Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Peter B

Siege in Sydney CBD

300 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

psyche101

We could use science to remove the warrior gene, or maybe use science to isolate that part of the mind that manifests religion, or use science to implant peace electrodes so that anger is bypassed in the masses I dont know how far you propose to go? Maybe beyond this? I dont believe theres much hope for humanity within artificial culture. It wouldnt be quite human now would it. :)

Either way, i think history reveals science is a weapon, as much as you suspect religion of being, and will always be used for power.

Aside from this psyche happy new year to you, looking forward to more of your interesting posts on UM throughout. :tu:

You have me all wrong, I do not propose that we use science to remove the imaginative gene. or the selfish gene, which keeps us bound to worshiping an imaginary being for the sake of an afterlife. I am telling you now, it is a lousy investment.

All we need is education what can religion actually prove, what can science actually prove - that is enough. We just need to get generations up to speed, and let them make that decision based on fact. And based on fact, it is no contest, science wins the accountability and proof award every single time.

Could you cite an example of science as a weapon? Do yo mean verbally or do you mean like Hiroshima? Science is brutally honest. It is what it is, if you use it for bad things, you get stuff like bombs, but what it will not do is lie to you and make you think you have to worship it all your life so you can have a good afterlife.

Could I ask what you mean by "artificial culture"? I am honestly not following you there at all. If you find religion "natural" I beg to differ. Science is based upon the world around us - nature, we observe these laws, we do not create them, we report them. Science is as organic as information can possibly be. God is a human construct, and therefore entirely artificial.

Hope you enjoyed the clip. A Happy New Year to you to, you had yours 3 hours earlier than I did, and I wish I was over there for it. I really love NZ. Maybe next year. I do not take our discussion personally, these are brutally honest thoughts that I want people to challenge. If I am wrong, that is the only way I will find out, by seeking as many alternate viewpoints as I can, but with all due respect, I do not see a good argument for Islam to date. It seems to be pretty much all downhill on that one, and all based on warm fuzzies. I think we can do better than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
TSS

Yes indeed you are claiming to be tolerant whilst throwing insults, you insist ion tolerance for an archaic movement that is reinterpreted by some individuals to cause pain and suffering. What your argument is 1.2 billion people should not miss out in worshiping an imaginary being for the sake of the 40 odd thousand who misuse those teachings to cause direct pain to thousands more, and the thousands suffering under Shariah Law. That is why I asked "why is Islam worth preserving? What good does it bring to the world? Which cannot be answered it seems. I can sure list many bad things Islam has brought to the modern world.

LOL...I haven't insisted on tolerance on anything, why do you keep making up a position that has never been stated. I'm not religious, so don't care what happens to a religion....I have never made the point that Islam needs preserving, or that it has brought any good to the world, that isn't the point, the point is that for over a billion people it does hold value in varying degrees, your personal dislike of it has no baring on these people. That was the point when I said that it is unreasonable to expect all those of one faith to talk with one voice in condemning the actions of a few, because contrary to your beliefs this isn't a fight between the West and Islam on the grounds of us taking some moral high ground based on an archaic mind set, because if it was then we'd be equally targetting Saudi Arabia, who are a vicious and uncompromising regime. Can you explain our double standards on that issue?

I never lost the point. Islam has a bad name, and if we are expected to know who is radical and who is not, distancing the two seems a prudent action to me. How would that not assist removal of racial profiling?

But when the leaders behave as badly as any other fool who makes the headlines, I ask again, what are we preserving this foolish and hurtful cult for? What is the globe getting in return for supporting Islam? Equal chances of getting into the imaginary heaven? If so, that is simply not good enough, and a selfish position that contradicts the ideal of a social community.

'We' are not preserving anything...you can't eliminate an entire religion, so it doesn't make the default position a preservation of anything...we are a planet packed with bizarre beliefs and traditions, which are entrenched into every nation and the way it's citizens conduct themselves. It's a juggling game, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

Yes it is a war on terror, and Iraq was home to a large part of the Taliban, who have created their equal share of suffering and pain. That is why US Forces are also in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the objectives for the war on terror are:

  • Defeat terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and demolish their organizations
  • Identify, locate and demolish terrorists along with their organizations
  • Deny sponsorship, support and sanctuary to terrorists
  • End the state sponsorship of terrorism
  • Establish and maintain an international standard of accountability with regard to combating terrorism
  • Strengthen and sustain the international effort to combat terrorism
  • Work with willing and able states
  • Enable weak states
  • Persuade reluctant states
  • Compel unwilling states
  • Interdict and disorder material support for terrorists
  • Abolish terrorist sanctuaries and havens
  • Diminish the underlying conditions that terrorists seek to exploit
  • Partner with the international community to strengthen weak states and prevent (re)emergence of terrorism
  • Win the war of ideals
  • Defend US citizens and interests at home and abroad
  • Integrate the National Strategy for Homeland Security
  • Attain domain awareness
  • Enhance measures to ensure the integrity, reliability, and availability of critical, physical, and information-based infrastructures at home and abroad
  • Implement measures to protect US citizens abroad
  • Ensure an integrated incident management capability

Nothing to do with any country, it has to do with organisations that would bring suffering to others no matter where they be. What do you mean "Iraq has loads of terrorists doesn't it"? Why yes, it does. Every heard of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi?

Then you have to accept the consequences of said actions. The Taliban were not in Iraq before we destroyed the country and gave them the opportunity to set up there. You can't have it both ways, saying on the one hand that it has nothing to do with foreign policy, when said foreign policy provides a vacuum for our next problem to solve (in this case IS).

Then you will have to get it from MVGroup or something because that is a link to an article on the documentary. Otherwise, I would have just posted the vid. Regardless, it has everything to do with your original point, why do we not have huge news crews? Who wants to skirt death for that pay grade????? The documentary shows how many reporters are killed in war zones, and what a high risk job it is. These are people with cameras, not guns, reporters not soldiers, but they are easy targets, and it's pretty much a death sentence of one was to stand in front of a scene in a war zone, ands report it like a suburban incident. Think about it, why are you not a reporter in a war zone? Would you put your life in high risk of likely death for like 30K a year? I wouldn't even get out of bed for that much!!!!!!

Oh there are definitely reporters in these places, they don't operate from the standpoint of a pay grade, they operate to get to the truth.....the point is, and always has been from my first post on this thread that there findings do not get the same air time, and the larger organisations don't operate with the same urgency to get to the scene of a drone strike as they do when it's a Taliban massacre for example. That is a fact, whether you choose to accept it or not isn't really an issue to me.

Are you freaking kidding? What reporter in their right mind would stand around Maulana Fazlullah while he kills kids, how is that not a direct death sentence?

A Report every 30 mins is not 24/7 coverage like the Sydney Siege, you are talking chalk and cheese here, here you tell me the BBC are doing what you tell me they are not doing, unless you expect even more from them? Can you clarify that? Are the 30 minute updates what you consider acceptable?

