Talking works

Life, the universe, and everything.
Forum rules
- No personal attacks against players or staff members - please be civil!
- No posting of mature images/links, keep content SFW. If it's NSFW, don't post it on these forums.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Talking works

Postby avak » Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:33 pm

Long gone are the days of, "we'll never negotiate with terrorists!" The mocking that Obama took for proposing he would talk to nations like Syria and Iran is ancient history.

Analysts Cite Obama Effect in Lebanese Election

BEIRUT, Lebanon — There were many domestic reasons why voters handed an American-backed coalition a victory in Lebanese parliamentary elections on Sunday — but political analysts also attribute it in part to President Obama’s campaign of outreach to the Arab and Muslim world.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Tue Jun 09, 2009 6:17 pm

I agree with Ron Paul that we should talk to everyone our friends and our enemies.

I do disagree and don't like Obama's speeches that have minimized Christians in favor of gaining "understanding" with Islamists. To minimize our Christian heritage solely to pacify the Islamists is pandering of the worst kind. However, the effect I think was very strategic and a much better alternative to war... in the short term. The long term effects of this pandering could be bad.

Why is everything Christian evil and bad and responsible for oppression, and every secular idea or world view is good and great despite evidence to the contrary.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Tue Jun 09, 2009 6:22 pm

kiryan wrote:I agree with Ron Paul that we should talk to everyone our friends and our enemies.

I do disagree and don't like Obama's speeches that have minimized Christians in favor of gaining "understanding" with Islamists. To minimize our Christian heritage solely to pacify the Islamists is pandering of the worst kind. However, the effect I think was very strategic and a much better alternative to war... in the short term. The long term effects of this pandering could be bad.

Why is everything Christian evil and bad and responsible for oppression, and every secular idea or world view is good and great despite evidence to the contrary.


Because secular reasoning never burned people at the stake for witchcraft? Because secular thought doesn't try to force laws into our country that restrict the rights of others based on their beliefs? Because Christians have bombed more abortion clinics than non-religious people have churches?

But no, we'd ALL be better off if we just bowed down before fundamental Christian theology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntC0PNHFRgU


Frankly though, I have no idea what you're talking about. What is this "minimizing Christianity" crap you're talking about? Is it that he doesn't claim God speaks to him? Because, really, that's just sanity.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby Ragorn » Tue Jun 09, 2009 7:55 pm

kiryan wrote:Why is everything Christian evil and bad and responsible for oppression, and every secular idea or world view is good and great despite evidence to the contrary.

Why are Muslims who attack and kill civilians called terrorists, while Christians who attack and kill civilians called violent protestors?
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:06 pm

They are terrorists and it is wrong.

Why does a person who murders a pregnant woman get charged with 2 counts of murder, but a doctor who aborts a baby in the 3rd trimester, up to days before it is born, just performing a "procedure".
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:16 pm

kiryan wrote:They are terrorists and it is wrong.

Why does a person who murders a pregnant woman get charged with 2 counts of murder, but a doctor who aborts a baby in the 3rd trimester, up to days before it is born, just performing a "procedure".


Umm, pretty sure 3rd trimester abortions are illegal.

Not that has anything to do with this discussion. You're missing the point. We could compare notes all day, but the point is you'd like to believe Christians are perfect when <i>there are notes to compare</i>.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:44 pm

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06 ... rmanently/

Tiller opened the Women's Health Care Services, Inc., in the 1970s and it served as one of three clinics in the country that performed controversial second- and third-term abortions.

I think I read it on CNN or ABC or CBS as well.

..

I'm not sure if 3rd trimester abortions are still legal, I think they are. Supreme court ruled that the Federal law outlawing partial birth abortions was legal... but this is not the same as late or 3rd trimester abortions. One of the methods of partial birth abortion was basically as the baby is being born, just hold it in the birth canal until it dies. There were some absolutely barbaric methods too that I understood to be legal under partial birth abortion.

---------

Christians are not perfect and just because we believe in a set of standards given to us by God, doesn't mean we can follow them and that people can't pervert it. If we could follow them, then the world would be a much better place. You can always find some wackos in any group of people. Look at PETA.

Secular reasoning is responsible for plenty of atrocity. Don't kid yourself. Hitler's killings, racial cleansing all across the world. Slavery... China? Human tests of chemical and biological weapons. The only difference between secular ideas and religious ideas is that we attribute them to God and don't take a scientific approach to proving its truer. If mormonism was proved to be a better way of life for happyness and social stability than popular American culture would you convert or support its widespread adoption? Why not, aren't we just trying to make everyone's life better utilizing the best approaches towards social engineering? Its just one man made idea vs another right if you don't believe in God.

