Was there just for you!or it could be this ;)I approve of this.
I appreciate your kind gesture.
|
The raging misogyny being, of course in assuming that if a man can't control himself it's the woman's fault and she thus bears the responsibility for not arousing him. A responsibility, again of course, foisted on her by male clerics.
This is not about, from my limited understanding anyway, women but the self control of men. Something about that they may be tempted if they see a beautiful woman, and a modest women does not give a man a reason to do something.
Thats one opinion.
Thats one opinion.The raging misogyny being, of course in assuming that if a man can't control himself it's the woman's fault and she thus bears the responsibility for not arousing him. A responsibility, again of course, foisted on her by male clerics.
This is not about, from my limited understanding anyway, women but the self control of men. Something about that they may be tempted if they see a beautiful woman, and a modest women does not give a man a reason to do something.
You know I get tired of that. You make dismissive sounding short sentences but don't provide further info or anything to refute.
Yes, that is one of the opinions. Though it is what is held by fundamentalist muslims as far as I can tell based off of statements like the infamous 'boobquake' and others.
|
|
That's one opinion.The raging misogyny being, of course in assuming that if a man can't control himself it's the woman's fault and she thus bears the responsibility for not arousing him. A responsibility, again of course, foisted on her by male clerics.
This is not about, from my limited understanding anyway, women but the self control of men. Something about that they may be tempted if they see a beautiful woman, and a modest women does not give a man a reason to do something.You know I get tired of that. You make dismissive sounding short sentences but don't provide further info or anything to refute.
Yes, that is one of the opinions. Though it is what is held by fundamentalist muslims as far as I can tell based off of statements like the infamous 'boobquake' and others.
All we ever hear about or from are the extremists. Yes if that is all you listen to then that is going to be your opinion. I don't care for the veil and see no need for it myself. There are however several well meaning individuals who do embrace Islam that in fact choose this form of expression. I have already placed what is the basic reason for the practice upthread. Samnell is welcome to his opinion. I honestly can't refute it. It does not however mean either of us is right.
Honestly it does not matter how advanced our society ever gets there always will be people who see the need to embrace a small narrow viewpoint. I just try not, despite any evidence to the contrary, to be one of them.
And Archlich if you look at this thread, though I do occasionally make small responses, general due to time constraints, it is not always the case.
|
...brain disorder research...Heya Jeremy, not to derail (again), but have you seen this?: "Mental Illness Tied to Immune Defect: Bone Marrow Transplants Cure Mice of Hair-pulling Compulsion"
I've heard it mentioned before but I have yet to read. I may get to it after work tonight.
All we ever hear about or from are the extremists.
Maybe if the moderates spent more time disavowing or otherwise opposing the extremists and/or rapists, then they'd be viewed as more a part of the solution, rather than as actively enabling the problems? For example, how many Catholics have demanded that the Pope (and everyone else who covered up or abetted the child abuse scandal) be excommunicated from the Church? And where are the clerics who are busily excommunicating Muslims who issue death threats over cartoons?
As long as the moderates continue to cover up for, shield, or otherwise abet the extremists, this condition will remain.
|
|
All we ever hear about or from are the extremists.Maybe if the moderates spent more time disavowing or otherwise opposing the extremists and/or rapists, then they'd be viewed as more a part of the solution, rather than as actively enabling the problems? For example, how many Catholics have demanded that the Pope and anyone else who covered up or abetted the child abuse scandal be excommunicated from the Church?
First off I reread that sentence, I apologize for the poor English.
Yes we should hear more from the moderates and we did at one time. Nothing has been heard from any Islamic moderate since the change of leadership in Iran several years ago. The moderates were driven out and stamped underfoot. This is however a political issue not something i hold against adherents.
A growing number of Catholics are calling for just this issue to be brought up. I expect more as years go on.
A growing number of Catholics are calling for just this issue to be brought up. I expect more as years go on.
That would be a huge step towards the Church (and religious moderates in general) being seen as an active part of the solution, rather than as part of the problems.
Nothing has been heard from any Islamic moderate since the change of leadership in Iran several years ago. The moderates were driven out and stamped underfoot. This is however a political issue not something i hold against adherents.
I agree that that's something of a mitigating factor for Iranian Shi'ites. Sadly, though, doesn't explain the insane eagerness of non-Iranian Shi'ites and Sunnis alike in threating to kill anyone who does just about anything that they can dream up a way to feel "offended" about -- or the reluctance for the larger Muslim community to excommunicate them, which sort of wants to lead me to believe that they do indeed represent the larger Muslim community.
