Pope-a-Dope

[Epsilon]

---

Then why do they need the goverment to do it for them? All a goverment is an organization that is supposed to look out for it's people right?

---

Enlightened self interest is the answer here again. If your government supports aid to other contries that reduces the amount of suffering in the world. Less suffering equals less desperation. Less desperation equals less hatred. Less hatred equals less violence.
It is in the best interests of everyone on this planet to help each other out. The problem with the current American administration is that they exist to help out only themselves and the powerbrokers that got them into office. Some of those powerbrokers are religious dickheads with an agenda that encourages blatent idiocy.

---

The point is that while the majority of rape is hate related
there is a minority that is just biological urge. Drugged
rape in particular seem to fit this pattern.
Note that the reason is irrelevant as far as punishment
for a rape goes but if you beleive sex is just a natural
biological urge then certain types of rapes are the
same thing. Which in my opinion is Ridiculous.

---

The very fact, the very fact that you would equate rape. RAPE! That you would equate rape with sex with a condom is... its abhorrent. I have no idea what the hell kind of right wing brain worm argument you are making but stop it. Stop it now. You are...
The fact is that abistinence education does not work. It does not work. It doens't work. It fails to work. It does not prevent the psread of disease. It has failed to do so. It does not work. It fails. Work, it does not. Have I repeated this enough to get that tyhrough you goddamn fucking thick skull?
It does not work.
Condoms do. They noticeably slow the spread of disease. Period.
So your argument is either we only use methods if they are 100% effective 100% of the time? Fuck you. That isn't how modern medicine, and modern virology, work. It isn't.
Shut up.
And damn you do not compare this or anything else to fucking RAPE again. Just do NOT.

---

For someone who doesn't know faith this is right. For those
that teach it and live by example though it's hypocresy(?)
A religious missionary in Africa in your view should say:
"My beleifs mean nothing. here, have some rubbers. "
If their beleifs are nothing then they wouldn't be there in
the first place. So who would fill the void?

---

You mean who would spread the banner of ignorance, intolerance and tribalism if not for Missionaries and their cultural war? I hope noone. I hope noone picks up the torch of trying to convert the people of Africa to religion.
Do you mean who would supply Africa with medical, argiculutral and other forms of aid? There are plenty of secular organizations that can do just that. If all the money currenly being used to support the Christina's Children Fund went to UNICEF instead I would be a happy man. I don't think international aid should come with religious strings attached.
----------------
Epsilon

[Fidoohki]

The problem with 'enlightened self interest' is that it depends solely on everyone thinking the same way as you do. Which if they did we wouldn't BE having the problems we do in the first place! Darn that stupid Free will thing huh? :/
and I never said ANYTHING about linking Rape and sex with a
condom. I link it with Biological functions period in SOME
cases. It still doesn't excuse it because despite the urge the
rapist MADE THAT CHOICE! He CHOOSE to do this against
someone else and should be punished accordingly.
It's all about making a choice. That is what everything here is
ultimately about. Yes we have urges: biological, emotional,
social. What seperates us from animals is our reason to
decide if said urges are possible, acceptable to do at that
moment or do we have to wait for a later time, or even if we
should be doing them at all. If you are an adult and cannot
resist those urges then you may need to be incarcerated
because you could be a threat to society and yourself.
And NO I am not saying that everyone that can't keep it
in their pants before marraige should be thrown in jail.
I don't know what secular-progressive brainwashing group YOU
came out of but you seriously need to start looking at things
at their face before looking for the conspiracy behind them
just because someone else doesn't agree with you.
Okay, you say abstinance doesn't work. Okay why? and don't use the 'biological function' crap excuse cause that was just
blown out of the water by reason and choice.
and giving to Unicef is a good idea but it seems that
people give more to religious organizations than non-
religious groups. I will grant you it is probably for hypocrasy
and practicality than faith in god but the more I explore
this subject the more I think there is a difference between
religous belief and church belief on a whole.
Let me ask this to everyone and tell me which is the
truer and more important statement. and 'both' isn't
an answer:
Sex is a right or Sex is a responsibility?

[Kokuten]

First off, the only thing rape and sex have in common is a similarity of body parts involved. Rape is not about sex, rape is about power.

---

Sex is a right or Sex is a responsibility?