Dim!! Freaking hell mate, you make no sense here at all, it might make sense in your head, but not in words.

It makes no sense to you because you go off on tangents that are not related to what is said. I'll repeat it again for you - the original point was in reply to someone saying why don't the muslim community and leaders come out more in condemnation of attacks like that seen in Aus. why would they? they see attacks from the West on muslims in other nations that do not see the same levels of condemnation from the western public, so why should they be expected to come out in criticism of one side only?

There was a hated Taliban commander responsible for the deaths of many in northern Pakistan, he was hated by the locals, he had killed many in that area. When a US drone took him out did the locals thank the US for killing the man that has killed many of their own? No they didn't, there anger turned to the US. People don't like having their air space invaded by a nation that the Pakistani government have constantly requested to stop using drones over it's soil. you think we can act with impunity, that these people should be grateful for what we are doing.....there is not a single country in the West that would tolerate these violations, but you expect muslims the world over to sing with one voice when we get hit......unrealistic i'm afraid.

No!! it did not!! Did you not read my post?

I was sitting at a friend's house, watching the same Asian women escape form the sige like every 30 seconds for hours. I went home, and until midnight, they played the same stupid 30 seconds of footage over, and over, and over, and over, and over.......

It desensitised myself, and everyone I knew to the situation!! After a while it became a running joke! Ohh my, another asian has escaped, thats 186 hostages that have now escaped.......

As I said, in the end I was so dammned bored, and said to my wife "I am going to bed, this will all be over in seconds, and we will hear about it in the morning". I did not sit glued to me TV until 2am when the action happened. Then before the bodies were in the morgue, this stupid Iwillridewithyou garbage pop's up. No, 24/7 news coverage is damn boring, not cutting edge. Lots of downtime to fill in, which in turn desensitizes an audience.

Maybe that stuff floats your boat, I do not know of anyone who does find 24/7 coverage useful.

It has been explained to you time and time agin why expecting one side to comment without the other accepting responsibility too is unworkable...you have gone off on another misleading angle....I don't know why these simple points are so hard for you to grasp.

I thought your point was that newspeople do not give war zones enough coverage. Pretty sure that is the case too. From what I recall, the conversation was specifically about that until you started on cause and effect and mentioned relatives in Australia. Upi seem to have jumped in on where I was asking PA why does the so called official Muslim Community not come right out and draw that line in the sand so EVERYONE can give the profiling garbage a rest. As there is no way to tell someone who is wearing traditional gear to be radical or moderate. I do not believe you got the entire gist of the conversation, and offered irrelevant points concerning your view of the religion, and what I see as an apologetic stance toward Islam in general.

Wrong again, the conversation wasn't with you at all, I was replying to S2F....it was nothing to do with you or your convo with PA.

Ohh, you do not remember saying

I'm simply pointing out that maybe everything is not as we assume.

Well, yes, basic magnetism is, it;s not anti gravity. I actually did not mean to get that snarky, but was shocked at your harsh response after all the posts I have seen. I think it unfair to offer a more benevolent position ot religion over science, as science can back what it says, and we should be all about what can be qualified, not imagined.

Wrong yet again, my comment was on the whole scene relating to these individuals, nothing to do with physics. Yet again you assume a position, and fill in the blanks for yourself.

And, no, I simply do not agree with you, not do I feel you have a qualified position to make such claims from. The war on terror is not BS, I see results, I see Saddam Gone, I see the 911 crew in custody, I see OBL gone, I see less dead people as a result. I weep for wa casualties as any human would, but am unsure how you feel that letting terrorist organisations continuing to hurt innocents work things out for themselves is any sort of solution. You speak is if these animals are regular people or something. 911 dragged the US in, and you can like it or lump it, based on 911, the majority of the world is in support of the US war on terror. You are in the minority, therefore as far as I am concerned, your concerns are your own. 28 nations have come out in full support of the war on terror. All those professionals have been duped, but you can see through the lies? Come on man. You surely cannot be serious with that statement!

Of course it is, would a Google copy and paste make you feel better would it? I keep asking you where the line is drawn in foreign policy when politics and religion are one. That makes a mess of the entire premise. The US is safeguarding itself as it did receive attacks from terrorist organisations, it seems pretty cut and dried to me.

You're the one with the uneven hand, I am asking for accountability, but you are asking for special permission based upon faith. And no, that should not have to be life. We should all be accountable for our actions and inspirations. What has Islam offered to the globe again?

Do you feel we should drop our current understanding of the Universe and return to the Copernican system for that sake of respect to elders? Seems to me to be pretty much what you ask here.

The "death we cause" be the issue, the way you describe that, you seem to put a war zone is like a bunch of murderers on a killing spree. Fathers, mothers, Uncles Aunts brothers and sisters make up the armed forces, and would give their lives to save an innocent, no matter where they come from. To degrade these heroes as you do I find insulting to the good people that would give their life for you or I. I do feel you have a nasty mix of Alex Jones with an unrealistic view of a war zone. Terrorist organisation use their own people as human shields to make these great people look bad. And when someone does go bad, we do see reams of footage like when Bales went crazy. To ignore the good being done and focus on the bad largely promoted by evil forces is only allowing radical Islam yet another win. Just the way Radical Islam uses moderate Islam as a cover in society today to spread evil and pain.

I'll have to come back to the rest of your points another time...i'm in and out of a hospice as my uncle is leaving us any hour soon....I shouldn't be on here and don't have time to carry on typing at the moment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I wasn't referring just specifically to religious ideals - but any ideals, your ideals for world peace inluded. Creating a diatribe of "them wrong, me right" everytime you enter a discussion is not giving credit the humanity of others and their right to ideals. My proviso stands and takes the above into account if you hold an ideal you need to be aware of how it is making you view others. Cults like Jim Jones would not thrive if the membership were not ready and willing to judge others as lacking to a degree that they want to escape the world and it's peoples, cult leaders depend on this mindset to draw people in.

I don't understand why we need a "right to ideals" If a question exists, it will have one answer, not two, why is it wrong to insist we seek the one that is correct, and discard the flawed data? I could see that brain power used to create the worlds biggest con into helping humanity much more than it does today.

Cults like Jim Jones would not exist if we had a decent education. If people all had an equal and decent education, then judgement would also be less as sharing knowledge is actually fun with people who want to learn. If one is ingrained to insist on accountability, things only get bad when you provide something like an imaginary being is a false ideal when someone has invested an entire life in that belief. That person does not want to better their knowledge because that would mean dumping their huge investment, which is supposed to have the bonus of continued existence upon death. It's a selfish and greedy action that denies real truth, it is the greatest suppression of knowledge science has ever seen, yet what do people blame? The Government, that very same evil that removed power from religion 400 years ago. And you think we are not sliding backwards? Again, I mention the 21st century. Why do so many insist in hanging onto the 11th?

You confuse a mindset with accountability, it's not who is right and who is wrong, it is what is right, and what is wrong. This is that we should look past our egos and focus upon.