Do you really think that fewer christian churches and places of worship have been destroyed by non religious people than abortion clinics bombed? How many abortion clinic bombings have there been? I seem to recall a string of 3 or 4 churches set on fire a few years ago and sporadically going back 20 years. Also, you clearly are not considering other countries like Africa and China. Oh its my turn. Whats your source for the followign quote: "Because Christians have bombed more abortion clinics than non-religious people have churches?" must not be true since you can't cite a source and prove it.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:14 pm

kiryan wrote:Secular reasoning is responsible for plenty of atrocity. Don't kid yourself. Hitler's killings,


Wikipedia wrote:In public, Hitler often praised Christian heritage, German Christian culture, and professed a belief in an Aryan Jesus Christ, a Jesus who fought against the Jews.[276] In his speeches and publications Hitler spoke of his interpretation of Christianity as a central motivation for his antisemitism, stating that "As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice."[277][278]


Yes, there is some controversy over how religious he was... but that's, well, controversial and it sounds more like he wanted the church to be different rather than non-existent. More Martin Luther, less Ayn Rand.

racial cleansing all across the world.


Racial cleansings? Such as? Do you have any that AREN'T based on religious disagreement?

Slavery...


I doubt highly that there were any atheists in a Babylonian slave market.

China?


What about it?

Human tests of chemical and biological weapons.


Ok, I really don't feel like researching the entire history of biological weapons. Do you really, honestly think that the people who made the decision to test and use such weapons weren't religious? I'm willing to bet it was politicians making the decision, btw. You know, those people who are always religious because their constituents demand it?

Yeah.

The only difference between secular ideas and religious ideas is that we attribute them to God and don't take a scientific approach to proving its truer. If mormonism was proved to be a better way of life for happyness and social stability than popular American culture would you convert or support its widespread adoption? Why not, aren't we just trying to make everyone's life better utilizing the best approaches towards social engineering? Its just one man made idea vs another right if you don't believe in God.


True. But good luck with that. We both know you'd rail against a Mormon society just as much as you do an Islamic one. Just man-made ideas after all, right?

Do you really think that fewer christian churches and places of worship have been destroyed by non religious people than abortion clinics bombed?


Yep. Frankly, your beliefs aren't important enough for us to want to destroy a building... and our beliefs aren't beliefs so we don't have much motivation to force them on others either. We really just want you to stop enacting laws telling us how to live and behave.

How many abortion clinic bombings have there been? I seem to recall a string of 3 or 4 churches set on fire a few years ago and sporadically going back 20 years. Also, you clearly are not considering other countries like Africa and China.


What do they have to do with anything?

Oh its my turn. Whats your source for the followign quote: "Because Christians have bombed more abortion clinics than non-religious people have churches?" must not be true since you can't cite a source and prove it.



I'll try to find something later. The only articles about church bombings or fires I can find are racially motivated, which means KKK and other white supremacist groups. I'm pretty sure most of those groups are filled with nice, down home, faithful christians... but I won't make that claim just yet.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:17 pm

Do you really, honestly think that the people who made the decision to test and use such weapons weren't religious?

Can I now go back and talk about USA being a Christian nation since Bush and Obama are both professed and practicing Christians? Can we go back to the "minimizing" of Christianity and our heritage as a Christian nation that Obama is doing in the Mid East solely to pander to the Islamists / Muslims?

I'm probably stretchign here, but just because people are religious doesn't mean that their action represent their religion. If I go bang a prostitute, thats not attributable to my religion. If I wage jihad on your ass, that is.

...

... racial cleansings are not all spawned based on religion. I'm sure some have been just as I'm sure that some are not. How about the Hutsu and Tutsi's?

Slavery was performed by plenty of religion and plenty of non religious people. Slavery certainly is not a Christian principle today... if it ever was (yes i know there was slavery in the bible by good godly men).

Yea, but I believe in God so I'm not going to convert to Mormonism. I'm just asking that if the Mormon way of life was better for society as proven by studies on Mormons, would you take up that lifestyle or promote it for everyone? I said "proven". Can you evaluate the lifestyle based on empirical results and accept that even though they claim its God spoken that it was just the idea of some crazy con man with a glib tongue? Two man made ideas competing with one another without the label of "religious" vs "secular"?

lol, non religious people have committed the same sins that religious people have. Don't kid yourself. A secular world view is fundamentally no different than a religious one except we believe ours is inspired by God and you believe yours is inspied by your god of Logic and freedom.

We really just want you to stop enacting laws telling us how to live and behave. (yea us too). So we pass laws to tell you how to behave, and you preach (i mean teach) our kids at school.


Why do you hate religion so much? Christianity has some great ideals... and if everyone acted in a Christ like manner, it would be wonderful. When I was young, I wasn't religious. I worshipped logic and science. I rejected religion to a large degree... but after studying some buddihism, I found one of the truest things I have ever known, life is pain... because of desire. At that point, I thought very very seriously about killing myself. Whats the point of living, reproducing, buying a house or a car or learning something? really what is the point... Go ahead and prove that with science or logic...

I started going to church to learn a better way to live, and found the truth of Christ in the process. I went to several different churches of several religions as I was looking. Regardless of whether you believe he is God or the son of God or whatever, he was a great man and I'm 100% sure that we would be happier if more of us were like him. Jesus was a social liberal, only he didn't want to make a law to force you to pay your taxes, he wanted you to give everything you had money and time to helping others.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby Ragorn » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:24 pm

kiryan wrote:They are terrorists and it is wrong.

Why does a person who murders a pregnant woman get charged with 2 counts of murder, but a doctor who aborts a baby in the 3rd trimester, up to days before it is born, just performing a "procedure".