---

Sex is a pleasurable physical act between two people, period. It is neither a right, nor a responsibility. Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979

[Fidoohki]

Pascal's Wager exemplifies not acting in good faith. As the article I linked to you pointed out, someone who does good things for fear of God is not taking any sort of moral highground at all. A calculated weighing of the risks of believing in a god versus not believing in one is the very antithesis of "good faith", and if you believe in God, it seems odd you believe he'd reward such calculation.
---------------------------------------------
I did read that and it gt me to thinking that there is a fundemental difference between 'religious' belief and
'Church' belief. The trouble is sure one can do good things
because it is the right thing to do but there are people
that do good things because they don't want for
face the consequences of not doing them. So if you remove
consequences would these people be doing that same thing?
Unlikely. As sad as it is some people need the stick to do
good. That's the real world for you.

-----------------------------------------
1) If everyone practiced abstinence, the human race would end.
----------------------------------------
You are smarter than this answer Ayiekie. You know what I
mean by abstinacne. Shame on you.
---------------------------------------
2) Why the hell should anybody of a reasonable age have to practice abstinence or die horribly? Why should they be given inaccurate information and kept from possibly life-saving birth control methods?
-------------------------------------
Okay let's get a few points straight:
1) I'm not against condoms. I don't care of you use them or
not. It's your choice.
2)Abstinance is a better contreceptive than condoms. 100% fact.
3) I object to religious organizations being force to hand out
condoms. Period.
With those out of the way let me ask this:
What is a reasonable age to you? I think 18 + is reasonable
to me.
--------------------------------
Kindly explain exactly what you mean.
--------------------------------
Through observations and study you could get the
results you quoted from chimps and dolphins but who in
ancient times would have done this with dolphins or even
been able to do this? Highly unlikely. Chimps on the
other hand is possible but again just like a civil war
missle ((mythbusters built one using stuff that was around
during the civil war era)) just because it was possible
doesn't mean it happened.
-----------------------------------------
Hence morality starting from Reglion is correct. IMO
anyway.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prove it. Peer-reviewed scientific studies, please
----------------------------------------------
Try this:
Hence my opinion that morality started through religion
is most likely true.
As for proof I haven't found anything that states
that it is not true. Like I've said before I am not a pro
debator so i use absolutes when I shouldn't. I'm trying to
correct that though.
------------------------------------
As has been pointed out to you many times, you can't prove the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist. You can't prove anything
doesn't exist. Does that mean everything that has ever been conceived is real?
------------------------------------
Wanna bet? Any rational person can put a childs tooth under a pillow. lock the room up tight. and go in in the morning to see that the tooth is still there. I pretty much just proved it
right there. It's a difference on philosphy. You seems to see
the world as fake unless it is proven to you it is real. Have you ever been to france? How do you know it is real? Ridiculous premise but it is an extreme example of your viewpoint. Which
is fine. nothing wrong with that.
I live by everything is possible til proven different though
with a bit of common sense and logic thrown in. Sort of a
half empty/half full thing.
--------------------------------
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And letting the goverment teach your children any better?
That is asking to turn them into fascists..or worse.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, since the government has been setting public school curriculums for as long as everyone in the US has been alive, what you are saying is that nearly everyone in the US is a fascist?
---------------------------------------------
Because the Goverment is not the only input on it and it is
mitigated by family and society's views. As stupid as it is,
the evolution debate is a prime example of that. Look at
the lawsuits against it. Imagine if it was something more
important. probably near riotous levels of objections.
-------------------------------------------
As for what you pointed out on how the US conducts
its' aid distribution I suggest you take it up with them.
Though the more I read about it the more I find it
disturbing since they shouldn't be adding religious
restrictions onto it to begin with.Now if the distribution
was through religious conduits then there might be a
point but they shouldn't even be doing that.
Also i suggest you check out the exact amounts
sent over to africa instead of the precentages. It
puts the US up there in the to 5 at least as I found out
in a previous post.
-----------------------------
Why abstinance doesn't work? poor teaching of it? the
constant bonbardment of the beleif that people are
not responsible for their actions? lack of personal discipline?
breakdown of the family unit? breakdown of religious belief?
Could be all of those.