No, I do not give credit to humanity alone, I give credit to humanity applying itself. Ideals are like armpits, everyone has them, and they mostly smell. Fact is untouchable, as my sig says, reality cant be debunked, that is the beauty of it. And Science is indeed beautiful, religion is not.

Being intellectually disadvantaged does not make some a lesser being - that's just plain ridiculous and quite a big part of the continuing problem. Also, holding the "superiority" view that it is "our" job to fix the "damage" done by religion is exactly the same mindset you are arguing against but in reverse. Clearly, it is a continuation of the same problem playing out.

No it is not, it is a fact. Plain and simple, brutal, and will upset people, especially those who did not have a good education, or wasted their own opportunities. Being intellectually disadvantaged robs people from rational and correct decisions when they rely on emotion, it robs people of real knowledge and hide evolutionary processes for the sake of an imaginary being making a species out of a rib from a man he created - hey, could not create more like the one he already did, had to take a bit from him and make more. Gee, I wonder if that idea came from simple seeds!! Adam is made from dust, but eve from a rib made from dust, I mean geez people. And I have not even got into the none of the great flood. It's a story book that we know is majorly flawed, and not an accurate history as has always been claimed. It's the worlds first and biggest con job. A con job is "damage" IMHO.

How can it be the same problem with one solution based in fact, and one in imagination? One relies on accountability, one of faith, how are they on a level playing field?

How is holding a stand that

(a) What people believe is that there is an "imaginary being".

( B) That this belief is "not acceptable" in "this day and age".

© That "we as a species should be past such "nonsense".

(d) That those who hold such a belief are "wallowing" and backwards to the tune of being in the "11 century".

(e) That religion is an "addiction like drugs".

Going to open a discourse that will promote and engender the kind of reconciliation and peace amongst the peoples of the world that we are all looking for.

I never proposed an immediate solution of you go back through all of my posts. It might take up to several generations to get over the shock of the entire globe falling for a huge con job. Like I say, this religion thing is a massive investment, billions of jobs, even more dollars, real estate, lives and communities based on it. It's big business. Of course it will take years and maybe generations to undo the damage religion has done. The people from IS are not rational decent human beings. There is no point in trying to salvage that train wreck. We need to build a better future, what you and I have sucks, and will until we die, I accept that, but hope future generation will have more to look forward to than we do in a world held in a grip of religion. I want to leave this world a batter place than I found it, I doubt I can do more than that. We are given this awesome brain to use it, it is a tremendous shame that it will expire one day, but what aPRIVILEGE to be here with it in the here and now! Why waste it on an imaginary being for some false notion of a neverland when you die? That seems almost criminal to me.

All you are doing playing pot and kettle. Your judgements are just as harsh and damaging as those of religious dogmatics who refuse to accept the views of others as valid and denegrate those that do not believe what they believe.

This pot is willing to back his kettle with facts, religion fails in that respect. And people do not wish to accept that very fact. It really is that simple. I do not degenerate people for believing, I degenerate the organisation for it's greed and manipulation of so many people for so many years. I am sure I have made that very clear, the oldies making tea out back in Church are not evil, the man planning to build the next Church and reap profits from it is.

Wake up, see the real problem, recognize the Ego and it's delight in superiority over others no matter which side of the fence it plays it's game from for what it is - the true enemy and the perfect opponent to compassion, love and empathy which real solutions are based upon.

Hrrmzz, yet Christianity, religion, love and empathy, but that does not seem to console the hundreds of thousand of victims of radical Islam, it does not comfort the sexual abuse victims. No does it comfort the poor sheltering under eves in the magnificence of the Vatican. Look at the money the Church spends on itself in all aspects, and look how many needy could be helped by those billions of wasted dollars.

Live an empathy to me are healing the sick, finding better solutions for energy and food, making life better, cleaner and cheaper so we may all benefit. That all comes from Science, Religion is great for verbal assurances, but to make the world itself a better place, we rely upon science.

I see much more real benevolence coming from science than I do religion, and am reminded of PA praying for the flood victims in Brisbane, whilst I was out there with a Gurney and a broom making things happen. That strikes me as the real difference between religion and science, a dreamer and a doer. Honestly, if I am in a pickle, I do not want people to pray for me and magnify my disposition, I want a friend to help.

And religious people NEED to learn that you are not better than the rest of us, we have benevolence, and love, and empathy, you do not have to believe in an imaginary being for that.

Then LIVE what you propose, be the ground you stand upon, deal with your own story telling, selfishness and greediness. Your judgements and diatribes of others are your greatest obstactles to your own ideals. I cannot say it any plainer than that.

I am living it, I am out there slapping heads with a wet fish, and in some cases it will stick. Some people will start to question religion, and why we give it so much leeway. I expect I am speaking with Adults here not the future generations that require the education to remove the shackles of religion. I am saying Look For Yourself People, do not "just believe" do yourself a favour and use that magnificent brain, don't let someone else control it or you - question Everything. Especially me, because if I believe anything, it is that we can only learn by getting our hands dirty.

My observations are not judgements, I am willing to back anything I say as far as I possibly can, and won't ascribe tough questions to a higher power. People are offended by my accusation, but they should be questioning them, and if I am wrong, they should be proving that to me. Thing is if nobody can prove me wrong, but just get offended at me questioning religion, what does that say - honestly?

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

LOL...I haven't insisted on tolerance on anything, why do you keep making up a position that has never been stated. I'm not religious, so don't care what happens to a religion....I have never made the point that Islam needs preserving, or that it has brought any good to the world, that isn't the point, the point is that for over a billion people it does hold value in varying degrees, your personal dislike of it has no baring on these people. That was the point when I said that it is unreasonable to expect all those of one faith to talk with one voice in condemning the actions of a few, because contrary to your beliefs this isn't a fight between the West and Islam on the grounds of us taking some moral high ground based on an archaic mind set, because if it was then we'd be equally targetting Saudi Arabia, who are a vicious and uncompromising regime. Can you explain our double standards on that issue?

'We' are not preserving anything...you can't eliminate an entire religion, so it doesn't make the default position a preservation of anything...we are a planet packed with bizarre beliefs and traditions, which are entrenched into every nation and the way it's citizens conduct themselves. It's a juggling game, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

Then you have to accept the consequences of said actions. The Taliban were not in Iraq before we destroyed the country and gave them the opportunity to set up there. You can't have it both ways, saying on the one hand that it has nothing to do with foreign policy, when said foreign policy provides a vacuum for our next problem to solve (in this case IS).

Oh there are definitely reporters in these places, they don't operate from the standpoint of a pay grade, they operate to get to the truth.....the point is, and always has been from my first post on this thread that there findings do not get the same air time, and the larger organisations don't operate with the same urgency to get to the scene of a drone strike as they do when it's a Taliban massacre for example. That is a fact, whether you choose to accept it or not isn't really an issue to me.

