Your Opinions Please

[Rat Faced]

No shit.

It's mighty convenient though, ain't it.

As convenient as all the Contradictions in Religious Text maybe?


Remember, anyone can say that God told 'em to write something...

[Busyman]

What it means to me is that the test of 'true' tolerance is having strong convictions, but being tolerant of others.........even though you feel strongly about an issue yourself.

I think it is going to be important in uniting the citizens of the United States after the election that the new President have this 'true' tolerance.

That makes no sense to me.

It sounds good if one of your convictions to be tolerant.

Otherwise having strong convictions is analogous to unwavering devotion to a fixed belief.

One does not have to be tolerant in order to have strong convictions but must be tolerant enough to not waver in those convictions.

Translation:
I do not have tolerate you to have strong beliefs but I tolerate you enough to not influence me to change my beliefs.

[Busyman]

As convenient as all the Contradictions in Religious Text maybe?


Remember, anyone can say that God told 'em to write something...

Agreed....


...but believing in organized religion is not logical in comparison to simply believing in a "creator".

[Rat Faced]

Creator?

Some think that Nature IS the Creator, and no one can dispute or disprove that belief, any more than they can disprove any other belief.

As only females (and hermaphrodites etc.) can create life... why is "God" most often portrayed as Male?

Always wondered that...

[Busyman]

Creator?

Some think that Nature IS the Creator, and no one can dispute or disprove that belief, any more than they can disprove any other belief.

As only females (and hermaphrodites etc.) can create life... why is "God" most often portrayed as Male?

Always wondered that...

What created nature?

It does work out that the spinning of the planet helps us not to float out in space.

I'm well versed in the science of things.

I know many folks explanation of things is, "well it just is".

I just believe something intelligent set it in motion.

God is "portrayed' male because we live in a male dominated world. God is perceived as the biggest dominator.

Females need a male to create life. Hermaphrodites don't.

[Rat Faced]

See?

This is why we need tolerance...

If we could break down what we are all trying to say into symbols, rather than what we have grown up with in far from perfect languages and cultures...

I wonder how far apart we'd all actually be?

I cant believe any "Creator" would have the sin of "Pride" to such an extent that he'd wish to be worshiped in a certain way, or at all...

[hobbes]

What created nature?

It does work out that the spinning of the planet helps us not to float out in space.

I'm well versed in the science of things.

I know many folks explanation of things is, "well it just is".

I just believe something intelligent set it in motion.

God is "portrayed' male because we live in a male dominated world. God is perceived as the biggest dominator.

Females need a male to create life. Hermaphrodites don't.

Why create something more complex than our universe (a creator) to explain how our universe came to be? That simply defers the question to "who created the creator?"

People tend to say that God has always been, so he has no beginning and no end, he is "outside" of time. That is about as meaningful as saying that there is no God and the Universe has always existed. Mere speculation.

Creating a God is mans' attempt to make sense of that which he cannot comprehend. A coping mechanism to negate the thought that our lives are as evanescent and pointless as a puff of smoke.

As for oxygen and carbon dioxide, that system works because that is what is available. If plants gave off hyrogren sulfide, whatever animals alive would "use" that. The ambient conditions of our planet dictate what works and what doesn't. There is nothing magical about oxygen and carbon dioxide.

[sArA]

That makes no sense to me.

It sounds good if one of your convictions to be tolerant.

Otherwise having strong convictions is analogous to unwavering devotion to a fixed belief.

One does not have to be tolerant in order to have strong convictions but must be tolerant enough to not waver in those convictions.

Translation:
I do not have tolerate you to have strong beliefs but I tolerate you enough to not influence me to change my beliefs.

I am sorry, I disagree here.

Tolerance does not require that I have sufficient conviction to enable me to resist influence to change.

Tolerance is the strength to accept another's conviction.

My personal conviction to any belief is irrelevant in this case, as tolerance does not imply that I might be tempted take on those views, merely that I accept other's rights to have them.

Just another imho...type thing

[Busyman]

See?

This is why we need tolerance...

If we could break down what we are all trying to say into symbols, rather than what we have grown up with in far from perfect languages and cultures...

I wonder how far apart we'd all actually be?

I cant believe any "Creator" would have the sin of "Pride" to such an extent that he'd wish to be worshiped in a certain way, or at all...

Well that's going into organized religion.

[Busyman]

Why create something more complex than our universe (a creator) to explain how our universe came to be? That simply defers the question to "who created the creator?"

People tend to say that God has always been, so he has no beginning and no end, he is "outside" of time. That is about as meaningful as saying that there is no God and the Universe has always existed. Mere speculation.

Creating a God is mans' attempt to make sense of that which he cannot comprehend. A coping mechanism to negate the thought that our lives are as evanescent and pointless as a puff of smoke.

As for oxygen and carbon dioxide, that system works because that is what is available. If plants gave off hyrogren sulfide, whatever animals alive would "use" that. The ambient conditions of our planet dictate what works and what doesn't. There is nothing magical about oxygen and carbon dioxide.

Never said it was hobbes, never said it was.