[Kokuten]

for _my_ sake, if noone else's, please learn to use the quote tag.
Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979

[Fidoohki]

First off, the only thing rape and sex have in common is a similarity of body parts involved. Rape is not about sex, rape is about power.
------------------------------
The definition of rape has been posted allready and it said
force not power. You are confusing what people use it for
with what it is. Otherwise if a man comes across an unconsious woman and has sex with her that wouldn't
be rape which it is.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sex is a right or Sex is a responsibility?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sex is a pleasurable physical act between two people, period. It is neither a right, nor a responsibility.
----------------------------------------
So you don't have a responsibility to your partner? or a
responsibility to protect yourself? Huh...

Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979

[Fidoohki]

Trying but the last tiem I tried it it got.. messy.

[Epsilon]

---

It's all about making a choice.

---

Fuck you.
Rape is not the same as sex.
Choosing to have sex is nowhere near the same as choosing to rape someone. The very fact, the very idea, that you could in any way equate the two, on any level, is sickening.
I am through talking to you.
Goodbye.
------------------
Epsilon

[Kokuten]

An essay in links, on religion.
I state that religion has no moral high ground, and should not be allowed to dictate moral conduct in any organized fashion. I believe in the freedom of religion as espoused in the Constitution of my country, America. I believe in unfettered personal worship.
I believe that a secular basis for government is a requirement for a sane society.
www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/09/0...index.html
religious leader instrumental in rape of 16-year old girl, used fear of eternal damnation to send her back to her rapist.
www.guardian.co.uk/religi...04,00.html
Religious cartoon spark for protest march threatening suicide bombing attacks.
www.guardian.co.uk/religi...25,00.html
Woman using modern technology to make compromise between strict religious beliefs and healthy physical activity treated very poorly
www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/me...index.html
Bus stopped, members of specific religious sect seperated out and shot.
www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19...index.html
David Koresh is back in the news.
www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/0...index.html
"Religious Experiences" analyzed in better detail than ever before, found to be nearly identical from faith to faith.
www.godhatesfags.com/
I refuse to believe that your imaginary friend can condemn me to an eternity of suffering due to the gender of my interest.
"We display large, colorful signs containing Bible words and sentiments, including: GOD HATES FAGS, FAGS HATE GOD, AIDS CURES FAGS, THANK GOD FOR AIDS, FAGS BURN IN HELL, GOD IS NOT MOCKED, FAGS ARE NATURE FREAKS, GOD GAVE FAGS UP, NO SPECIAL LAWS FOR FAGS, FAGS DOOM NATIONS, THANK GOD FOR DEAD SOLDIERS, FAG TROOPS, GOD BLEW UP THE TROOPS, GOD HATES AMERICA, AMERICA IS DOOMED, THE WORLD IS DOOMED, etc."
There's your fucking moral foundation.

www.familysecuritymatters...?id=921957
Jews don't do pork. Jews don't eat pork available through school meal plan. No Problem.
Muslims don't eat port. Muslims force schools to remove pork available through school meal plan.
WTF?
www.theglobeandmail.com/s...l/Ontario/
religious folk beat atheist up, get away scot-free because "It's not a hate crime"
newsblaze.com/story/20070...ories.html
God Is Great, indeed. Wish my religious beliefs let me behead people on television.
www.nctimes.com/articles/..._26_07.txt
scroll down to the "Monument dedicated to victims of abuse by clergy" bit. Why do we need a statue for the victims of abuse by priests if religion is a moral foundation?
www.newyorkblade.com/2007...alhate.cfm
Christian groups stating that the victims in the Vtech shooting 'are obviously not christian', and that the shooting was caused by the acceptance of homosexuality in America.
worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...E_ID=55288
and, finally, a bright spot to banish the blahs from the bleak bullshit brigade.

In conclusion, I am of the opinion that religion has no place dictating moral regulations at any organizational level past the individual. If at any point in the past there was a valid reason for organized religion to provide a moral framework to society, that time has passed, and long ago.
The sheer amount of immoral behavior able to be laid at the myriad feet of organized religion makes it evident that religion no longer has a place at the forefront of the lives of humanity.
Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979

[rmthorn]

The lack of quotes makes it really hard to work out who is saying what, but I'll do my best to figure it out.

---

Through observations and study you could get the
results you quoted from chimps and dolphins but who in
ancient times would have done this with dolphins or even
been able to do this? Highly unlikely.