It makes no sense to you because you go off on tangents that are not related to what is said. I'll repeat it again for you - the original point was in reply to someone saying why don't the muslim community and leaders come out more in condemnation of attacks like that seen in Aus. why would they? they see attacks from the West on muslims in other nations that do not see the same levels of condemnation from the western public, so why should they be expected to come out in criticism of one side only?

There was a hated Taliban commander responsible for the deaths of many in northern Pakistan, he was hated by the locals, he had killed many in that area. When a US drone took him out did the locals thank the US for killing the man that has killed many of their own? No they didn't, there anger turned to the US. People don't like having their air space invaded by a nation that the Pakistani government have constantly requested to stop using drones over it's soil. you think we can act with impunity, that these people should be grateful for what we are doing.....there is not a single country in the West that would tolerate these violations, but you expect muslims the world over to sing with one voice when we get hit......unrealistic i'm afraid.

It has been explained to you time and time agin why expecting one side to comment without the other accepting responsibility too is unworkable...you have gone off on another misleading angle....I don't know why these simple points are so hard for you to grasp.

Wrong again, the conversation wasn't with you at all, I was replying to S2F....it was nothing to do with you or your convo with PA.

Wrong yet again, my comment was on the whole scene relating to these individuals, nothing to do with physics. Yet again you assume a position, and fill in the blanks for yourself.

I'll have to come back to the rest of your points another time...i'm in and out of a hospice as my uncle is leaving us any hour soon....I shouldn't be on here and don't have time to carry on typing at the moment.

For goodness sakes, do not waste your time on me insisting I am wrong!!! Get the hell out of here and do not come back until all is settled with your Uncle man!! I have been a member for ten years, UM is not going anyplace, it will be here when things are sorted. For now at least, I insist you forget I exist!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

How Christian is that?

I doubt on the face of it, how few realise the diversity of this question, it does not have just one answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
taniwha

You have me all wrong, I do not propose that we use science to remove the imaginative gene. or the selfish gene, which keeps us bound to worshiping an imaginary being for the sake of an afterlife. I am telling you now, it is a lousy investment.

All we need is education what can religion actually prove, what can science actually prove - that is enough. We just need to get generations up to speed, and let them make that decision based on fact. And based on fact, it is no contest, science wins the accountability and proof award every single time.

Hmmm, what makes you so sure God is all in the mind? We might be getting off topic, its an interesting question and others might like to debate it, perhaps its been put to death already, nevertheless i will start another thread in the appropriate skeptics vs believers section of religion. Watch that space.

Could you cite an example of science as a weapon? Do yo mean verbally or do you mean like Hiroshima? Science is brutally honest. It is what it is, if you use it for bad things, you get stuff like bombs, but what it will not do is lie to you and make you think you have to worship it all your life so you can have a good afterlife.

I cant think of any weapon in history unfounded by science. Even hunting and martial arts evolve by scientific principles.

Could I ask what you mean by "artificial culture"? I am honestly not following you there at all. If you find religion "natural" I beg to differ. Science is based upon the world around us - nature, we observe these laws, we do not create them, we report them. Science is as organic as information can possibly be. God is a human construct, and therefore entirely artificial.

By artificial culture i simply mean a culture that would deny belief in a supreme being, or God. How do you envisage humanity in your future scenario? What else might you supress? Would you make worship a crime? Would you drive it underground?

Hope you enjoyed the clip. A Happy New Year to you to, you had yours 3 hours earlier than I did, and I wish I was over there for it. I really love NZ. Maybe next year. I do not take our discussion personally, these are brutally honest thoughts that I want people to challenge. If I am wrong, that is the only way I will find out, by seeking as many alternate viewpoints as I can, but with all due respect, I do not see a good argument for Islam to date. It seems to be pretty much all downhill on that one, and all based on warm fuzzies. I think we can do better than that.

Thanks psyche, im sure your comments are meant in good faith. No offense taken by my part. PM me if you need a contact in Christchurch on one of your flyovers.

Im 5 min from the airport. :tu:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranoid Android

I see much more real benevolence coming from science than I do religion, and am reminded of PA praying for the flood victims in Brisbane, whilst I was out there with a Gurney and a broom making things happen. That strikes me as the real difference between religion and science, a dreamer and a doer.

I'd just like to add my comments here because I feel like I'm being quoted out of context. I have NEVER advocated prayer at the expense of other help. And the fact that I am a seven hour drive away from the border of Queensland (and I don't know how much further exactly to the floods) meant that I couldn't offer any real support other than monetary donation (and since I'm exceedingly short on money at the moment, what with a home-loan and only intermittent paid work I couldn't do that). Meanwhile there were church groups IN Queensland who were right up to their galoshes next to you helping out the victims of the floods there, and if it happened closer to where I live I may just be with my church group helping out AND praying for the sad events that would be happening. I have no problem with prayer AND action, a dreamer AND a doer, to co-opt your comment. I have never advocated prayer alone and feel that both prayer and action have a place in dealing with any problem.

Honestly, if I am in a pickle, I do not want people to pray for me and magnify my disposition, I want a friend to help.

I have no such problem. In a pickle I'd love to have people praying for me AND a friend to help out in the situation. If given a choice between only one or the other, I'd choose the person to help because to me that would be a form of answered prayer, but given the chance to have both I say "why not"?!??!!!
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TSS

For goodness sakes, do not waste your time on me insisting I am wrong!!! Get the hell out of here and do not come back until all is settled with your Uncle man!! I have been a member for ten years, UM is not going anyplace, it will be here when things are sorted. For now at least, I insist you forget I exist!!

No worries mate - i'll pick this up with you again another time!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

Hmmm, what makes you so sure God is all in the mind? We might be getting off topic, its an interesting question and others might like to debate it, perhaps its been put to death already, nevertheless i will start another thread in the appropriate skeptics vs believers section of religion. Watch that space.

A lifetime of having access to different religions, what I feel is two educations, scientific results, the accuracy of the Bible, the understanding of the Universe, understanding evolution, history of Jesus, contradictory principles between religions supposedly worshiping the same God, corruption within the Churches, moral soundness of religion, blinding people from real results from science to maintain a theocracy and using fear to control people are some of the reasons I know there is no God. Evolution and Science answer all the philosophical questions the Bible ponders, and corrects many assumptions man made in the Bible. There is simply no need for God to exist, the Bible is wrong, life requires certain conditions to thrive, not an omnipotent being. In a rational world, God is simply redundant. Like the Greek Gods who helped us understand Nature (Thor with his mighty hammer creating thunder, Zeus hurling lightning bolts etc.)

I'd be more than interested in your thread, considering the amount of flaws exposed, and questions answered, I honestly wonder why people have faith in religion if it is not entirely about securing a happy afterlife. There is no afterlife, we can know that too by way of simple reasoning and tracing historical record. I'd like to know if people could wrap their heads around that very simple fact, what impact it would have on religion. I can guess, but I won't see it, so discussing it is the next best thing I suppose.

