I think that's how it makes the news and stuff. :wacko:
How do you explain that your examples are not all moral values for all religions? Some religions have drugs as part of their ceremonies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
But then seeing as "moral values" in regard to religion are based on man made ideas anyway what makes you think that they wouldn't be taken up if religion didn't exist?
Perhaps you think I mean the crime is dismissed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
I am talking about dismissing the connection with the criminal having religion.
The BTK killer was a church leader...... this fact was considered irrelevant and he "hijacked" religion as a cover. Tell me that the same people that say that would be so dismissive if he had a house full of porn or a collection of "texas chainsaw massacre" type movies.
Wow..Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
It sounds to me you're saying that because the BTK killer "hijacked" religion as a cover that the world would be better without religion.
That's pretty slick. I like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley
When Jehovah's Witnesses came to my door, on occasion I'd let them in and we'd have talk.
I wanted to know what they believed and the subtle nuances of their religion.
No i am saying that when questioned on the subject of him being a church leader people of faith say he hijacked it as a cover.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
In other words they are saying his crimes couldn't possibly have anything to do with faith...... = dismissing any connection.
I am saying religion doesn't = morality adn Atheism doesn't = immorality
I will give that a try JP. Just for the look on their faces. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley
I'll have to go out to the wheelie bin to get it so I can make copies.:lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley
A stitch like nine, saves time. :lol: :lol:
God, as described by organized relgions is a myth, of this I have no doubt. God,as an unknowable creator, could exist because, as I have explained before, there is just so much around us that looks planned and science really is quite deficient is explaining such things currently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley
I think that if God exists, he is not personal, he just got the ball rolling. He didn't write a book and he doesn't talk through prophets. I didn't wake up one day an agnostic, I kind of wandered my way there as I thought about the various religions and I discarded them reluctantly. Hobbes wants to go to heaven, too.
Agnosticism is basically where I got stranded. I don't recruit people to my "church" because it sucks. I could never by in to religion despite spending 5 summers at a fundament Christian camp. These people really lived the life and I had a great time. But still, you know that private place inside you where you admit fears and doubts, I could never go there and state that I believed in Jesus. But I could go there and say "I have no fear of punishment from God".
Since I think that God is unknowable, then I must be my own highest authority and conduct myself in a way which makes me proud of myself. Don't always do it, but I am just an animal.
I think it would be a fair statement to say that men are attracted to women, as a rule. Just like Catholics beget Catholics and Jews beget Jews, this is a generally fair statement as well.
We do know, however, that some men like other men. That is unusual but real. Just like your process in becoming a Catholic may be an exception to a perfectly valid rule. I certainly would not say that you are average and a good example of the typical religious person.
The world has lots of sheep and just a few shepards. I was giving the general rule I have observed for sheep.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Why would it be pathetic? Again just saying something is so does not make it such. And if I were an atheist rather than an agnostic, would that make a whit of difference?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley
I regard an Atheist as one who out-right denies the possiblity of God. I don't believe that there is a God, I believe the God's presented to us by organized religion are myths and I doubt any other God of any sort. That may place me as a "soft" atheist or a "hard" agnostic, but I personally avoid the Atheist label because to me it is a fixed position. I like to take the attitude that I am willing to continue to refine my beliefs, as doubt is not proof.
So arguing the label of Atheist or agnostic is semantics and totally irrelvant to the points I have made.
You, again, have not touched on the actual point I made regarding Catholics begeting Catholics, but have chosen to quibble definitions which are of no relevance to anything.
My point in this thread that religions are divisive stands, my point that religions as a general rule brainwash people stands (Would you like see to all the votive candles at the local puddle that looks like the friggin' Virgin Mary, and hear the testimonials of those who visited?), my point that merely stating that something is "pathetic or bizarre" without any supporting evidence stands. My point that I must answer to myself as the highest authority stands. There is nothing more I wished to convey.
I am trying to make points, you are try to score them.
Just to address one of Busymans points..
Religion is not necessarily an extra layer of consionce.. it could be quite the opposite depending upon the religion.
Some psycho's would consider their religion demands things, like certain fundamental muslims as an example or cults such as satanism.
Others, such as Catholicism, have "Confession" which to a certain type of person... would clear their consionce altogether. They will have been "forgiven" and all is well again.
I know that JPaul..
Thats why i hilighted "To a certain type of person"...
Granted these are a minority, they do exist..
First up, apologies for my lengthy absence; my funky PC suddenly refused to connect to the net... or anything requiring IP routing, for that matter.
Long story short, had to reformat to get the damned thing back online.
Anyways, back on topic...
Seems to me that we can agree on most things in this discussion, but unsurprisingly, religion has been the main cause of division and debate amongst us.
Just like it does out there in the real world.
Myself, I have no problem with folk who subscribe to any of the faiths, but I do think religion should be kept right out of politics.
But ~15 pages should be enough religious talk. What of patriotism and parochialism?
Fugley's first post in this thread said that if we were to truly gain a global society, we would eventually bemoan the loss of our own country's cultures.
Fugs, you are 100% correct on that count, imho.
It's already happening here in Australia, and has been ever since we entered into the US Free trade agreement.
(Don't go thinking I'm bashing America, hear me out.)
If anyone is to blame, it's the apathy of most of the Aussie population for letting what follows happen in the first place.
80% US content on Aussie cable TV. Complete with the obligatory waving of the stars and stripes and the singing of The star spangled banner at every opportunity... even during the kids cartoons fer cryin' out loud.