---

*blink* Huh? What does not humans not being able to study chimps in ancient times have to do with human morality coming from religion?
Dolphins cooperate with and look after each other. Dolphins are not religious. Chimpanzees cooperate with and look after each other. Chimpanzees are not religious. Therefore, members of a species do not need religion to cooperate with and look after each other. It is a biological urge, and if you read the book I mentioned, it will explain why in a little more detail. I believe Richard Dawkins "The Selfish Gene" also covers the same topic.

---

As sad as it is some people need the stick to do good.

---

Yep. Religion is a control mechanism for human morality, but not the cause of it.
People, for the most part, will look after friends and family the most. Back in the hunter gatherer days, those are the only people you would have dealt with.
Now, fast forward to a time where agriculture has become common, thus allowing large numbers of people to congregate together. You're not related to most of these people, so you don't have the urge to make sure that they are looked after in the same way that you would a friend or family member.
Insert religion: Love everyone like you would a family member. Help everyone that's in need. And if you don't, big angry father figure in the sky will punish you.
It's taking the basic biological urge and forcing people to extend it others.

---

Okay let's get a few points straight:
1) I'm not against condoms. I don't care of you use them or
not. It's your choice.
2)Abstinance is a better contreceptive than condoms. 100% fact.
3) I object to religious organizations being force to hand out
condoms. Period.

---

2) Only if people practice it, which they don't. Look at the incidence of teenage pregnancies for proof of that, which renders it next to useless.
3) Why?

---

Wanna bet? Any rational person can put a childs tooth under a pillow. lock the room up tight. and go in in the morning to see that the tooth is still there. I pretty much just proved it right there.

---

No, all you proved is that the tooth fairy didn't come that particular time. Why not? Maybe it couldn't get in through the locked door. Maybe it just doesn't like that particular type of tooth.
Now, if you did that experiment millions of times across the globe, and no tooth fairy ever came, then that might suggest that there is no such thing, but it still doesn't really prove it.

---

I live by everything is possible til proven different though with a bit of common sense and logic thrown in.

---

Believing that everything is possible != Believing that something actually exists.
How do you distinguish between something like the tooth fairy and something like God? Neither can be proved to not-exist, although the huge lack of evidence that they do certainly indicates that they don't.
(Note: I'm not having a go at you. I just like to understand why some people think the way they do.)

---

Also i suggest you check out the exact amounts
sent over to africa instead of the precentages. It
puts the US up there in the to 5 at least as I found out
in a previous post.

---

So, Mr Media Mogul who owns billions is a better person for giving $1000 to charity than Mr Average Joe down the street who gives $100?
Of course the US is going to score higher for sheer volume. It is a wealthy, developed country with 250 or so million people.
And while we're on the subject of rape and sex, here is a little quote I found somewhere:
If I hit you on the head with a rolling pin, would you mistake it for cooking?

[Logan Darklighter]

---

And while we're on the subject of rape and sex, here is a little quote I found somewhere:
If I hit you on the head with a rolling pin, would you mistake it for cooking?

---

This is going to sound silly and ugly at the same time but I can't help think that the above analogy is incomplete without the following caveat: If on rare occasions a loaf of bread would be produced the act of the rolling pin being applied to the head, would you still mistake it for cooking?
Because let's face it, on the purely mechanical level, an act of rape can sometimes produce the same long term effects - i.e. a baby - as an act of sex.

Now excuse me while I go take a bath and try and get the stench of that idea off of me. God. Damn. It.
-Logan
-----------------
"Wake up! Time for SCIENCE!"
-Adam Savage
-----------------

[Morganite]

Okay. I haven't been reading this thread, so this may be a long post as I catch up while reading through it. Or it may be short. It's hard to say.
But first, number one important thing TO BE READ BY FIDOOHKI IMMEDIATELY!
How to do quotes easily, even with no javascript!
1: Add the below line to your text.
(quote) (/quote)
2: Replace the parenthesis with square brackets.
3: Put whatever you want to quote in the middle.
Please. Future generations will thank you. Or at least, I will. ^_^;;;
Attributions are helpful, but not required. I usually just put something like "Rev Dark wrote:" before the quote, because I can't remember the markup to do it, and I usually have javascript turned off, so I can't use the little buttons to do it.
I don't recommend trying to put a quote inside a quote. It can be done, but it probably won't produce the results you expect it to. (Could be the reason why you said it didn't work very well before.) And if you aren't certain you've got something the way you want it, just click preview and hit "add reply", and it'll show you what it'll look like without actually posting. So if it turns out wrong, you can fiddle with it some more.
Okay, going way back to the beginning of this thread...
Rev Dark said... I believe all the things I'm going to be quoting for a while, though not in the same posts...