I cant think of any weapon in history unfounded by science. Even hunting and martial arts evolve by scientific principles.

Like the bomb, the scientific principles were used to create weapons, that's the thing with science, it is brutally honest, and you can kill yourself with it, if one has an understanding of that which they undertake, they know science can kill them, but science does not care if you die, it only provides information. I think of it like the martial artists you mention that used garden tools and made them deadly weapons with the aid of Martial Arts.

By artificial culture i simply mean a culture that would deny belief in a supreme being, or God. How do you envisage humanity in your future scenario? What else might you supress? Would you make worship a crime? Would you drive it underground?

Not denial, I am against denial, the drives a thing underground, I prefer to face religion head on, and force it to have a level of accountability. Religion will simply become redundant. We do not have AFaryeists anymore, nor do we have ALeprechainists, one day the term ATheist will also be redundant when religion takes it's rightful place next to fairies and leprechauns as science exposes it for what it truly is, and the accuracy of it.

This is where the generations of young people come into the big picture. As I say, these animals from Boko Harem and Al Qaeda are not what I consider a human being, they are murderous animals with no morals, they cannot be reasoned with. All we can hope to do is educate out that level of ignorance. These people are religious extremists, they believe they are working for the highest power in the Universe, because their world is crap, and they cannot better it. Twisted versions of their religion tell them their life will be great one day, if they just punish themselves in this life for the sins of their fathers, which is something religion has been manipulating people with for centuries. They do not know a better way, and religion has corrupted them and taken advantage of mans greed. They are investing in an afterlife that is a crock, because they are helpless to better this life, and they know it.

Thanks psyche, im sure your comments are meant in good faith. No offense taken by my part. PM me if you need a contact in Christchurch on one of your flyovers.

Im 5 min from the airport. :tu:

Thank you for you comments, and your kind manner, I very much appreciate it. I may well take you up on that offer one day!! I usually head straight to Queenstown or Auckland, but have been meaning to head to Christchurch for some years. I hope everything is not too bad after the last big earthquake there.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I'd just like to add my comments here because I feel like I'm being quoted out of context.

I am sorry about that, hopefully I can clarify.

I have NEVER advocated prayer at the expense of other help.

That is correct, no you never advocated prayer at the expense of physical help, if I gave that impression, I do apologise, it was not what I meant to convey.

And the fact that I am a seven hour drive away from the border of Queensland (and I don't know how much further exactly to the floods) meant that I couldn't offer any real support other than monetary donation (and since I'm exceedingly short on money at the moment, what with a home-loan and only intermittent paid work I couldn't do that).

Exactly, and thank you for hammering home the point I was making to Yamanto and TSS concerning logistics of reporting an incident. This is also one of the many reasons that drone strikes do not have the same level of coverage that the Sydney Siege did.

And without question, your monetary donation, even if fifty cents went to good use.

Meanwhile there were church groups IN Queensland who were right up to their galoshes next to you helping out the victims of the floods there, and if it happened closer to where I live I may just be with my church group helping out AND praying for the sad events that would be happening. I have no problem with prayer AND action, a dreamer AND a doer, to co-opt your comment. I have never advocated prayer alone and feel that both prayer and action have a place in dealing with any problem.

Prayer takes time that could be put into action, prayer takes time that could be used to create fundraisers for those affected, prayer time could be used to gather blankets and goods to send up to the victims. What I am saying is actions speak louder than words, and goodwill accomplishes nothing in the real world. This is where we got off track, I find it something of an insult for a Muslim to pray to a Muslim God for a Christian, sorry, I just "don't get that", and see it as nothing more than a selfish action for attention. If the Lakemba Mosque members carried placards even to the police line saying "You are not a Muslim" and "You offend Allah" things might have been different, as that psycho gave reverence to all other Muslims and said so. There are plenty of Muslims carrying placards that say "Behead those who insult Islam" and brainwashing children to speak in Sydney Gardens about how they want to fight the evil West, I see plenty of bad Muslim demonstrations, and all the time, one nice one, that might have actually saved lives would have made a massive difference to the millions of us that simply do not trust or want Islam, and do not feel we should ever have to make any special compensation for it whatsoever. No Australian Citizen should ever die for Islam, not ever. Lets face it, if this was a cult as opposed to a "religion" and was creating the same level of unrest in the world, it would not be given the same leeway. But it's so damn close to the Christian Bible, that denouncing the evil os going to be rather hypocritical isn't it.

I have no such problem. In a pickle I'd love to have people praying for me AND a friend to help out in the situation. If given a choice between only one or the other, I'd choose the person to help because to me that would be a form of answered prayer, but given the chance to have both I say "why not"?!??!!!

I simply say "why" Don't waste your breath on false help, it does not actually do anything. We know people care, that is why in a crisis situation, volunteers are abundant. To pray to Allah for a Christian seems rather stupid to me to be honest. If you want to do something, door knock for spare blankets or something.

Mate, you would not even know half the people who are praying, how do you feel that helps anyone but the one doing the prayer? It's just self promotion. Look at me, I care, aren't I wonderful!!! Nah mate, people ARE awesome without prayer too, and don't need to be told how amazing they are. Nobody needs religion for that. Just a decent education, and a good upbringing. Heck, sometimes the former overcomes the latter too, and the latter drives the former. Empathy is great, and it helped man become what we are today, I do not deny that, but it comes from man, not religion. We had empathy long before we had religion.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

No worries mate - i'll pick this up with you again another time!

I'm not going anyplace, get your family affairs sorted, and my deepest condolences for the suffering your Uncle must be going through. Loss of life is never easy. If it takes a bit longer than expected, and you do not get back for a bit, and the thread drops down the list, feel free to PM me if you wish to pick up the conversation at a later date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

People do not have the right to their own facts, people have to say "this is a belief" not "God created man" that is not a belief mate, that is stated as fact, and many do feel it is fact, but in the real world, we Know that is not the case. As pointed out in this very thread, 50 years ago, the Rib story would have been top contender for the origins of man in a general discussion group, today it is "interpreted" All we are doing is refusing to let go a 2,000 year old addiction that helps us rationalise dying. Refusing to let go an addition does not make someone a better person, it helps them cope with things they struggle with. For a while anyway. I do not understand why being brutally honest with oneself is seen as a bad thing, and addiction to a superstition is not.

No mate, believe in Adult Santa Clauses does not make someone a better person, it shields them from reality, that is not a good thing at all and it is why we grow up.

I guess it would surprise you that is you asked me a few years ago the same question, I would have snapped back with Catholic. Then the last couple I would have answered with "Agnostic" It's been something of a progression, many people turn to religion as they age, I seem to have gravitated in the opposite direction. But I accept death and do not expect some amazing thing to whisk me away on my deathbed to some amazing faraway land. That obviously has a great deal to do with my more rational outlook.