A growing number of Catholics are calling for just this issue to be brought up. I expect more as years go on.
Firstly, sorry to be a bit of a lurker but so far I just don't feel as if I really have much to add.
Of course, that being said...
Why I highlight/seperate this piece to quote is to ask,
"So what?"
The Roman Catholic Church is not a democracy. The current Pope, and indeed the cardinals who voted to place him there, are more conservative than ever.
I know becuase one of the Cardinals who was a part of the voting process is a local and I have the pleasure of reading his thoughtful wors in every Sunday paper I choose to buy.
So what if the lay person is offeneded? What exactly are they going to do? The average person has zero recourse when it comes to affecting (Effecting?) the workings of the RC church. The best they could possibly do is what? 'Vote with their feet' and what? Go to another RC church...?
Sorry, but just an observation.
*bows* I'll just go back to lurk mod...(^_^)
Maybe if the moderates spent more time disavowing or otherwise opposing the extremists and/or rapists, then they'd be viewed as more a part of the solution, rather than as actively enabling the problems? For example, how many Catholics have demanded that the Pope (and everyone else who covered up or abetted the child abuse scandal) be excommunicated from the Church?
I don't think it's very moderate to demand excommunication. That's practically a love tap. If this were anything other than a church, its officers would already be doing time. Given that, it seems the moderate response would involve arrests and trials.
So what if the lay person is offeneded? What exactly are they going to do? The average person has zero recourse when it comes to affecting (Effecting?) the workings of the RC church. The best they could possibly do is what? 'Vote with their feet' and what? Go to another RC church...?
How about leave the Church entirely?
If it were your political party, your softball league, your university, your children's school, your employer? If any of those organizations were involved in a massive, global conspiracy to protect and conceal child rapists? If they responded when the scandal came to light by entrenching and rationalizing, blaming the victims and making counter-accusations? Not in a few isolated incidents, but as a massive, institution-wide culture, a matter of official policy even, that extended throughout the organization and reached all the way to the top?
What would you say about a parent who kept sending their children to a softball league with this kind of record? What would the whole neighborhood say?
Look up a few posts and you can read what doesn't get you an excommunication. Turns out saving a life does.
And amazingly, the same organization lectures the rest of us about morality.
Maybe if the moderates spent more time disavowing or otherwise opposing the extremists and/or rapists, then they'd be viewed as more a part of the solution, rather than as actively enabling the problems? For example, how many Catholics have demanded that the Pope (and everyone else who covered up or abetted the child abuse scandal) be excommunicated from the Church? And where are the clerics who are busily excommunicating Muslims who issue death threats over cartoons?
As long as the moderates continue to cover up for, shield, or otherwise abet the extremists, this condition will remain.
Technically, wouldn't speaking against the Pope make a catholic not a catholic? Isn't it that is Catholicism the Pope is gods representative on earth and his word is infallible.?
Trying to kick him out of the church seems tantamount to kicking god out. But Im not a catholic so maybe I have it wrong.Also it is less to do with the moderates not speaking against as much as the moderates not doing anything about. Speaking and acting are two different things. And as far as acting goes acting for and not acting often have the same end effect.
And Archlich if you look at this thread, though I do occasionally make small responses, general due to time constraints, it is not always the case.
Maybe I was just grumpy and read it the wrong way. My apologies.
Now the next step for the investigators is to figure out which god or goddess did it.
Technically, wouldn't speaking against the Pope make a catholic not a catholic? Isn't it that is Catholicism the Pope is gods representative on earth and his word is infallible.?
Trying to kick him out of the church seems tantamount to kicking god out. But Im not a catholic so maybe I have it wrong.
So, by your logic, the idea of a "moderate Catholic" is an oxymoron. Every one of them is an extremist, by definition, so long as the Pope is. Interesting... possibly correct, as well. We'll see what happens with this thing.
Technically, wouldn't speaking against the Pope make a catholic not a catholic? Isn't it that is Catholicism the Pope is gods representative on earth and his word is infallible.?
Papal infallibility doesn't work that way. If the Pope says the moon is made of green cheese, that doesn't mean it is. Unless he decides that it does mean that it is. In which case it's infallible and Catholics are obligated to believe the moon is in fact made of green cheese. A cynical person would note that this ambiguity is clearly a deliberate strategy to get all the benefits of being infallible in perpetuity with none of the expectation of actually being right.
The body in charge of letting people know what is and isn't infallible, incidentally, is the Inquisition.
Now the next step for the investigators is to figure out which god or goddess did it.