---

His primary thrust is that evolution raises philosophical questions science alone cannot answer.

---

Now, if this is an accurate summarization...
I'm not sure I see what the problem is. Really, I didn't think science was *supposed* to answer philosophical questions. It's supposed to answer physical ones.
(Mind you, as someone who doesn't feel evolution and creationism fundamentally contradict each other, I tend to be biased towards both sides...)
Next up, the respecting beliefs thing... I'm not really sure how to respond to this. I do believe that telling someone to believe something, or that they shouldn't believe something, is almost always an inherently scummy act.

---

Interesting choice in belief in the bible written by man Eas you are essentially cherry picking the parts you like, and throwing away the bits you do not, or the ones that are no longer sanguine to the world you live in. A rational process dictating to an irrational belief.

---

... Doing this is a *good* thing, right? '.'
On the general subject of abstinence only education in Africa and it's effects... What the hell? Have these people not heard of "defense in depth"? o.@;;;

---

I should note that it is a biological drive that has no sense of the future Ewe are programmed at a very low level to want to fuck Eregardless of social, economic and environmental conditions.

---

Hmmm. I seem to remember once reading something that expressed a different point of view - that we *were* programmed to take conditions into account, because just reproducing wasn't enough, that our offspring had to survive too, and then conditions became important. Can't remember where I read it though.

---

Abstinence is a terrible method, it just does not work in practice,

---

I'm not sure this part of the sentence means what you intended it to.
Actually *practicing* abstinence is very effective for the individual in question. The problem isn't with abstinence itself, it's that trying to teach abstinence doesn't seem to have much success in getting people to practice it. Which has been covered pretty thoroughly in this thread from what I can see. But still, it's an important distinction.
Epsilon wrote:

---

Granted, we haven't seen a society develop morals without a religon of some kind, but we also haven't seen any society develop from scracth without a religion. However, it should be noted that societies such as Native American, Oriental and others have all managed to have moral people in them without paying lipservice to the Abrahamic diety.

---

This gave me an interesting thought, but I don't have time to properly write it out tonight, so I'm putting this here to remind me of it tomorrow.
rmthorn wrote:

---

I'm curious why someone would believe in something that can't be proved to exist.

---

Going off on a tangent, this made me think of Jane Goodall's position on yeti...
Epsilon wrote this:

---

The very fact, the very fact that you would equate rape. RAPE! That you would equate rape with sex with a condom is... its abhorrent. I have no idea what the hell kind of right wing brain worm argument you are making but stop it. Stop it now. You are...

---

Okay, since this whole line doesn't seem to be going away...
The point it sounded to me like he was trying to make was this:
1. If we are programmed to want to have sex regardless of conditions, it wouldn't be surprising that the condition of "partner wants to have sex too" was disregarded quite regularly.
2. Quite a lot of people, in fact, *don't* commit rape.
3. Therefore, humans must be better at controlling their biological urges than is being suggested here, and ought to be able to handle not having sex at all.
Of course, there's an alternate conclusion that can be reached....
3a: Therefore, consensuality must be at least one condition that most people in fact do take into account.
Epsilon also wrote this:

---

Choosing to have sex is nowhere near the same as choosing to rape someone. The very fact, the very idea, that you could in any way equate the two, on any level, is sickening.

---

I really don't see what your issue is here. He's saying that rape is bad and people who commit rape are bad! What's wrong with this? o.O
Moving on, even though I have a feeling I'm not done with that particular tangent yet, Fidoohki wrote:

---

Sex is a right or Sex is a responsibility?

---

I quite honestly have no idea what that question is supposed to mean.
Okay, back to the tangent. Kokuten wrote:

---

First off, the only thing rape and sex have in common is a similarity of body parts involved. Rape is not about sex, rape is about power.