That's actually a really good question, and I'm curious about the double murder charge. Do you have a citation? A pregnant woman was denied access to a HOV-2 lane. I think we need to make up our minds.

I'm really not going to get drawn into the argument about whether Christians or non-Christians are more violent or hateful. I wonder though, when you say "secular" whether you mean "non-religious" or simply "non-Christian."
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby avak » Wed Jun 10, 2009 2:32 pm

Wait a second! I want to hear from the people that said negotiation was "stupid and naive" and "defeat".

http://www.torilmud.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=16443
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:35 pm

Scott Peterson was charged with 2 counts of murder. I've read a few stories over the years in the news.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/lacicharge1.html

http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-articles ... nalty.html
The fact that Peterson was convicted of two murders automatically limits his sentencing options to life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty.

The whole secular vs religion thing, I'm talking about religion of any kind. Religion is a dirty word in public education and government, but secular world views and ideas are given wide latitude. Gay and Lesbian club ok, bible club no. If there is no god, aren't all these ideas man made? What makes the ones labeled secular special, let alone better than the ones labeled religious?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:42 pm

kiryan wrote:Scott Peterson was charged with 2 counts of murder. I've read a few stories over the years in the news.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/lacicharge1.html

http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-articles ... nalty.html
The fact that Peterson was convicted of two murders automatically limits his sentencing options to life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty.

The whole secular vs religion thing, I'm talking about religion of any kind. Religion is a dirty word in public education and government, but secular world views and ideas are given wide latitude. Gay and Lesbian club ok, bible club no. If there is no god, aren't all these ideas man made? What makes the ones labeled secular special, let alone better than the ones labeled religious?


How would you feel about an Islam Club?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:46 pm

Shouldn't we give it a chance to see if it was naieve and defeat? I mean the speech was just last week. I just read an article that blames the current economic collapse on Reagan. LOL

I think its naieve to think that talking will solve the middle east problems, but I hold out hope that it can.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Talking works

Postby Corth » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:50 pm

avak wrote:Wait a second! I want to hear from the people that said negotiation was "stupid and naive" and "defeat".

http://www.torilmud.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=16443


Corth wrote:What the Islamic radicals want we cannot give them. They want the destruction of Israel, the only civilized country in the region. They want western society to stop corrupting their children with devil stuff like.. television and barbie dolls. They want to revert to the dark ages, establish a caliphate, run by a powerful dictator who doles out strict islamic punishment for horrible crimes (like, for instance, showing one's female face in public). Its not like we can just sit down at a conference table and hash this out. Don't be stupid and naive.


I stand by this statement. It was and still is 100% correct. I am not referring in that passage to Iran and Syria. I am referring to Al Queda and other like radical islamists, where there is nothing at all to talk about. It is, indeed, stupid and naive to believe that we can negotiate a resolution to our issues with Al Queda. I do not see how my statement would be interpreted as being against diplomatic overtures to Iran and Syria.

That said, I think Obama is absolutely nuts to proclaim that Iran should be allowed to pursue nuclear energy sources. They have all the oil they could ever need. The argument that they need nuclear energy is absurd, and obviously just a pretext for obtaining nuclear weapon technology. The entire civilized world, including the Europeans, have come out against the Iranian nuclear program, and Obama decides to undermine it by saying such a program might be considered legitimate. The guy is a menace.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby avak » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:54 pm

Well, to be honest, I was just trying to incite you because I know what you meant.

However, negotiation and diplomatic talks are certainly vastly more in vogue than they were four years ago, no? The US considers countries like Iran a 'sponsor of terrorism' which is nuanced enough for me to get a headache.

The broader point simply being that the old administration and even McCain (to an extent) not only laughed off the efficacy of these tactics, but mocked those that held the belief that they could work. I saw some of those sentiments being echoed in the thread I linked to and I am just happy to see that Obama is getting results through seeking common ground. That is a hell of a lot better than sending billions of dollars and America's young people in to a hellish abyss.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:22 pm

see... now you are going way too far... He gave a couple of speeches... where are the results that are supposedly working? They like us better? They elected some more moderate people? This is not a popularity contest and being liked doesn't mean they aren't going to screw you when its in their best interests. They are and will. We do it, they do it irrespective of how much we like each other. Look at North Korea. Do you think Iran is going to be more like India or more like North Korea.

Now look at the real harm that has been done. The leader of the free world (that is us btw) vindicated Iran's nuclear position throwing away years of sacrifices and resolves to tow the line on this position. He declared that their cultural and government systems should be respected and that no one should impose their beliefs on them... So much for basic human rights... apparently we only champion them when 2 dudes want to screw and pretend they are a husband and wife. There was rampant criticism from middle eastern womens activists about the damage Obama did with his statements, and I agree with them. Obama said we are goign to respect your cultural traditions. We are not going to impose democracy on you. We are not going to force you to give your people (specifically women and children) rights. We're going to treat you like a friend and ignore that you are burying women up to their neck in the ground and brutually stoning them to death for being raped.