When I lived in Virginia, a nearby church was struck by lightning and burned to the ground. The dutiful churchgoers rebuilt it and vowed to God that they'd correct whatever had made Him smite them. The next thunderstorm produced a lightning bolt that again struck the church, burning it to the ground once again.
Evidently this was the same clergy who accused Benjamin Franklin of "playing God" when he invented the lightning rod.
P.S.,
"Lighting" -- the condition of the ambient illumination.
"Lightning" -- electrical discharge often associated with storms.
P.S.,
"Lighting" -- the condition of the ambient illumination.
"Lightning" -- electrical discharge often associated with storms.
Yeah... that and my previous post were not well edited. My bad.
|
Yeah... that and my previous post were not well edited. My bad.
P.S.,
"Lighting" -- the condition of the ambient illumination.
"Lightning" -- electrical discharge often associated with storms.
Although if a bolt of lighting destroyed a church, it would prove that if there is a God, he has a sense of the absurd. ;-)
|
|
Although if a bolt of lighting destroyed a church, it would prove that if there is a God, he has a sense of the absurd. ;-)Yeah... that and my previous post were not well edited. My bad.
P.S.,
"Lighting" -- the condition of the ambient illumination.
"Lightning" -- electrical discharge often associated with storms.
Platypus!
|
|
Platypus!Although if a bolt of lighting destroyed a church, it would prove that if there is a God, he has a sense of the absurd. ;-)Yeah... that and my previous post were not well edited. My bad.
P.S.,
"Lighting" -- the condition of the ambient illumination.
"Lightning" -- electrical discharge often associated with storms.
Elephant.
Echidna!(As in both Monotremes)
Heck Emus! Because nothing is more absured than a six foot, flightless bird!
The fact that the Funnel Web Spider, the Blue ringed octopus AND the Box Jelly Fish all have the same LETHAL neurotoxin. Pretty good for three completely different critters.
:P Ah yes, divinity, it's such a kidder! (¬_¬)
|
|
Echidna!(As in both Monotremes)
Heck Emus! Because nothing is more absured than a six foot, flightless bird!
The fact that the Funnel Web Spider, the Blue ringed octopus AND the Box Jelly Fish all have the same LETHAL neurotoxin. Pretty good for three completely different critters.
:P Ah yes, divinity, it's such a kidder! (¬_¬)
Penguins
AnteatersRiver Dolphins
Gharials
Manatees
Seriously, there are some strange critters out there.
|
|
Echidna!(As in both Monotremes)
Heck Emus! Because nothing is more absured than a six foot, flightless bird!
The fact that the Funnel Web Spider, the Blue ringed octopus AND the Box Jelly Fish all have the same LETHAL neurotoxin. Pretty good for three completely different critters.
:P Ah yes, divinity, it's such a kidder! (¬_¬)
Penguins
Anteaters
River Dolphins
Gharials
ManateesSeriously, there are some strange critters out there.
ah but what a boring world if they were not.
|
|
ah but what a boring world if they were not.Echidna!(As in both Monotremes)
Heck Emus! Because nothing is more absured than a six foot, flightless bird!
The fact that the Funnel Web Spider, the Blue ringed octopus AND the Box Jelly Fish all have the same LETHAL neurotoxin. Pretty good for three completely different critters.
:P Ah yes, divinity, it's such a kidder! (¬_¬)
Penguins
Anteaters
River Dolphins
Gharials
ManateesSeriously, there are some strange critters out there.
The luxury of television makes it a less boring world by being in my daily life. Animal Planet FTW!
Oh, and Puffins too!
Pee Yew double-fuh En
|
|
Look up a few posts and you can read what doesn't get you an excommunication. Turns out saving a life does.
And amazingly, the same organization lectures the rest of us about morality.
Wow, this actually made me throw up in my mouth a little bit. Dawkins (IIRC) is right, the Brits need to arrest the pope if he steps foot on British soil. This man was personally responsible for covering up an abusive priest's exploits and he's the head honcho of the RCC, but a nun makes a tough choice that results in a woman's life being saved at the cost of her fetus and she's excommunicated? Wow. Just...wow...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Echidna!(As in both Monotremes)
Heck Emus! Because nothing is more absured than a six foot, flightless bird!
The fact that the Funnel Web Spider, the Blue ringed octopus AND the Box Jelly Fish all have the same LETHAL neurotoxin. Pretty good for three completely different critters.
:P Ah yes, divinity, it's such a kidder! (¬_¬)
Penguins
Anteaters
River Dolphins
Gharials
ManateesSeriously, there are some strange critters out there.