I reckon I have been to more Churches than you have driven past in your life. My Father who passed in 2006 was my biggest religious inspiration in life. He is gone, and I read. I moved on and bettered his knowledge. And I gather that is what we as a species are supposed to do. He showed me what you speak of, and I met many lovely people in the tea room and other gatherings, I got to know his priest quite well too. Yes, lovely people. But an age that we need to let go of. I understand preserving historical record, but I do not see why one should continue to live by it, that is the point of progress. Ancient Aztecs had some amazing artifacts too, but we do not sacrifice people to imaginary Gods on a pillar anymore so we can make those artifacts.

These oldies making tea and organising missions are not the evil, they are doing good work for a bad cause. It's all marketing. I have not proposed to come down on people currently brainwashed by religion, as I keep saying, this is a solution that might take generations. To attempt to rationalise with the Religious animals at IS is not actually possible, those minds are too corrupt and evil to speak rationally with, our only hope lies with future generations.

Of course they do not make headlines, that is plain silly, who can afford to send news crews out with every missionary effort? Are you going to fund a cameraman to document a pump being installed in some remote African Village? And why do we need to accolades, can't we just help each other in peace without media and religions? I know many Atheists who send containers of food and clothing to third world countries every Christmas - they spend all year gathering goods to send, and solicit donations for freight and they have nothing to do with religion. That's man, not God mate. Believe it or not, man is capable of being benevolent without religion, despite what religion might infer!!

You know why they choose Christmas? Nothing to do with Santa and God, they know they will have time off for sure to organise the fright.

Time, and rational minds, that is all that is required. Generation of fact instead of fiction. Proper education for all. There will be casualties in the meantime, and that is unavoidable regardless of method, we can only hope for a better future in generations to come. These animals that shoot and kidnap children are beyond salvation. In that way, force will not be required, all we need to do is let more information into more heads. From the get go, not after being brainwashed by religion.

We cannot just keep bashing each other with stick saying my God is better than yours. We need to put all the Gods in Mothballs with the Roman and Greek ones, who were once also held in such light.

Belief in not fact, and nobody has the right to promote it in that fashion. One of the first things we need to learn as a species is to be accountable for our words as well as our actions. Faith is just a sales tool. If I believe something, I state, This is my "belief" if I know something is fact I state "this is fact" It's part of the basic education plan I speak of.

Ohh come on, you really believe that? You don't think the afterlife malarky is not a very large part of that belief? For goodness sakes man, it's a sales pitch!! Religion will make you a better person than your fellow man didn't ya know?, and I have to say the more religious people here do seem to consider themselves "better" for some reason, in the same way Tom Cruise said "Scientologist are better people" We are not "Better" some live in a fantasy world, some are waking up to reality, one is fact based, one is fantasy based. It really is that simple. That people find this business of religion so complicated I am starting to think is because they simply do not want to lose that security blanket of an afterlife and the assurance they are better then the unbeliever next to them. How do you find such a separatist attitude a good thing?

Asking me to live in a more dangerous situation so that someone can pretend and Adult Santa is going to oversee them and whisk them off to some wonderful land upon death is too much to ask mate, yes it is. A religion that inspires many to kill, and radicalise youth and destroy family units, a religion that is homophobic, misogynist, racist, infanticidal, sexist movement heralded by an unforgiving control freak is not what I consider a good thing we need in our lives, let alone anyones. I do not care how much comfort the thought of an afterlife brings, I am about the here and now. I simply do not believe at all that there is any such thing as an afterlife. We should be grateful for the time and learning we have.

I believe that there is life after you're gone. It's just not yours. But I completely disagree, despite our identical religious roots and subsequent progressions, that lovely people are another age. We should embrace lovely people not crucify them.

Governments monopolizing relationships with other countries, other religions, other whatever, that's quite the sales pitch too seeming how so many people just comply without question. There's sales pitches everywhere. If we're going to take the baseball bat to them, the one you're talking about is way, way down the priorities list at least insofar as this topic goes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
psyche101

I believe that there is life after you're gone. It's just not yours.

Sort of, there is existence of matter, but no level of ongoing consciousness. Basically we are minerals and elements that will be compressed into new formations, you your matter might be part of a rock in a billion years. The glass of water you drank this morning may have been gulped down by a Dinosaur at some point.

But I completely disagree, despite our identical religious roots and subsequent progressions, that lovely people are another age.

Well, put simply they are, just as the ancient Greek who believed in Zeus and Thor are now of another age, this cusp is very wide, ad we should have been making the moves to shed religion a good hundred years ago, but better late than never.

We should embrace lovely people not crucify them.

Who ever mentioned anything like crucifying them? I recommend leaving them to live out their lives with their faith, what is that going to take? 20 years? 30? and leave them be. The oldies hoping to see their loved ones again soon are not the issue here, it s the heads of the religions pushing them and brainwashing people to refuse science as a possible alternative, because that is all that science needs to make religion redundant.

As all the songs say, the children are the future, they need the decent education that is not obfuscated by religious fantasies.

Governments monopolizing relationships with other countries, other religions, other whatever, that's quite the sales pitch too seeming how so many people just comply without question.

An if religion was removed, that would be one less way for heads to state to manipulate masses. These underhanded under the table deals would not be able to happen.

There's sales pitches everywhere.

That is why we have so much addition to archaic ideals.

If we're going to take the baseball bat to them, the one you're talking about is way, way down the priorities list at least insofar as this topic goes.

No baseball bat, just a textbook and some time. People seem to think I want to outlaw religion, I do not, I want to make it accountable and let it make itself become redundant. It's just a feelgood ideal most people are addicted to in order to mitigate the fear of death. This is used by some to control the masses. It had it's run, it did it's job, it s now redundant, we can think past religion, it is just that most do not wish to.

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Sort of, there is existence of matter, but no level of ongoing consciousness. Basically we are minerals and elements that will be compressed into new formations, you your matter might be part of a rock in a billion years. The glass of water you drank this morning may have been gulped down by a Dinosaur at some point.

Well, put simply they are, just as the ancient Greek who believed in Zeus and Thor are now of another age, this cusp is very wide, ad we should have been making the moves to shed religion a good hundred years ago, but better late than never.

Who ever mentioned anything like crucifying them? I recommend leaving them to live out their lives with their faith, what is that going to take? 20 years? 30? and leave them be. The oldies hoping to see their loved ones again soon are not the issue here, it s the heads of the religions pushing them and brainwashing people to refuse science as a possible alternative, because that is all that science needs to make religion redundant.

As all the songs say, the children are the future, they need the decent education that is not obfuscated by religious fantasies.

An if religion was removed, that would be one less way for heads to state to manipulate masses. These underhanded under the table deals would not be able to happen.

That is why we have so much addition to archaic ideals.

No baseball bat, just a textbook and some time. People seem to think I want to outlaw religion, I do not, I want to make it accountable and let it make itself become redundant. It's just a feelgood ideal most people are addicted to in order to mitigate the fear of death. This is used by some to control the masses. It had it's run, it did it's job, it s now redundant, we can think past religion, it is just that most do not wish to.