There are signs he has done real damage already... what remains to be seen is if he does influence the elections... if the moderates can change the countries from within. If Iran can unclench its fist. If the muslim nations of the world can clean up their islamist fanatics the same way we cleaned up the klan, the wild west, peta and our own christian fanactics.
Last edited by kiryan on Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby Ragorn » Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:28 pm

kiryan wrote:We are not going to force you to give your people (specifically women and children) rights. We're going to treat you like a friend and ignore that you are burying women up to their neck in the ground and brutually stoning them to death for being raped.

Hmm.

Should the EU censure the United States for violating human rights by waterboarding our prisoners? I'm just wondering, because it seems to me that you're very loudly championing the idea that countries should attempt to impose their moral values on each other when they feel they're in the right. It just strikes me as odd that the person/party that's mad at Obama for talking to our enemies is the same person/party who gets all "Don't fuck with Texas" when other countries start calling us out for our own violations.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:40 pm

kiryan wrote:see... now you are going way too far... He gave a couple of speeches... where are the results that are supposedly working? They like us better? They elected some more moderate people? This is not a popularity contest and being liked doesn't mean they aren't going to screw you when its in their best interests. They are and will. We do it, they do it irrespective of how much we like each other.

Now look at the real harm that has been done. The leader of the free world (that is us btw) vindicated Iran's nuclear position throwing away years of sacrifices and resolves to tow the line on this position. He declared that their cultural and government systems should be respected and that no one should impose their beliefs on them... So much for basic human rights... apparently we only champion them when 2 dudes want to screw and pretend they are a husband and wife. There was rampant criticism from middle eastern womens activists about the damage Obama did with his statements, and I agree with them. Obama said we are goign to respect your cultural traditions. We are not going to impose democracy on you. We are not going to force you to give your people (specifically women and children) rights. We're going to treat you like a friend and ignore that you are burying women up to their neck in the ground and brutually stoning them to death for being raped.

There are signs he has done real damage already... what remains to be seen is if he does influence the elections... if the moderates can change the countries from within. If Iran can unclench its fist. If the muslim nations of the world can clean up their islamist fanatics the same way we cleaned up the klan, the wild west, peta and our own christian fanactics.


This is similar to my last question:

How would you feel if Middle-Eastern countries were trying to impose their beliefs on us?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Talking works

Postby Corth » Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:55 pm

avak wrote:Well, to be honest, I was just trying to incite you because I know what you meant.

However, negotiation and diplomatic talks are certainly vastly more in vogue than they were four years ago, no? The US considers countries like Iran a 'sponsor of terrorism' which is nuanced enough for me to get a headache.

The broader point simply being that the old administration and even McCain (to an extent) not only laughed off the efficacy of these tactics, but mocked those that held the belief that they could work. I saw some of those sentiments being echoed in the thread I linked to and I am just happy to see that Obama is getting results through seeking common ground. That is a hell of a lot better than sending billions of dollars and America's young people in to a hellish abyss.


And then the other side of the coin. We tried talking with North Korea, and indeed came to several deals with them which they continued to breach. We even took them off the list of states that sponsor terrorism, and now the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton is looking for a legal basis to put them back on the list. Constantly talking with them has gotten us absolutely nowhere, and has bought them time to manufacture working nuclear weapons. If we had embargoed them right away before they went nuclear we may have prevented it, and in fact, may have toppled that outlaw regime.

Fact of the matter is that there is no easy answer. Sometimes diplomacy works and sometimes it doesn't. What needs to be avoided is a dogmatic fits all sizes response. We need our leaders to think outside the box and judge, on its own merits, how each particular situation should be handled.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Botef
Sojourner
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Eastern Washington
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Botef » Wed Jun 10, 2009 7:45 pm

On the issue of openness and communication let us not forget that Gorbachev's reforms, in particular glasnost, paved the way for communication between the soviets and the west and probably played a big role in ending the cold war or at least cooling it down (or warming it up?) to a point where changes could be made within the USSR that would end the escalation. While there is certainly a big difference between the USSR and our modern enemies I still think it is important to try and communicate without using the 'your with us or against us' rhetoric that was common place during Bush's years in office. I don't think that approach is in any way productive to ending disagreements with a nation that already dislikes you. I agree that some of these nations and peoples don't have any intention of resolving their differences with us through diplomacy but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take interest or try to engage these nations, whether it be directly or through future ruling parties. That doesn't mean we should concede or submit to the demands of a rogue nation, just that we should lend our ear if and when a dialogue can be started and sometimes you have to take the first step towards reaching that point. For the record I question the wisdom of Obama's approach but the last eight years have done very little to secure the region so I don't think its entirely irrational to attempt it.
Sunamit group-says 'imrex west, tibek backstab touk i think his name is on entry'
// Post Count +1
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:06 pm

I should probably qualify my statement of "real harm being done" as real harm has been done to existing positions and dynamics and to our resolve as a country. It is very clear now, that if you have a US administration you don't like, you can wait them out. Iran's strategy is vindicated and I would expect countries around the world to employ the same strategy in the future.

I believe its possible that Obama's approach could shake things up and lead to changes that decades of bluster, threats, sanctions did not bring. I mean look at how successful it was with Cuba... 40 years of nothing? In retrospect, maybe talking would've been better. On the other hand, all the talking in the world is probably not going to get middle eastern countries to give their women equality.