Humans.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
we should hear more from the moderates
Religious moderates could be singing their blessed heads off about it, but you'd never hear about it. It isn't considered newsworthy. My wife notes, accurately I believe, that the bad Christians (and Muslims, for that matter) get all the press.
|
|
we should hear more from the moderatesReligious moderates could be singing their blessed heads off about it, but you'd never hear about it. It isn't considered newsworthy. My wife notes, accurately I believe, that the bad Christians (and Muslims, for that matter) get all the press.
Moderation is never exciting and is therefore never news. It is, however, the daily life of the vast majority of all religions and philosophies.
APPEAR
Humans.
Really, it does trump all.
Religious moderates could be singing their blessed heads off about it, but you'd never hear about it.
Because they're not actually doing anything about it, so there's not much to report?
Religious moderates could be singing their blessed heads off about it, but you'd never hear about it.Because they're not actually doing anything about it?
It isn't considered newsworthy.
Moderation is never exciting and is therefore never news.
You miss my point entirely. Some examples:
Because both of them would be GREAT news. They would be extremely "exciting," and definitely "considered newsworthy," despite being moderate. But the reason we don't hear about them is becasue they don't seem to be happening, not because they aren't newsworthy. Instead, I suggest that we don't hear about these moderates because they're not doing anything newsworthy -- like actively opposing their criminal and/or extremist brethren.
When I lived in Virginia, a nearby church was struck by lightning and burned to the ground. The dutiful churchgoers rebuilt it and vowed to God that they'd correct whatever had made Him smite them. The next thunderstorm produced a lightning bolt that again struck the church, burning it to the ground once again.
Shame no one suggested that maybe what cheesed God off so much was the church building.
As an experiment, I just googled counterprotests against Westboro "Baptist" Church's hate-filled picketing (you know, Phelps and his wackos in Topeka, whom the "moderate" churches say is an "extremist" and "does not represent their views.").
I submit that this isn't because the high school students and the soldiers are more "exciting." I think it's because the other churches might claim to condemn Phelps' band of loons, but they don't do anything about him. Not even a simple counterprotest. Someone please prove me wrong, so that I can go back to thinking that most moderates actually don't tacitly support the whackos with their inaction.
|
I was not aware of this, I always assumed it was simply a scientist's overbearing logic lol.
Blaise Pascal was a very clever scientist who had faith. Some of his "Pensees", I dunno if you've read them some are quite insightful, others a product of his time, but he was after all a human being, a logistician stuffed into a similar conundrum that I myself am as a grad school scientist with a Masters degree in Earth sciences and chemistry. So the problem I have with Pascal's Wager is a statement of logic that though correct at a certain level presumes that anyone who isn't a Christian is in a big and dangerous dilemma! That is why I don't believe it is helpful to a modern discussion like this one. BTW Yes you have always been civil with me and I respect that.
You see we really don't 100% know whether we are right. But I am 99.999999% recurring sure in my God because of the demonstrations of his work in my life. The problem is we can take every argument and refute it which is why I said there are two types of disbelievers, the honest ones and the dishonest ones.
Pascal did also say, and this is a little closer to the truth if you've ever studied first order predicate logic. Say, for example if I managed to find the Logical proof of the Divity's existence and show it, no one would understand it anyway so it would be a rather large a pretty useless document.
I mean there are far simpler logical conundrums we can't yet work out today.
So if the greatest human mind, say, that ever lived is unable to decipher and even say he were, only He and a few huge brained people would believe, leaving the vast majority of mortals lost.
This is why God won't be proved. Mainly because He cannot be proved, and even if he were provable as I discussed in my thought experiment above, then the vast majority of human beings are kinda screwed.
The second thing, and this is something revealed to me is that God is perfectly happy, and has no need of us to be any happier. He is at peace. But he loves because his nature is so and it is why he cares that his dear humans are not lost to him.
It comes down to one simple thing can one bow before a God and believe before you see Him? I did. But others won't for reasons of their own, which I won't go into here. I made the deliberate choice to believe in the hope that as Christ told us that if we did we "would" see, because God is true to his Word. I bowed I prayed and nothing happened so I though OK, Hey I gave it a go. But over the first few weeks strange and wonderful things happened to me in my life and turned my whole world into a different and much better thing.
An honest disbeliever can give it a shot and say, well I gave it a shot and nothing happened, or maybe it did, for some it is an immediate thing. It wasn't for me.
A dishonest disbeliever does NOT want there to be a GOD and is frightened that He might find God if he did what Christ asks us all to do. Because he/she is happy enough to live his life as master/mistress of themselves.