No it's not "just" that, the gravity is immeasurably more than that, but you won't know anything else unless you go to church. I would add that fearful people are irrational people.

Who ever mentioned anything like crucifying them?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/crucify

Yours is #4.

When people don't have the right to believe, they don't have the right to religious belief either. I have a right to believe in Thor if I want to, and that might be a personal experience you'll never share and a subjective reason you'll never understand. It has nothing to do with my equality with you on this earth. It only has to do with my behavior. If my behavior is better than yours, it's not Thor's fault it's mine. You do what you like out back with whatever textbook you're talking about. Show me some real results out on the streets and I'll give it another glance. But you'll be crucified (#4) if you dare come here and step on our rule of law with such intolerance-based education.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

No it's not "just" that, the gravity is immeasurably more than that, but you won't know anything else unless you go to church.

I mentioned the heads of the religions, they are the ones I consider the bad people. You seem to keep missing that point.

I would add that fearful people are irrational people.

You mean like having to live your entire life worshiping some omnipotent being in fear of suffering an eternity in hell? Hrmmz, some benevolent being you have there!

No, you just seems to be purposefully missing the point. I have stated too many times to mention that the oldies should be left in peace to die with that they have been brainwashed with. Educating the dying population is a total waste of time, as is trying to speak rationally to the animals of IS. What we need to be looking at is the next generation, the people yet to be educated. We tell them from day one that things evolve, we did not all come from some bloke made of dust, and his missus that was made from his rib. We take each and every aspect and sentence of the bible and hold them accountable in the same way. Then the bible becomes redundant by way of better and accurate information. In this way, we eventually weed out the lies and propaganda used to control the masses for the last two centuries, an replace it with genuine knowledge. To chastise some Granny because she was brought up as Church of England and expects to see her relatives in the next few years is completely pointless, and as you point out cruel. That is not what I have proposed at any point. If you bother to go back and read my posts I have not ever advocated anything but a long term solution spanning generations which will only teach fact, not fiction and to children, not the aging population. They are not part of the problem, but mere pawns in the big picture. Canon fodder. Go door knock for your God and donate 10% if your wages thanks, you are a good parishioner aren't you now.

When people don't have the right to believe, they don't have the right to religious belief either.

You have this gun mentality stuck in your head of one way or the other. No, I have not ever proposed banning religion at all, or anything like that, I have proposed that we force teachers to be accountable for what they teach, and only teach truthful works, not fabrications that have been handed around forever and considered genuine by way of tenure. Religion is nothing but lies. if we force people to realise that we did not have a world flood, our great granny was not made from a rib bone and you do not have to sacrifice children to appease some omnipotent being, we are already on the way. We need to be teaching what when you have two hydrogen atoms, and one oxygen atom, you have water, not that God made it rain for 40 days and nights. I mean who gives a rats even if that did happen, which evidence proves did not!!

I have a right to believe in Thor if I want to, and that might be a personal experience you'll never share and a subjective reason you'll never understand. It has nothing to do with my equality with you on this earth. It only has to do with my behavior. If my behavior is better than yours, it's not Thor's fault it's mine.

If you have a decent education, then you are only fooling yourself, aren't you?

Yes it does have to do with your equality on earth, If you want to be some bludging numpty walking around with your head in the clouds just so you do not have to do your part in the real world, then you are of less worth to a community than one who rolls their sleeves up, yes your worth is less. This applies to all aspects of life, which is why I have zero respect for hippies and new age types. Anyone can be lazy, go lie on a beach and dream, not shave, not work, that is simple. It takes effort to get up, make yourself presentable, learn and go to a workplace where you are productive and make a difference. Effort deserves respect. It makes many lives better, not some silly fantasy. We live in a community, It is really that simple.

Now of say a Thorian is brought up to rape pillage and plunder, and from birth you have been told that is going to please God, it is how you should live and it is your God Given right to purge these lowly scum from the earth that God provided to gift you. Should you be held accountable, or the people who preach that and put it in your head from birth? Personally, I think the teachers.

You do what you like out back with whatever textbook you're talking about.

All of 'em. And that is the thing, we could all do more if we spent more time trying to be part of a living community, not preparing for an afterlife that does not exist. All we do is waste the time we have when we spend it all on the promises of man who would manipulate you with man made Gods.

Show me some real results out on the streets and I'll give it another glance.

Where are the Greek and Roman Gods today once held in the same light? You want an examples? This should suffice.

But you'll be crucified (#4) if you dare come here and step on our rule of law with such intolerance-based education.

You are the intolerant one, and scared when you realise that which you have held dear and true for so long is not. You are not using the word "tolerant" correctly here. As I keep saying, I do not wish to outlaw religion, that would drive it underground, and that would attract unitelligent people. You know, the ones always looking for a shortcut in life. You are refusing science to be allowed to do what it does, and that is inform us by way of observation. We observe scientific laws and principals and report them. Those reports make religion redundant, and that my dear friend is that which you fear like death. All your talk of old people is just wasting time, they are not part of a future equation, and that is what we should be doing, leaving this world a better place than we found it. You need to stop looking for an immediate solution, and trying to mitigate my solution into an immediate one. That is simply not going to work. And it is selfish, I too want to rationalise with the extremists making this world a scary place, but the the Priests of Thor I theorised above illustrate why it is a losing battle, as this lie is being disseminated to the masses generation after generation. All we are doing is breeding more of what we have now, if we do not change that, it can only get worse for future generations, not better. We need to forget a quick fix, we are screwed, when we accept that and ditch religion, we can repair the damage done by religion to date.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I'm refusing science? Holy crap! I'm just not-telling people what to do with their beliefs, psyche. In fact, I hope I'm tolerant of your beliefs so you can be tolerant of mine.

If it's religion you're worried about, the trend says there's nothing to worry about. So long as we believe that extremists are the "Islamists" and the millions of Muslims they're killing are something else, we're going to blame religion and miss the target. I can show you figures that say 80% of the US is Christian. I hope the hell our enemies and would-be enemies aren't going to make the same mistake you're making and blame Christianity for our need to reach out and touch them. So what, our governments don't do it in the name of religion. What difference does that make?

There's probably a million good beliefs and a million bad beliefs. We can't police them. We've had word police, thought police, hate police, now we've got belief police? Liberty dies in the police state.

The institutions of religion are dying on the vine too. They're probably growing in the third world so overall numbers might be misleading. There's probably something else more important in the world to worry about than the shrinking religions. And a means more enlightened to solve our problems than a caveman smashing the problem with a club. Our bureaucrats don't make the best decisions by default man. I don't think you can ignore government and our belief in that either.