--

I don't think we should impose our beliefs on others... even abortion and homosexual marriage. But if presented with the choice to vote for or against abortion, I'm going to vote what I think is right in moral terms irrespective of my belief that we should have the freedom to choose for ourselves.

I once spent some time considering whether it was ok that other countries don't operate like countries of the western world do... I think that we are too egocentric sometimes believing that democracy is the holy grail of a government / society. That people everywhere are oppressed if they don't have the same freedoms or world view we do. I don't agree that they should or have to change. I would like to see people have the freedom to leave a society that doesn't let them do what they want to, but I don't think you go in and tell them that forcing women to wear headscarves is oppressive.

Another interesting thought... does every world view have the right to exist... to be practiced? I am inclined to say yes, but I can't argue too strenuously that Iran's world view that Israel must be will be wiped out should be allowed. Or that Hitler's view that Jews should be exterminated should be respected. Do you want thought police like they have in Iran? Do you allow these "dangerous" ideas to flourish and spread as long as violence doesn't occur? China suppresses world views they dont like and actively socially engineers their people... Is that wrong? We suppress religion in our schools and government and promote other secular doctrines in our schools.

I'm rambling
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:21 pm

kiryan wrote:I should probably qualify my statement of "real harm being done" as real harm has been done to existing positions and dynamics and to our resolve as a country. It is very clear now, that if you have a US administration you don't like, you can wait them out. Iran's strategy is vindicated and I would expect countries around the world to employ the same strategy in the future.


That was never not true. Every country in the world knows that our government can take a radical change every 4 years.

I believe its possible that Obama's approach could shake things up and lead to changes that decades of bluster, threats, sanctions did not bring. I mean look at how successful it was with Cuba... 40 years of nothing? In retrospect, maybe talking would've been better. On the other hand, all the talking in the world is probably not going to get middle eastern countries to give their women equality.


We're not talking about giving their women equality, we're talking about them not wanting to fly airplanes into our buildings. We can be the big bully everyone hates, but that's not going to change how they behave either... they'll just have reason to hate us for it.


I don't think we should impose our beliefs on others... even abortion and homosexual marriage. But if presented with the choice to vote for or against abortion, I'm going to vote what I think is right in moral terms irrespective of my belief that we should have the freedom to choose for ourselves.


Kiryan wrote:He declared that their cultural and government systems should be respected and that no one should impose their beliefs on them... So much for basic human rights... apparently we only champion them when 2 dudes want to screw and pretend they are a husband and wife.


Make up your mind. Is it "doing real harm" when we say we shouldn't impose our beliefs on others, or do you think we shouldn't do that?

It makes no difference, you can't change what people believe through threats or violence. You only anger them.


I once spent some time considering whether it was ok that other countries don't operate like countries of the western world do... I think that we are too egocentric sometimes believing that democracy is the holy grail of a government / society. That people everywhere are oppressed if they don't have the same freedoms or world view we do. I don't agree that they should or have to change. I would like to see people have the freedom to leave a society that doesn't let them do what they want to, but I don't think you go in and tell them that forcing women to wear headscarves is oppressive.


Isn't this what you praise Bush for doing and criticize Obama for not doing?

Another interesting thought... does every world view have the right to exist... to be practiced?


Irrelevant question. It is not something that can be prevented. Even though Hitler was stopped, his beliefs still resonate strongly with various segments of our population. What do we do, kill all the White Supremacists? We'd just create more, as their families cry out for revenge and seek to place blame.

I am inclined to say yes, but I can't argue too strenuously that Iran's world view that Israel must be will be wiped out should be allowed. Or that Hitler's view that Jews should be exterminated should be respected. Do you want thought police like they have in Iran? Do you allow these "dangerous" ideas to flourish and spread as long as violence doesn't occur? China suppresses world views they dont like and actively socially engineers their people... Is that wrong? We suppress religion in our schools and government and promote other secular doctrines in our schools.


I'll ask again: Would you be ok with public schools teaching Islam?

You DO realize why there is separation of Church and State right? It's because most of the people who settled America were running away from societies where they couldn't practice their religion the way they believed. Protestants were running from Catholic infused governments, and knew the wisdom of separating belief from law.


I'm rambling


Yes, usually.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby Ragorn » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:58 pm

Corth wrote:Fact of the matter is that there is no easy answer. Sometimes diplomacy works and sometimes it doesn't. What needs to be avoided is a dogmatic fits all sizes response. We need our leaders to think outside the box and judge, on its own merits, how each particular situation should be handled.

Perhaps Chimpy McFlightsuit shouldn't have called them the "Axis of Evil." Maybe that sorta incited them to the point where diplomacy was less effective.

After all, don't you guys just LOVE when Iran calls us the Great Satan?

Edit: Iran, right.
Last edited by Ragorn on Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Talking works

Postby Corth » Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:18 am

I'll agree with that Ragorn. It doesn't serve any real purpose to call people or countries names. In fact I could even see such overblown rhetoric sparking an arms race. It still doesn't change the fact that years of diplomacy by the Clinton and GWB administrations resulted in us getting scammed time and time again. That and inaction by the UN (due to China's veto threat in the Security Counsel), gave NK plenty of time to perfect a nuclear arsenal. The correct thing to do would have been to embrago them before they had nukes. Search ever single ship coming in and out of that country.