All thanks to Rupert bloody Murdoch.
McDonald's logos appearing on the game ball during the AFL (Australian Rules football) Grand Final.
Iconic Aussie companies are being sold off to US corporations one by one.
Even ownership of our public utilities is heading overseas (although I admit most of them are being sold off to French or UK companies).
Children play less tennis and football (Aussie Rules and Soccer), but basketball, baseball and gridiron are rapidly gaining popularity.
It's gotten to the point where I've even invented a name for it: Cultural irrelevence.
Hell, we have wiggers living just a few doors down the street, ffs. :rolleyes:
But is this the loss of my culture or is it merely big businesses exploiting a new market with unexpected side effects?
It's a bit hard to tell. Only a conspiracy theorist would accuse overseas goverments of plotting to gradually assimilate a smaller nation by waging a subtle war via entertainment, commerce and advertising.
But it sure feels like that's just what's happening. There's even been public discussions at my local university about whether Australia should become a US state so we can benefit from the stronger US dollar.
Funny thing is, my culture is far from being the first one here. The Indigenous Australians must be laughing fit to burst.
After 200 years, the white fellas are finally getting a taste of thier own medicine.
Yes yes, I know. I'm just being parochial. :P
Most of this sounds market driven to me. It seems you don't like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by uNz[i]
Soccer is the most popular sport but basketball is the fastest growing sport in the world.
McDonald's is the biggest restarant chain in the world.
It sounds to me like you are pissed off and added a couple of sentences saying the opposite and adding a :P to detract from a rant.
It's like me complaining of too many Koreans owning dry-cleaning stores.
America is a capitalist society. What country doesn't want others just like them? As you say, it brings us closer... :devil:
Sure, for the most part, it is a rant. The last couple of sentences are just me trying to take the edge off and be fair - at least a bit, anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Call it a fault.
And of course I'm pissed off about this. I wouldn't have bothered with all that typing unless I felt strongly about it.
However, I wonder how you would feel if AU did to the US what the US is doing to AU? Market driven or otherwise.
Would you get pissed off about it if the situation were reversed?
Do you care about your culture enough to want to hang onto some of it?
Would any American? Do I even need to ask?
As for who runs the dry cleaners, that's hardly going to be a threat to an entire nation's culture.
And sure, commerce will bring us closer... for a while. Expect a backlash eventually though.
Calling McDonalds a Resturant is probably the funniest thing in this thread...
Doesnt even deserve the title Cafe or Diner, so to name it after "Quality" eating establishments... :P
America is a different animal somewhat. We are used to other cultures coming in to the fray. If something is popular there is a reason for it.....MOST PEOPLE SEEM TO LIKE IT. DUHH. :1eye:Quote:
Originally Posted by uNz[i]
You sit there and complain about McDonald's....well don't eat there...and furthermore if it really pisses you off then try to get your Australian brethren to do the same. Tell the AFL to not sell out by not smearing McDonald's marketing feces on your football.
If Australia had a good TV show over here, I'd simply watch it, a good restaurant, I'd eat there and if people stopped eating at McDonald's to eat at Aussinald's then I wouldn't be fucking pissing and moaning about it.
The US isn't doing this to the AU. The AU is doing it to themselves.
Looks like you got some coercing to do with your brethren. :dry:
btw while it is polite, there is no need to apologize for being away when no one was looking for you. :P
Fine then.Quote:
Originally Posted by uNz[i]
Define "culture".
To use some examples from your "rant":
"Children play less tennis and football (Aussie Rules and Soccer), but basketball, baseball and gridiron are rapidly gaining popularity."
Hmmm.
All of those games involve running around and doing something with/to a ball, but the former somehow embody your culture while the latter do not.
Obviously, to you, Australian culture is contained in the narrow and (relatively) insignificant differences in the rules of these games.
"Iconic Aussie companies are being sold off to US corporations one by one.
Even ownership of our public utilities is heading overseas (although I admit most of them are being sold off to French or UK companies)."
Iconic American companies are either being sold off or have moved offshore too (who knows where Levis are made these days? NOT San Francisco....) and, in today's corporate world, I doubt that there even is such a thing as an "American" corporation. There may be an American corporate headquarters, but the money rivers flow beyond and unheeding of national borders.
The only truly "American" companies that I can think of offhand are the ones that have failed spectacularly...Enron, Worldcom and the like.
Perhaps American "culture" is embodied by the Ponzi schemes so beloved of recent failed companies.
But Ponzi was Italian, so that can't be it either.
I can't think of any particularly binding definitions of American culture and don't bemoan the loss if it...whatever "it" might have been.
Can you do better with your definitions?
Well as you know I did my best... but then everything vanished in the mysterious manner as has been the trend in here of late.
Deus ex machina? Or just another blockhead with a chip on a hunched little shoulder?
Yes I do recall.
Your answer was a model of rational riposte, well reasoned and thoughtful.
And now it's vanished.
Que sera, sera.
It seems the episode hasn't quite ended, huh?
Well, then.
Do we have a consensus as to who/what constitutes the offending party?
I have an idea.
We could start a thread in the guest section where we could all post without logging in, and, if we can trust our mod crew to forego use of their mod-toolboxes for the time being, perhaps we could empty our mud-buckets at each other, and we could likewise issue an open invite to any mischievious types (Rikk, are you listening?) to participate, all with the understanding that order should be maintained, with an eye/ear towards peaceful future co-existence.
Kind of like the United Nations, yes?
I think I'll go start it right now. ;)