Science is the best ideas we've ever had, ever. I would never refuse that or turn my back on that or not recommend it. But I also don't share your faith in humanity. I think we need to get a moral backbone from somewhere. We're not born with a moral instinct and given the way half the world treats the other half, we can do a lot better despite our lack of religious justifications. Having a sense of the color of right will keep us out of tyranny's chains. Right and wrong. Science doesn't answer that question. Like we should whitewash the world into some kind of unrealistic objective utopia where there is no good and evil there's just facts! Yeah that's not gonna work. I don't care where morality comes from, I think we can borrow from multiple sources, but I don't want to force upon anyone a means of moral code anymore than I'd want to deprive someone of their means.

Oh hey have you seen what Sea Shepherd's been up to? I should start a thread! Gotta love Australia man!

Edited by Yamato
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I'm refusing science? Holy crap! I'm just not-telling people what to do with their beliefs, psyche. In fact, I hope I'm tolerant of your beliefs so you can be tolerant of mine.

Science has no need for belief, it makes belief redundant, we can know with science. Knowing is better than believing.

If it's religion you're worried about, the trend says there's nothing to worry about. So long as we believe that extremists are the "Islamists" and the millions of Muslims they're killing are something else, we're going to blame religion and miss the target. I can show you figures that say 80% of the US is Christian. I hope the hell our enemies and would-be enemies aren't going to make the same mistake you're making and blame Christianity for our need to reach out and touch them. So what, our governments don't do it in the name of religion. What difference does that make?

Then what is the harm in making religion accountable? If science can answer the questions properly, and religion makes stuff up, why take the lesser alternative? If there is any truth behind religion, it can rely on that can it not? Is this not realising that religion actually has nothing to offer and holding out an olive branch?

There's probably a million good beliefs and a million bad beliefs. We can't police them. We've had word police, thought police, hate police, now we've got belief police? Liberty dies in the police state.

No we cannot, but we can clarify, which is why the Roman and Greek Gods now sit in halls of Myth, why do you think modern Gods are different?

That is why I keep saying what is needed is education. People need to be brought up knowing how the world actually works, and when that happens, there is no need for God. Religion becomes redundant like it did for the Romans and Greeks. Religion should be preserved as historical record, but we are done with it now. Man exceeded the fables we have relied upon for thousands of years, and he can show you how things actually go together instead of saying "God did it".

You have this idea of policing and banning in your head. I do not want to ban modern Gods any more than I want to ban Gods of antiquity. Historical record is important to our development or we keep going in circles, like we are now. Instead of embracing the 21st century, we shield religion and wallow in the 11th.

The institutions of religion are dying on the vine too. They're probably growing in the third world so overall numbers might be misleading. There's probably something else more important in the world to worry about than the shrinking religions. And a means more enlightened to solve our problems than a caveman smashing the problem with a club. Our bureaucrats don't make the best decisions by default man. I don't think you can ignore government and our belief in that either.

If they shrink in first world countries, then religion will shrink in third world countries, Christianity at least, because it has no finds to convert the wicked.

Removing religion and replacing it with knowledge is a benefit to mankind. It can remove much hate and adversity.

Science is the best ideas we've ever had, ever. I would never refuse that or turn my back on that or not recommend it. But I also don't share your faith in humanity. I think we need to get a moral backbone from somewhere. We're not born with a moral instinct and given the way half the world treats the other half, we can do a lot better despite our lack of religious justifications. Having a sense of the color of right will keep us out of tyranny's chains. Right and wrong. Science doesn't answer that question. Like we should whitewash the world into some kind of unrealistic objective utopia where there is no good and evil there's just facts! Yeah that's not gonna work. I don't care where morality comes from, I think we can borrow from multiple sources, but I don't want to force upon anyone a means of moral code anymore than I'd want to deprive someone of their means.

Religion is not where morality comes from. That is how the Church keeps people justified. It is simply not true. In fact I find it somewhat offensive to suggest that is the case. If a thief enters your house you do not consult your religion, you understand that the person is objectively wrong and act appropriately. Morality and ethics come from thinking, not religion.

Science wont tell you what religion to pick, or to avoid it, and it wont tell you how to use science. That does not mean without God a person is a mindless person without moral or ethics.

LINK - MORALITY DOES NOT REQUIRE RELIGION

How is it most serial killers are Christian, if religion gives such a deep sense of morality???

LINK - Answered Prayers ~ The Worlds Most Prolific Serial Killers are Devout Christians ~ Coincidence, or Men of Perfect Faith?

And yet faith says even people like that or Hitler can go to heaven, all they have to do is accept Jesus on their deathbed. Mate, you are not convincing me on moral grounds, that's for sure.

Oh hey have you seen what Sea Shepherd's been up to? I should start a thread! Gotta love Australia man!

No, my days are too short lately to bother with that bunch of complete morons, I have seen two cars with the sticker, and some rotten bugger must have thrown an egg at them or something, hit right on the sticker!! :blush: What a b****** to do that huh.

God I hate the Sea Shepherd and Paul Watson. Is he coming here? Been nice and hot lately, I could sit a dozen eggs in the sun to welcome the fat mongrel ahole as he pulls into port. Be a good shot for the TV show, we Aussies can show how much we really like him, because mate, you would not pick me in the crowd. His supporters will be the halfwits wearing tie dyed t shirts and flowers in their hair. Hope he never comes here again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

The report is out on the siege. http://www.cnn.com/2...ay-1/index.html

Seems that 1 fatality and the four injuries were caused by friendly fire, unfortunately.

They were the result of friendly fire, the cause was the self proclaimed Islamic Cleric.

Thank goodness he did not have a bomb, the count would be far higher. Sad that people died, but it does not sound like there was much choice in the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nefer-Ankhe

This "#I'll ride with you" movement that was being promoted through the media post Sydney siege is a load of Bollox! Why are we making efforts to console the Muslim community, shouldn't it be the other way around? Why are there more sympathizers for the muslim community opposed to the Sydney siege victims themselves, bewilders me.

#I'll ride alone thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

This "#I'll ride with you" movement that was being promoted through the media post Sydney siege is a load of Bollox! Why are we making efforts to console the Muslim community, shouldn't it be the other way around? Why are there more sympathizers for the muslim community opposed to the Sydney siege victims themselves, bewilders me.

#I'll ride alone thanks.

I thought it was an advertising grab in bad taste as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

I found the #nonsense a fairly quaint but inherently harmless way of saying "we don't blame all of you for the actions of one ******".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I found the #nonsense a fairly quaint but inherently harmless way of saying "we don't blame all of you for the actions of one ******".

I still think 365 days a year without having to say anything would be more productive, I do not see why anyone should blame the Sydney Muslims for one Madman taking his religion too literally, it makes Aussies out to be a bunch of knuckle dragging morons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

We're no knuckle-dragging morons, our knuckle-draggers are quite well informed, and our morons rather eloquent.

One of them got elected PM after all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
psyche101

We're no knuckle-dragging morons, our knuckle-draggers are quite well informed, and our morons rather eloquent.

One of them got elected PM after all.

Well informed knuckle dragging eloquent morons then!!

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.