Oh, and BTW - Its Iran, not Iraq, that is famous for the "Great Satan" comment. Iraq is a lot more secular than Iran. The Baathists (Hussein) were not Islamists, as opposed to the Ayatollahs in Iran.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:47 pm

I would be ok with non violent religions like most practicers of Islam and most flavors of Christianity being allowed to be in a public school. I dont think I want the government teaching anything, but I would like to be able to be involved instead of shunned or actively discriminated against. You can barely get permission to start a bible or a prayer club these days.

I'm ok with the separation of church and state. what i'm not ok with is this idea that having bible club at school is a violation of the separation of church and state. That your kid or family can be offended because there are flyers on the public bulletin board promoting a religion but you can for the environment club, the gay and lesbian club and every other "secular" idea. That basketball teams can't pray at all before a game because some aethiest kid would be uncomfortable. Religious people have to suffer uncomfort all the time, but everyone else gets all bent out of shape and receives government protection.

That religion is a dirty word. Most US religions are pacifist and inspirational and oriented on helping others. All great qualities. I guarantee you right now that more human / social service good is being done by people in the name of religion across American than in any other non public enterprise... yet we rail them and actively discriminate at all levels of government and public systems. You don't have to have a state religion, just stop working against it.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:58 pm

kiryan wrote:I would be ok with non violent religions like most practicers of Islam and most flavors of Christianity being allowed to be in a public school.


Gee, I'm sure they're glad you're willing to let them exist. That isn't really what I asked, though.

I dont think I want the government teaching anything, but I would like to be able to be involved instead of shunned or actively discriminated against. You can barely get permission to start a bible or a prayer club these days.


See, the problem here is that clubs need to be led by teachers. (At least, they were in my school.) At that point you have a government employee teaching religion to the students.

All great qualities. I guarantee you right now that more human / social service good is being done by people in the name of religion across American than in any other non public enterprise...


I tried to find actual statistics on Religious charity vs. non-religious charity, but found this instead. PRetty well said:

http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2009/06/atheism-theism-and-charity.html

Of course, I could also note that you're the one constantly railing against government programs to help the poor and provide other social services. Programs which those "evul libruhls" like to set up. So I still have to wonder who is doing more, you with your church based charities or Liberals with government based programs.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:17 pm

Yes I am constantly railing against government based aid programs and I will continue to be put out by someone taking my money and giving it to someone else because they don't have enough money. It should be my choice to give someone else my money to support their lifestyle.

--

Interesting view point. I do agree that charitable activities are a way of promoting the church, but the direct focus is to help people. I don't think its a valid argument in this debate that resoruces spent on the sciences is a direct comparison to resoruces spent on directly aiding people. Also, i think its important to point out that the article portrays christian giving as selfish promotion of the church and science as essentially a selfless desire to make life better for everyone. Some scientists go into science to make the world a better place just like most clergy, others are in it for the money the fame the prestige or just their selfish desire to know how things work.

Also, I'd like to point out that while liberals may be responsible for the social programs, we all pay for it and the religious people are doing that + additional.

--

"Gee, I'm sure they're glad you're willing to let them exist. That isn't really what I asked, though. "

Gee, I wish liberals were willing to let them exist.

--

Clubs have to be lead by teachers. so we can't have bible clubs because that would be a violation of church and state. schools I grew up in clubs had to be sponsored, not "lead" or taught by teachers. I'm sure it varies.

Still, i dont see the problem at all for a teacher to "lead" or "teach" religion in this manner on a voluntary basis. if teachers are paid for sponsoring / leading clubs like environment club then I'm even ok for them to be paid for "promoting" religion in this way. I still don't think that this translates into state sponsored religion... specifically not the separation of church and state the framers meant.

---

We're not talking about giving their women equality, we're talking about them not wanting to fly airplanes into our buildings. We can be the big bully everyone hates, but that's not going to change how they behave either... they'll just have reason to hate us for it.

so pacify them? can you social liberals do something to pacify us pro lifers so we dont hate you and want to kill your doctors?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:26 pm

kiryan wrote:
so pacify them? can you social liberals do something to pacify us pro lifers so we dont hate you and want to kill your doctors?


Yes, we can disallow teachers from forcing religious values so far down your through that you forget Thou Shalt Not Kill.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Talking works

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:29 pm

Sarvis:

A Nation of Givers (2nd chart)

It's the most famous recent study on charitable giving. It also talks about giving across income levels, political views, religious, etc.

Chronicles of Philanthropy

Another one I quickly found.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:29 pm

Oh, and you know what's TRULY ridiculous? Your absolute belief that there is a war against Christianity when we condone private Catholic schools.

You're not upset that we're excluding you, because we aren't. You're upset that we're not letting you pressure us.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby Ragorn » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:37 pm

kiryan wrote:That your kid or family can be offended because there are flyers on the public bulletin board promoting a religion but you can for the environment club, the gay and lesbian club and every other "secular" idea.