---

It's really getting off the original topic, but I've heard this before, and thought it seemed somewhat dubious. I have no trouble believing that it's *usually* about power, but I've seen the fringes of enough really disturbing stuff to think that sometimes, maybe it actually is about sex. But how exactly do they find out?
(The thing that really freaks me out is anything that suggests someone could actually *enjoy* being raped. Brrrr... That goes beyond needing to wash my brain out with Bleach, I need to wash my brain out with Pita-Ten...)
-Morgan, wants Rev Dark to create a flux-bypass-defenestrator, so I can buy one from him. '.'
Hey, my current signature fits in with this topic, so I should leave it in, shouldn't I?
"This continuity is now a Princess of Darkness crossover."
"... They're all going to die, aren't they?"
"Yep. Popcorn?"

[Kokuten]

---

(Mind you, as someone who doesn't feel evolution and creationism fundamentally contradict each other, I tend to be biased towards both sides...)

---

---

It's really getting off the original topic, but I've heard this before, and thought it seemed somewhat dubious. I have no trouble believing that it's *usually* about power, but I've seen the fringes of enough really disturbing stuff to think that sometimes, maybe it actually is about sex. But how exactly do they find out?

---

Interviews with rapists, interviews with rape victims. There is a whole 'rape culture' in America, and while there's a lot of knee-jerk bullshit in it, you spend enough time and effort learning, and it becomes clear. "Rape isn't about sex, it's about power" is a cliche, but it's a true one. No, I'm not saying that there are no exceptions, but it's as true as most any generalization I've run across.

---

(The thing that really freaks me out is anything that suggests someone could actually *enjoy* being raped. Brrrr... That goes beyond needing to wash my brain out with Bleach, I need to wash my brain out with Pita-Ten...)

---

The "Rape Fantasy" is a completely different animal, and can be both an incredibly erotic experience, and an emotional high of very high grade, but the setup for doing it right requires a level of trust and communication that is abnormal in its strength and integrity. The roots of it, though, are in power and responsibility and sex, not just sex..

As far as I'm concerned, we can tangent this thread all day long, until our board's personal Godsucker gives up.Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979

[Epsilon]

---

(Mind you, as someone who doesn't feel evolution and creationism fundamentally contradict each other, I tend to be biased towards both sides...)

---

Then I would have to say that you have a fundamental inability to understand any of the science involved. Rev Dark knows far more about it than I do but suffice it to say this:
Unless you believe god either a) created the universe 13.7 billion years ago and hasn't actually done anything since or b) that god has been systemically falsifying all the scientific experiments and data we have been collecting over the last two hundred years than creationism and evolution are fundamentally incompatible.
One states that life is the result of natural laws and heriditrary mechanics without any purposeful design or forethought aside from adaptation, the other says that god did it. The two are, at their very essence, incompatible.

---

This gave me an interesting thought, but I don't have time to properly write it out tonight, so I'm putting this here to remind me of it tomorrow.

---

And further on that: If we are going to give reilgion credit for morality, we must also give it credit for all the other things: rape, murder, war, hatred, intolerance, tribalism, genocide, slavery and on and on.

---

3. Therefore, humans must be better at controlling their biological urges than is being suggested here, and ought to be able to handle not having sex at all.

---

I have a biological urge to eat. This does not mean that the choices of "I will eat a hamburger" and "I will kill my neighbour and feast on the sweet, savory goo in his skull" are the same choice or should ever be compared.
Yes, rape is a choice on the part of the rapist. But comparing consensual sex and rape on any level is abhorrent. Please never do so again.
-------------------
Epsilon

[Morganite]

---

Unless you believe god either a) created the universe 13.7 billion years ago and hasn't actually done anything since

---

Works for me.
Really, how can someone claim to believe in an all-powerful god and think that their god couldn't be working on a *really* long timetable? Looking at it this way, not believing in evolution is a monumental insult.
One doesn't even have to believe that humans were the intended result.

---

Yes, rape is a choice on the part of the rapist. But comparing consensual sex and rape on any level is abhorrent. Please never do so again.

---

*Rape* is abhorrent. Given that the entire point of the comparison (as I see it anyway) hinges on that fact, I'm not sure what your problem with it is. Especially since this:

---

I have a biological urge to eat. This does not mean that the choices of "I will eat a hamburger" and "I will kill my neighbour and feast on the sweet, savory goo in his skull" are the same choice or should ever be compared.