So the question you have to deeply ask yourself is, would I be happy to find God or not. If you would be happy that there really is a God then you have really nothing to lose.
But everyone makes there own choices and that is their sovereign right. No one can can convert another. Only God can do that, just a vengeance and judgment are His and His alone, because He is the only person/being that knows the job.
I would agree that living without a deity is extremely tough because then you are effectively your own god, but with only limited powers among 6.5 billion others on the planet.
The peace of God is so strong that it really does set you free. You can become truly what you are, and for those with good minds, they are expected to use them. There are a lot of very ignorant believers spreading cowshit over scientific discovery and pushing people away from God because they have their heads in the sand of ignorance to the working of the God's Creation.
If it were up to Christians alone I doubt I would have become one. Luckily for me God is a lot cleverer than they are.
This probably made no sense but if you have questions fire away.
Pascal did also say, and this is a little closer to the truth if you've ever studied first order predicate logic. Say, for example if I managed to find the Logical proof of the Divity's existence and show it, no one would understand it anyway so it would be a rather large a pretty useless document.
I'd have to argue against his logic here. My wife, for example, has no idea how our refrigerator works. I can explain the principle to her, and she stares at me blankly. But she believes it, because the refrigerator works. She doesn't need to understand how to see that it does. But here's the main thing -- and it's far more important -- the refrigerator works for everyone just the same, and they all perceive its effects similarly. If a guest comes in, who also has no idea how it works, and who isn't even aware that we HAVE such a device, and I hand that person a cold drink, they say, "Ooh, it's nice and cold." In fact, 100 out of 100 people in a blind test agree that the drinks from the 'fridge are colder than the ones at room temperature. Not one of them doubts that such a device exists. Not one of them tries to disprove its existence.
The thing is, of those 100 people, maybe one of them can understand how the thing works. The complexity of an explanation in no way increases the unlikelihood of acceptance by way of effects.
If large-scale, controlled studies showed that cancer victims who were prayed for recovered 99 out of 100 times, and those who weren't died 99 out of 100 times, we might not understand the mechanics of how Giod interecedes in cases of prayer, but we would know that He does. But that's not the case -- prayer actually makes no difference at all. If I were struck by lightning every time I blasphemed, I might not be able to demonstate why, in terms of supernatural effects of electrostatic charges -- but I'd for sure know it happens! If we occasionally had people who were resurrected bodily from the dead, we might not understand the mechanics of that, either, but the effects would be unmistakable. Unstead, we get thirdhand accounts and a bunch of excuses like, "well, it just doesn't happen anymore, is all." But the only consistent effects we see are ones that can be explained by non-supernatural means that do not require a God.
That doesn't mean that there isn't a God; only that he hides all the time. And that's why you won't prove His existence, because of His trickery and stealth, not because of His complexity.
Humans.Echidna!(As in both Monotremes)
Heck Emus! Because nothing is more absured than a six foot, flightless bird!
The fact that the Funnel Web Spider, the Blue ringed octopus AND the Box Jelly Fish all have the same LETHAL neurotoxin. Pretty good for three completely different critters.
:P Ah yes, divinity, it's such a kidder! (¬_¬)
Penguins
Anteaters
River Dolphins
Gharials
ManateesSeriously, there are some strange critters out there.
Horseshoe crabs. Such an old species that they have green copper based blood.
Horseshoe crabs. Such an old species that they have green copper based blood.
Actually, their blood is blue.
I didn't know they were old money from new england!Actually, their blood is blue.
Horseshoe crabs. Such an old species that they have green copper based blood.
*facepalm* ;)
Actually, their blood is blue.
Horseshoe crabs. Such an old species that they have green copper based blood.
Man today is not my day. Going off of memory and bam another mistake. Apparently I do need sleep.
A growing number of Catholics are calling for just this issue to be brought up. I expect more as years go on.That would be a huge step towards the Church (and religious moderates in general) being seen as an active part of the solution, rather than as part of the problems.
I stopped being a Roman Catholic over a decade ago, over a number of these same reasons. Moderate common sense Catholics are out there, trying to reform the Church from within, but they often don't get any press and don't seek the attention:
Locally (SW FL) every couple months, the local diocese uncovers a number of these moderates (pro-women ordination, in favor of prosecuting pedophile priests, pro-choice but not pro-abortion, pro-GLBT inclusion, pro-birth control) in lay church jobs... and fires them. They are often threatened with excommunication (basically telling a devout Catholic he/she is damned to Hell) if they persist in their efforts. At least some of the moderates are trying to push for reform, but it seems they'd have better luck tilting at windmills.