I don't think you'll find many people who are offended at the idea of a "bible" club... except in cases where "bible" clubs are allowed and "koran" club flyers keep getting torn down or destroyed. The thing about atheists in general is, we typically don't care about how you practice your religion, as long as you don't do it in a manner that makes it mandatory for me to observe/participate.

That basketball teams can't pray at all before a game because some aethiest kid would be uncomfortable.

Like that. That makes it mandatory for me to observe/participate, and is thus not ok. If you want to pray in the locker room, or ten of you want to hold hands and form a prayer circle before the game, that's fine. "The team" cannot pray, because we don't all worship your god.

If you ever want a litmus test to determine if something is ok or not, just pretend that the prayer in question is being offered to Allah and not Jesus. Would you feel comfortable if the basketball coach handed you a prayer mat and pointed you toward Mecca before the team's prayer?

Religious people have to suffer uncomfort all the time, but everyone else gets all bent out of shape and receives government protection.

And this is about the point where I tell you to shut the fuck up. Christians are not persecuted in America. Nobody is proposing constitutional amendments to prevent christians from getting married. Nobody is accusing politicians of being "secret Christians" like it's some kind of derogatory thing to belong to a particular religion. You don't get to cry martyr about unequal protection, considering Christians get ALL the protections they constantly try to deny non-Christians.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:21 pm

I'm upset because my kids get pressured with your social liberal views in the public school system and my kids can't even have a bible club. (ok well most schools probably do allow a bible club). And its clearly wrong for christians to tear down koran club fliers.

There is a war against christianity and religion in the public arena. Obama just went out there and said we are not a christian nation. Across the country, religious ideas are shoved out the door and liberal ones are welcomed. This is not new, but it is happening.

--

Ragorn. I generally do not do the pledge of allegiance, I haven't since I was about 8 years old. I got harassed by my school and my teachers and my sports teams about it. It is tough to be the only kid in an entire school who won't say the pledge. At first I wouldn't even take my hat off or stand up, but now I do as a matter of respect to others. Do you support eliminating the pledge in public settings because it makes me uncomfortable?

I could make the argument that nationalism is a world view just as religion is a world view. If we held other world views to the same standard as we do religious world views, I would shut up. But we don't we actively discriminate and everyone argues that its perfectly appropriate and fair.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby avak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:26 pm

Violent scripture may increase aggression-study

DALLAS, March 6 (Reuters Life!) - Violent passages in religious texts can increase aggressive behavior in people, especially if they are true believers and the violence is sanctioned by God, according to a new U.S. and Dutch study.

article

For both groups-whether the students were based in the Netherlands or the United States, and believed in God or not-the trend was the same: those who were told that God had sanctioned the violence . . . were more likely to act aggressively in the subsequent exercise.

Another article

Deuteronomy 13 -

13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

Just sayin
Last edited by avak on Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:29 pm

kiryan wrote:I'm upset because my kids get pressured with your social liberal views in the public school system and my kids can't even have a bible club. (ok well most schools probably do allow a bible club). And its clearly wrong for christians to tear down koran club fliers.


I'd really, REALLY like you to show us one of these Koran club fliers.

There is a war against christianity and religion in the public arena. Obama just went out there and said we are not a christian nation. Across the country, religious ideas are shoved out the door and liberal ones are welcomed. This is not new, but it is happening.


Bullshit. It's not our fault you can't separate your ideas from religion. I don't see atheists running around saying we should allow murder, by the way. I DO see christians running around in support of the death penalty though. Maybe when you actually learn your own "religious ideas" you can present them and see how we don't reject your ideas. In fact, I probably follow most of your values just because I'm not a dickhead. I wish more Christians could say the same, but when Thou Shalt Not Kill only extends to people who believe what you believe, look like you, and don't ask questions...


Ragorn. I generally do not do the pledge of allegiance, I haven't since I was about 8 years old. I got harassed by my school and my teachers and my sports teams about it. It is tough to be the only kid in an entire school who won't say the pledge. At first I wouldn't even take my hat off or stand up, but now I do as a matter of respect to others. Do you support eliminating the pledge in public settings because it makes me uncomfortable?


Good luck separating state from state. How about this, instead: We don't force everyone to say the pledge at the beginning of their Church services.

Oh wait, we already don't.

Now if we could just take "under God" back out of it...

I could make the argument that nationalism is a world view just as religion is a world view. If we held other world views to the same standard as we do religious world views, I would shut up. But we don't we actively discriminate and everyone argues that its perfectly appropriate and fair.


Of course you could, and it can even be corrupted in the same way. Hell, just look at Fox news and recent Conservative tactics... you either do what Bush says or you're un-American.

But again, how do you intend to separate state from state?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:31 pm

avak wrote:Violent scripture may increase aggression-study

DALLAS, March 6 (Reuters Life!) - Violent passages in religious texts can increase aggressive behavior in people, especially if they are true believers and the violence is sanctioned by God, according to a new U.S. and Dutch study.

article

For both groups-whether the students were based in the Netherlands or the United States, and believed in God or not-the trend was the same: those who were told that God had sanctioned the violence . . . were more likely to act aggressively in the subsequent exercise.