---

Distills down to the same idea - that we are capable of choosing not to do things that are wrong. This is a good thing, I would think.
(Mind you, as *not* the person who made the original comparison, what I think it means may not be what it was originally intended to mean. All those non-quote-tagged posts still make me a bit dizzy...)
-Morgan."This continuity is now a Princess of Darkness crossover."
"... They're all going to die, aren't they?"
"Yep. Popcorn?"

[Rev Dark]

Just back from vacation and still catching up.
Fidoohki states

---

I did read the report you linked in. I'd suggest you go with the facts and not the left wing crapfest of the register. However, I find it strange that none of the scientists asked the question 'why'?. Also page 42 of the report seems to be confusing on how they got their control group together.

---

I think you need to read a little more carefully. The report is rather clear and concise on the matter. Your own ability to pull data from it might be a little skewed. The Register article was for satiric bite, hence the link to the report itself.
Fidoohki states

---

Wanna bet? Any rational person can put a childs tooth under a pillow. lock the room up tight. and go in in the morning to see that the tooth is still there. I pretty much just proved it

---

Ah Empirical Scientific testing. Now the true toothfairy-ologist will state that the Tooth fairy is not fooled by such silly games and will actively seek to disarm them. (For the record the Tooth Fairy is not omnipotent, but is, to paraphrase Peter Cooke as George Spiggot, highly maneuverable.
Hey, wait a second, lets try this with another figure. Jesus. While we dont have the sacred text of the tooth fairy (the Brush-Gums Veda), we do happen to have quite a few from the Judeo Christian faith. Lets start with the gospels for those reading at home John 14:12, 14;14, Matthew 7:7 & 18:19 (and a few other places). Hard core instructions for getting a little hot miracle action out of Jesus.
Like the Egyptian Book of the Dead, these are instructions. The veritable RTFM for getting the big JC to come on down and do some prayer answering and divine man, god and spirit action.
Do they work? Nope. Can you test them. Yep. Do they work when you test them. Nope. Of course you can fall back on the moves in mysterious ways thing, just like the Tooth Fairy.
Fidoohki states

---

I live by everything is possible til proven different though
with a bit of common sense and logic thrown in. Sort of a half empty/half full thing.

---

I hate to be blunt here, (no I dont but literary form must be maintained) Ill go to Morgenstern for this one (Paraphrased) Logic? Common Sense? You keep using those words, I dont think they mean what you think they mean.
Shayne

[Fidoohki]

I think you need to read a little more carefully. The report is rather clear and concise on the matter. Your own ability to pull data from it might be a little skewed. The Register article was for satiric bite, hence the link to the report itself.

I read the test questions at the end they used to
determine the results. Unless I missed it, they never
asked why the subject choose to have sex after
taking the course. They do surmise why in the report.

Do they work? Nope. Can you test them. Yep. Do they work when you test them. Nope. Of course you can fall back on the moves in mysterious ways thing, just like the Tooth Fairy.

Of course since the bible was written by people they could
have omitted the most important part or just got it wrong.
Then again if you really want to run the consiracy theory
spiel the Royalty might have forced it's ommision as a
way to keep power.. or the church itself...then again it
could all well be just BS. I wasn't there so I don't know but neither were you.

I hate to be blunt here, (no I dont but literary form must be maintained) Ill go to Morgenstern for this one (Paraphrased) Logic? Common Sense? You keep using those words, I dont think they mean what you think they mean.

Well you don't understand what true faith is either so
I guess we are at in empass. Such is life at times.
((so much for my first try at quotes.. ))

[Rev Dark]

---

Of course since the bible was written by people they could have omitted the most important part or just got it wrong.Then again if you really want to run the consiracy theory spiel the Royalty might have forced it's ommision as a
way to keep power.. or the church itself...then again it
could all well be just BS. I wasn't there so I don't know but neither were you.

---

Or they could have just made the whole fucking thing up. Thats the far more realistic and probably explanation. You could of course make all manner of conspiracy theories mostly by reading the DaVinci Code you could also masturbate the latter would be a better use of your time.
Neither of us were there but we have access to a great deal of the material and can make some rather good inferences from it. Just like a detective and the associated lab techs can make sense of scene following a murder. We can trace religious worship all across the birthplace of Judeo Christian faith. We can see where the various stories emerged which ones were stolen from earlier faiths, which ones were adapted. What religious figures where transposed as one faith faded and another one emerged. Christianity is many things original is not one them. The same goes for nearly all other faiths one inevitable begets the next. Start with Friedman and Ehrman for the Judeo Christian side of things and then sidestep to Davis for a good overview of the early pre Judeo-Christian faiths.

---

Well you don't understand what true faith is either so
I guess we are at in empass. Such is life at times.

---

No we are not at an impasse. Just because you thrive on ignorance it is no excuse to paint the rest of the world with the same tattered brush.
True faith is easy to understand. It is the abandonment of reason. It is the abandonment of evidence. It is the pig-headed stubbornness to hold on to something in the face of hard, reproducible, data and logical thought. Think of it as a mind virus (meme) an idea that get lodged early in the grey folds of your brain and refuses all attempts to shake it loose. Religion is such a mind virus. The faithful are overwhelmingly of the faith that they were raised in as such mind viruses are transferred in the early years. There is the potential for some cross contamination in later years, but the majority of these are a product of early indoctrination.
True faith is not a virtue. It is an abandonment of our potential to discover the wonders of the universe around us, and even reach beyond this universe to the myriad of layers that support it (that is if you are interested in the hypothesis of Quantum Foam).
True faith is a fucking cop out. It is a po-dunk explanation for the universe for those whom expanded knowledge is seen as threatening. God all gods used to be the best explanations we had for things. Fire. Life. Death. Beginnings. Endings. We have much better explanations now. Explanations backed up by observable evidence; explanations that can be tests, verified and supported by a myriad of evidence.
And it is not taken on faith. The great strength of science is the capacity to self correct with the emergence of better theories, backed up by the scientific method, deepening our understanding of the universe. True faith is the opposite a stagnant pool of bronze age myth that resists change in the face of evidence, all the while insisting that their god or gods occupies the smaller and smaller niches where science has not yet shone an investigating light.
Shayne

[Fidoohki]

Rev, Just out of curiosity, is there anything good about religion in your opinion?

[Rev Dark]

Are you interested in my opinions on religion, faith, ritual, or some combination of the above?
For example 'Religion' was responsible for financing some of the great works of art and architecture during the Renaissance. Of course it was when the Roman Catholic Church was in a particularly corrupt phase...
Shayne

[Fidoohki]

Start off with faith first then ritual then organized religion.

[Angryoptimist]

I think it's unfair to characterize all faith in God so harshly as has been done here. Many unsavory things have been done with faith in God, but is this not also true of many things which are not necessarily bad?
I believe in God, but I don't even think evolution is even a matter of faith. The evidence leads straightforwardly to the conclusion--it's nearly inconceivable that it could be wrong. I don't really feel conflicted here, either.
I'm a Bah'. One of the things Bah's believe is that religion can't be simultaneously true and contrary to reason. The Wikipedia article on this stuff isn't too bad.
In any case, there's good stuff in Christianity itself, as well. I think it'd be pretty hard to argue that 'love thy neighbor' and the Golden Rule are bad.
Okay, I'm done. I now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

• XKCD #1288
  
• FoxReplace for Firefox

Two great tastes that go great together!

[Kokuten]

www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm
*whistles innocently*Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979

[Fidoohki]

---

www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm

---

Interesting..but let's take it further..
What if he can't prove why the fingers are burnt? or how
the print was made? He will probably still say it isn't real
and if you
A Give him a massive grant
B Buy his new tell all book
C pay him a fee to speak at an conference
D or all of the above
he might be able to resolve the mystery...once he gets done
figuring out where to put his 'research funds'....
Of course this can go the other way also with someone hiding how they did it to create the 'First church of the invisible garage dragon' and 'asking' for donations.
Also why can't they say it needs further study? State the
facts you have. Point out their flaws then pursue the
investigation. To reach a 'tenative conclusion' and then wonder why everyone else isn't treating it as 100%
fact doesn't make sense.

[Kokuten]

---

Also why can't they say it needs further study? State the facts you have. Point out their flaws then pursue the investigation. To reach a 'tenative conclusion' and then onder why everyone else isn't treating it as 100% fact doesn't make sense.

---

Apply this to your christian religion. You can tell when you understand what I'm saying, because you'll be crying in your fucking beer and ashamed of yourself for being associated with that group of people.
Once you have accomplished that step, come see me. I'll introduce you to the glory of the real world.
Edit: Fixed QuotesWire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979