Another article
Deuteronomy 13 -

13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

Just sayin


You know, I've always found it funny that the One and only God, Perfect being that he is... needs to threaten us to keep us from believing in other (presumably nonexistant) gods.

It's as if he's got some competition or something... and is insecure.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby avak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:39 pm

What I love about the bible is that it is the perfectly crafted propaganda tool.

You can interpret it any way you want; claiming crap like 'intent', 'modernism', 'old testament vs new' etc etc (eg. slavery and women as property). But then you can always pull the untouchable card: 'the Bible says so' (eg gays, abortion).

The guy that thought the whole thing up was like Bernie Madoff except 100 times smarter.
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Talking works

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:40 pm

Deuteronomy = old testament.
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Talking works

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:43 pm

avak wrote:What I love about the bible is that it is the perfectly crafted propaganda tool.


avak wrote:The guy that thought the whole thing up was like Bernie Madoff except 100 times smarter.


Yup, it's perfect, and we as humans can't really do anything perfectly. I think the name of the guy you're looking for is God.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby avak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:48 pm

Yeah, I really don't intend to ridicule christianity despite the fact that I clearly am. I'm just making a roundabout point.

So, explain to a noob why the old testament (written by God?) "doesn't count"?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:54 pm

Adriorn Darkcloak wrote:
avak wrote:What I love about the bible is that it is the perfectly crafted propaganda tool.


avak wrote:The guy that thought the whole thing up was like Bernie Madoff except 100 times smarter.


Yup, it's perfect, and we as humans can't really do anything perfectly. I think the name of the guy you're looking for is God.


Not that perfect, it didn't work on me...
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby kiryan » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:57 pm

The old testament is the old law... the foundation of the relationship between God and his "chosen people" the Israelites... if they followed his law he would protect and provide for them. The new testament is the new contract between God and the people of the world... not just the "chosen" people.

To call it a new and old contract is really overly simplifying things. The principles of the new testament were in the old testament so its not really new and Jesus showed people how the old testament / law was being perverted for discrimination and other self serving and overly ritualistic reasons.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:03 pm

kiryan wrote:...was being perverted for discrimination and other self serving and overly ritualistic reasons.


Sounds familiar...

Hey Adriorn, if it's so perfectly written by a perfect being (who's just a little insecure in front of the other gods) why is it so easy for people to pervert His Word for self-serving reasons?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Talking works

Postby avak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:08 pm

Yeah, that makes a -ton- of sense.

Thanks for clarifying. Passages in Matthew and Luke say the old law is still valid, but whatever...I probably just don't get it.
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Talking works

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:19 pm

Sarvis wrote:Hey Adriorn, if it's so perfectly written by a perfect being (who's just a little insecure in front of the other gods) why is it so easy for people to pervert His Word for self-serving reasons?


Freewill. Satan. Lack of education. Ignorance.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:22 pm

Adriorn Darkcloak wrote:
Sarvis wrote:Hey Adriorn, if it's so perfectly written by a perfect being (who's just a little insecure in front of the other gods) why is it so easy for people to pervert His Word for self-serving reasons?


Freewill. Satan. Lack of education. Ignorance.


So perfection can't deal with such things? You have a strange definition of perfect...

I mean, logical paradoxes are on thing... but it can't even convince people with free will that it's correct? Rather imperfect philosophies such as Scientology are even capable of THAT.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Talking works

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:36 pm

Sarvis wrote:So perfection can't deal with such things? You have a strange definition of perfect...


I don't think you understand the implications of free will Sarvis. And yes, I think it's perfectly suited for free will. That way, people still have the choice to follow it, or not; to accept it, or not; to misuse it, or not.
Last edited by Adriorn Darkcloak on Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:37 pm

Adriorn Darkcloak wrote:
Sarvis wrote:So perfection can't deal with such things? You have a strange definition of perfect...


I don't think you understand the implications of freewill Sarvis. And yes, I think it's perfectly suited for freewill. That way, people still have the choice to follow it, or not; to accept it, or not; to misuse it, or not.


And you ignored the rest of my post.

If the Bible were perfect, shouldn't it be self-evident that it was better than L. Ron Hubbard's books? Self-evident that it was, in fact, perfect?

Free will would lead us to pick the more perfect choice, wouldn't it?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Talking works

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:42 pm

Sarvis wrote:If the Bible were perfect, shouldn't it be self-evident that it was better than L. Ron Hubbard's books? Self-evident that it was, in fact, perfect?


It is. You can choose not to see it as such, and perhaps believe Hubbard's books are "better".
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Talking works

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:49 pm

Adriorn Darkcloak wrote:
Sarvis wrote:If the Bible were perfect, shouldn't it be self-evident that it was better than L. Ron Hubbard's books? Self-evident that it was, in fact, perfect?


It is. You can choose not to see it as such, and perhaps believe Hubbard's books are "better".


Personally I believe they are both equally valid.

Which is to say not at all.

I'm still struggling with why a 3rd rate sci-fi author could create a book that even compares to the Perfect Word of a Perfect being.

Funny that HE could create a religion comparable to the Perfection that is the Bible (which edition, btw, is actually the perfect one? Hopefully King James...) while authors such as Tolkien or Shakespear never inspired so much as a cult...
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire

Return to “T2 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests