[Masthead] Fair and Breezy ~ 47°F  
High: 54°F ~ Low: 42°F
Friday, Nov. 28, 2014

Speak Out [religion] [February 1 to March 31, 2012]

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

This forum is for discussing religious issues. The same standards of behavior apply as are spelled out on our home page in the introduction to Speak Out.

Post a comment


Comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on marshallnews.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Rr3, accepting the scientific theory of evolution does not negate one's belief in a god or even in christianity. There are millions of learned christians that understand that evolution is a fact. They have their own way of justifying that with their belief because they understand it is true. And then there are those religious people who cannot accept irrefutable facts because it conflicts with the literal interpretation of their holy book, and they usually follow a flock who's leader's believe fringe theories (like over the top conspiracy theories) to justify their refutation of evolution. The latter camp sounds like what you fall into rr3. You do realize that there are many religious people who have sufficient science education background to know that this scientific theory is indeed a fact, don't you? You can still believe without flaunting ignorance.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Apr 1, 2012, at 11:04 AM

If you believe evolution then it is impossible to predict what species will appear or become extinct. If we accept that then human life is not worth more then any other life. Would evolution make human life worth more then any other life? If human life is worth more then other life then how do you get that from evolution?

Evolution teaches that we have the desire to pass on our genes. They go on to say that rape is a biological adaptation to allow undesirable man to pass on their genes. If rape is just an evolutionary adaptation, then how can it be immoral?

Isn't evolution about 'natural selection' and 'survival of the fittest' then why do we find exceptions?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Apr 1, 2012, at 6:33 AM

You call that proof news? You have to presuppose that there is no God to listen to these people. I can't listen to them because I know right away their only purpose is to build on your denial of God. That's the only purpose. Sadly they got you good, man. Sadly there is no proof there unless you first deny God, that is not proof.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Apr 1, 2012, at 5:51 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otCpCn0l4...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 4:19 PM

rr3yv0

All human morality is a result of evolutionary biology.

Want to see the proof?

Watch these video and you won't have to guess where morality comes from because they give you all the scientifically derived facts.

"Morality: From the Heavens or From Nature?' by Dr. Andy Thomson, AAI 2009"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnXmDaI8I...

"The Selfish Gene 01"

(watch/listen to all chapters/videos)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOxMQ3Q09...

"Who Says Science has Nothing to Say About Morality?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm2Jrr0tR...

"Sam Harris: Science can answer moral questions"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj9oB4zpH...

Finally, this last video is short and carries an important moral message.

"Just a Book"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBLyvp0_0...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 3:21 PM

Rr3: "The real problem is that we don't judge what is right or wrong. God does."

And who interprets god's judgement? Answer: Humans who claim to have a direct line with a supernatural being. Are we to trust all such communicators, or any of them. I don't believe anyone has knowledge beyond what I or most rational people have.

Rr3: "Without believing in God or the bible then you can't have an objective standard of morality. By what standard do you have to judge what is morally correct?"

Your bible, nor the Koran or any other "holy" book is objective. They all are subject to interpretation and have proven to be interpreted many ways by many different people.

Rr3: "Without an objective standard of what is moral then the best you have is an opinion."

Governments try to provide laws on what is not to be done as determined by our elected officials. Our fore fathers did a fantastic job of laying out this foundation including the bill of rights. They were very careful to insure a system where the rule of the majority could not trample on our basic rights. Beyond that, each person must decide what constitutes ethical and moral behavior. What happens behind closed doors to two consenting adults is none of anyone else's business. Most of us, including yourself I am sure, subscribe to The Golden Rule as a guide to how we should treat each other.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 2:45 PM

RT,

The solution to America's health care access problem is Socialized medicine. Its worked very well for all the other Western industrialized nations -- including the Country I live in.

Here in Australia we have had socialized medicine since the early '80s and we flat out love our socialized medicine.

Let me tell ya how it works for me.

I had a problem with one of my major saliva glands and it had to come out.

So I went to see my GP.

I picked my GP from the yellow pages. He is close by (within walking distance). So I strode down to his office and let the receptionist know I was there. There was no discussion of insurance, co-pays, deductibles, costs, or money -- not one word.

10 minutes later, my Doctor was busy making his diagnosis. He ordered a few tests and an ultrasound of my throat. My cost? -- zilch, nada, nothing.

So he sent me to see a surgeon. He offered me a wide range of surgeons to choose from. I chose one of the younger ones because I figured he would have been recently trained to use the most advanced surgery techniques -- my hunch turned out to be correct. I saw him the next day.

When I went for the consolation with the surgeon, there was no discussion of insurance, co-pays, deductibles, or money in any form or manner.

The surgery was performed the next day. I spent 1 night in the hospital recovering and left the next morning.

My cost? -- zero. zilch, nada, and nothing.

That is how it works here. and nobody in Australia ever files bankruptcy or goes without medical care because of the cost because there is no cost to the patient. We pay medical costs from general tax revenues.

My taxes here are no greater than the taxes I paid when I lived in America on the same level of income, I always get in to see my doc right away, our medical care is top-notch quality, and the longest I ever waited to see a specialist here was 2 days -- and that was a heart specialist. In Australia and any country that has socialized medicine -- which means every 1st World nation except for the USA -- nobody is ever denied medical care and it is equally accessible to everyone from the richest to the poorest.

Socialized medicine -- take it from a guy who actually lives in a country with socialized medicine -- it works!

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 2:35 PM

The real problem is that we don't judge what is right or wrong. God does. Without believing in God or the bible then you can't have an objective standard of morality. By what standard do you have to judge what is morally correct? Without an objective standard of what is moral then the best you have is an opinion.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 1:18 PM

I used to understand where the GOP was coming from, when talking about fiscal conservatisms. But they've branched out to become totally heartless bastards (Eric, I mean this literally as a fatherless child :-)

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 8:05 AM

"... guess all you MONEY Christians improved on that.."

Nana, you nailed it!!!! LOL!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 8:02 AM

But RT why do you feel it is ethically right? Is it fair for people to pay for health care they don't use? No matter how health care is done it won't be free for anyone. Do you feel comfortable for the government to decide if you are too old to treat or if it will cost too much? I would really like to know how its unethical though. Your answer is not rational.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 8:02 AM

Nana, it was a cause to rally around against unjust and violent rulers. The problem is there is also a lot of craziness in the bible that is bad as well. It condones slavery and treating women badly, as well as killing non-believers. It WAS BAD then and is bad now. 99 percent of the people who follow a religion are good, but blindly following doctrines as defined by individuals who claim they know the sky daddies wishes makes the collective group sometimes do bad things. All they had to do was rally around the golden rule and build a collective consciousness around that. Instead, they chose fables and parables written by men to base everything on. Basing your life on imaginary things has very negative results, with only minute positive value -- certainly not worth it.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 7:59 AM

Rr3, you are correct that health care is not a god given right, any more than a santa given right. However, many of us feel it is ethically right to provide all our people with health care. Further, the fair way to do it is for the cost to be distributed fairly by everyone. And by fair, the richest should pay the most, the poor should pay nothing, and a sliding scale for all the rest of us based on our ability to pay. It should be part of our income tax. Social security would not be in trouble if there was no cap on when to stop taxing it, and if there was a maximum gross salary where you cannot draw it. Very simple and ethical solutions that leave plenty of room for the wealthy to stay rich. But, many of the very rich label that as socialism and welfare to give it a label that makes it sound bad so they can continue to hoard their millions to pass down to their offspring. Buffet and a few other super rich understand their responsibility to fellow human beings, but a large number don't want to share any of their fortune at all. Even though jesus was just a man, his compassion for the unfortunate would have undoubtedly have him labeled as a left wing liberal if he was alive today.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 7:45 AM

RT how do you rationalize that not providing health care is unethical? People in this country can still buy health care if not provided by their employer. Jesus didn't have health care did he? Oh that's right he healed people. Health care is nice to have but it is not a God given right.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 7:26 AM

News: "Does Christianity, and the New Testament in particular, make any philosophical contribution to our culture and society?"

Only contribution is psychological for those that need the crutch of a sky daddy. The only philosophical contribution would be a negative in my opinion, and pragmatically, it has held us back as a species. Philosophically speaking, it has only as much contribution as the tooth fairy has given us.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 5:29 AM

Obama Care -- I am beginning to think that in the long run we will be better off if the courts rule the mandate portion as unconstitutional. Although it does help a lot of people, it also forces millions more (mostly younger) people to pay the big health care providers. We need to go to a single payer system, and OC may ultimately cause the current system to be propped up longer. If OC is overturned, the more likely we'll get to a single payer system sooner. But then again, the cost would be more lives lost and less people insured now, which is really unethical. A very tough dilemma.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 5:28 AM

On taxing the church, if they are so committed to doing charitable work, then the church should be allowed deductions for charity and taxed on income after subtracting charitable work and contributions. So, the short answer is "yes". Preaching to the flock is not charitable work. The flocks donations are payment for a service (literally). I wouldn't feel strongly either way, but the problem is that you must then allow any religion the same exclusions, and then you get into what constitutes a religion -- a very gray area.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 5:27 AM

QUESTION:

Does Christianity, and the New Testament in particular, make any philosophical contribution to our culture and society?

Or is it only significant in terms of its contribution to mythology?

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, at 3:41 AM

When an atheist dies are they still an atheist?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 11:45 PM

rr3yv0

They should all be paying their fair share of taxes -- all of them.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 11:35 PM

Obamacare healthcare exemptions

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/e...

Are you going to ask that the Muslims, Amish, Christian Scientist, and Scientologists give up their exemption too? Or is just the Christians that you have a problem with?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 11:28 PM

Are we going to be tax exempt from Obamacare?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 11:23 PM

What the hell are you talking about?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 11:21 PM

Why is it ok to subsidize organized religion but not healthcare? How about a show of hands, anyone here willing to ask thier church to relinquish their tax exempt status and direct those monies to help fund the continued health and well being of our brothers and sisters? Anyone?...chirp...chirp...chirp...hello?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 11:11 PM

Wow news you really need to read someone that knows what he is talking about. This Mr. Humphrey's doesn't. He would fit right is with Raw Story though. Maybe he is a contributor.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 10:56 PM

He was both God and man news and still is today.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 10:52 PM

"Yahweh -- Jehovah, Brutal Jewish God of War"

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/brutal....

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 9:00 PM

rr,

No doubt Jesus was a brilliant man but he was just a man -- not a God mate.

He did, like most Jews, worship the Hebrew War-God, Yahweh, and at no point in the Gospels does Jesus claim to be that War-God nor does he ever claim to be the offspring of anyone but his own Parents.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 7:21 PM

I was hoping you would enjoy it ND.

It has a wonderful message to be sure.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 7:12 PM

Philippians 4:6-9

"Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7 And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. 8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable -- if anything is excellent or praiseworthy -- think about such things. 9 Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me -- put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you."

Jesus is the only way to 'not worry and be happy'. Nothing else will do that.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, at 2:20 PM

"Don't Worry Be Happy"

Bobby McFerrin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65sc...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 29, 2012, at 10:56 PM

That figures.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Mar 29, 2012, at 1:37 PM

rr3yv0

While I may not come to the same conclusion as you regarding that quote, I do find a lot of good philosophical wisdom there.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 29, 2012, at 8:11 AM

Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do you worry about the rest? ( Luke 12:25-26 ) Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own. ( Matthew 6:34 )

Have faith in God don't worry.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Mar 29, 2012, at 6:11 AM

Lol RR...lol.

A fella's gotta have a sense of humor...lol.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 29, 2012, at 1:23 AM

You got it!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 11:17 PM

What is truth?

Is it a feeling?

Is it an idea?

Where do we find it? In the bible.

Do we have to be sincere and do good works? That's part of it but that is not enough. If it was enough God would not had to give us the bible. He gave us the bible to correct our sincerely wrong ideas that we have. There is only one God that exist anywhere, anytime and anyplace. There is none before him and there will be none after him.

Isaiah 43:10 (NASB95)

"You are My witnesses," declares the Lord, "And My servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and believe Me And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me.

Is truth important simply because it is true? Or is it important because it defines who or what we believe in? Should we have faith? If we have faith in something false do we really have faith? Faith is only as good as the object in which it is placed. That's why it is important to believe in the one true God the one in the bible.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 10:46 PM

That's what cults do News they get you hooked and make you think every thing they tell you is true. Liberalism is a cult because it is so ridiculous that a person that knows the truth would never believe it. God gives discernment.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 10:20 PM

rr3yvo,

I believe you are the only person here who worship's anything period.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 9:20 PM

RR...why do you hate factual reporting by the largest independent news source in America?

Could it have something to do with not wanting to know truth when that truth is contrary to your perception of the World?

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 7:01 PM

RT we also need a name for those that worship at the Raw Story altar. Would that be Raw Storians? Hey we just started a new religion.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 5:26 AM

SD don't wait until you are dead to realize that you are wrong.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 5:22 AM

I didn't see any of his comments on this long thread, but I now think I remember seeing some in past threads quite some time ago. This memory thing is geting to be a pain :-(

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Wed, Mar 28, 2012, at 4:21 AM

Lol, RT,

have you read any of smart dog's comments?

That smart dog is indeed very, very,...VERY smart.

Frankly, I am very impressed with his critical analysis skills -- very sharp and well developed.

If I had to bet on it, I would put my money on his being a rationalist of the highest quality.

...and yeah, welcome smart dog...great to have you commenting mate!

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 8:16 PM

Welcome Smart Dog! Have you been following these posts for any length? Are you ready to lay out your opinions about religion and if so, we'd love to hear your take including how you were influenced to either be extremely religious by your family and peers or whether you have come to the conclusion that the sky daddy is really man made or not? How's that for asking you to place your feet in the fire? I think we are all hoping to hear some fresh takes on some of our discussion if possible. Don't fear, some of us will try to throw logic and reason at you while others will respond to everything with bible quotes. I think it would be interesting if Eric could somehow add a poll to this blog to determine how many consider themselves Christian, Other Theist, Deist, Agnostic, or Atheist. Do you align yourself more closely with any of those categories? Again, welcome aboard!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 7:32 PM

"NOM strategy documents: 'Drive a wedge' between black and LGBT voters"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/27/no...

http://www.hrc.org/nomexposed/entry/must...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 4:59 PM

zeke

The piece you refer to is a news report designed to inform the reader. It is what it is and the Church is what it is...no matter what our opinions may be.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 4:07 PM

hey news

don't think you'll get much of a reaction from your crouch link - most christians i know aren't all that fond of the crouch family ... that said - i believe we shouldn't throw all who pay for time on the network out with the proverbial bathwater ... there are some folks on that network who do what they do from a relatively clean heart ... even if you personally disagree with what they do.

zeke

-- Posted by zeke on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 3:23 PM

"Christian network's Crouch family facing cover-up allegations over sexual, financial misconduct"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/27/ch...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 2:11 PM

:)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 1:08 PM

rr3,

I plan to be completely unconscious after death and am looking forward to the rest. I have no worries because I will have no idea that I am dead.

In fact I will have no ideas at all to contribute to the collective consciousness, whatever in the heck that is. I figure any contributions I have to make had better get done now.

Some might say that it is already true and that I am already brain dead, just refusing to fall down.

I say, you are only as brain dead as you feel, and that varies with what day it is and who I am talking to.

-- Posted by Smart Dog on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 11:46 AM

I am willing to bet that none of you know.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 11:34 AM

I would like to know what this 'Universal Consciousness' is that happens after we die. Where is it and how do we know its there?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, Mar 27, 2012, at 11:33 AM

RR,

It would appear that we can now safely say that a consensus has been reached in regards to your question, and in fact even the man you worship as a God is currently serving as Middle-Eastern dust where he has maintained his current form for the last 2000 years.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 7:39 PM

lol ND...

ROTFLMAO!!!

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 7:30 PM

"Pennsylvania lawmaker sued over 'Year of the Bible' resolution"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/26/pe...

http://ffrf.org/uploads/legal/Yearofbibl...

Yeah, well nobody ever promised that transforming America into a theocracy would be cheap.

However, I feel relatively certain this would not deter any christianist determined to replace our democracy and our freedom with a theocracy.

"Onward, Christian Soldiers"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWFyqKYfQ...

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 6:39 PM

"Pat Robertson blames homosexuality on 'demonic possession"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpPwC7QRv...

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/26/pa...

When will this fool wake up and stop believing in magic?

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 4:45 PM

WTF,

Excellent retort mate!!

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 3:42 PM

Worms.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 1:38 PM

I would be interested to know why you believe that Nana. Do you believe that there is something after death?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 11:56 AM

"Catholicism, Contraception & Secular Morality at Notre Dame by Sean Faircloth"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HATid5VJ...

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 4:29 AM

rr3yv0

I see you didn't read the article very well or listen well when the Republican made his observation.

As he points out, all the politicians who sponsored the law (Republicans) as well as every Republican member of the Floridian Congress (all of them) who voted for the law all tout the high priority of their Christian belief as a factor in their elections. Its they who claim to be Christian and in typical Christian political fashion, they passed a most un-christian law. Its not the first time its happened either.

Its hard to see how you could miss all that in an article that is clearly sitting on today's Raw Story edition front page...unless of course your conservative bias convinced you to skip it altogether.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 26, 2012, at 12:35 AM

RR3: "RT I notice that you always mention this 'golden rule'. Is that from the bible or something you made up?"

Do you just throw these questions out without thinking about them at all? We've had numerous discussions about The Golden Rule. It has been around well before xtianity and other religions. If you don't remember our discourses of the past, Google it.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 10:08 PM

How is a gun law Christian or Un-Christian? Wow you really have to dig deep for articles like this. I guess it is beneficial to pray at the 'Raw Story' altar. Amen brother preach on.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 8:06 PM

"Fmr. Bush strategist: Conservative Christians passing un-Christian gun laws"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/25/fm...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 1:02 PM

RR,

The Great Flying Spaghetti Monster --the One and only true God -- prohibits your worship of false idols.

You may want to get right with the Noodle. Invite his Noodliness into your heart. Remember, your salvation depends upon you accepting Him into your heart and repenting your old pagan beliefs. Put down that silly cross and pick up that Noodle -- you will be glad you did.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 11:57 AM

That's funny Nana that you would think I am the one confused. Hardly! I believe in the one and only true God of the bible. Illogical? Only to those that deny him. Believing in God is not my version it is what God desires that we do. Believe or deny? THAT IS THE QUESTION!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 8:25 AM

RT I notice that you always mention this 'golden rule'. Is that from the bible or something you made up?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 8:20 AM

RR3: "Yes even Christians can deny God. Were they really a Christian? Can an atheist claim to be a Christian? Who would know the difference? Real Christians we can see. We also see those that deny God."

I think you are trying to say that all atrocities committed, whether committed by someone claiming to be religious or not, were not really christians because you know that a true christian would not do such a thing. And that is because YOU would not do such a thing. I could use the same logic about atheists or humanists, but I know neither would be true. I can only say that those who have humanist moral values that live by the simple "golden rule" would not commit such crimes against humanity. I cannot say that about anyone who feels they must follow the rules of their religion based solely on the very obscure rules as specified (interpreted) from their holy book, whether that be the Koran, bible, or any other archaic writings claiming to be the word of a deity.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 6:58 AM

Rr3, your link states "It is often argued (by atheists I presume) specifically that religious violence proves God does not exist." That is so ridiculous. The point is that religious violence is often done "in the name of religion", and has nothing to do with proof for or against the existence of a god. Certainly actions of deranged individuals with no morals that nobody in this blog would condone represent any sort of proof for or against a god's existence. I dare say that not one atheist on this blog would condone the elimination of a person or group of people because of their belief. However, I do question whether some extremely religious people that have commented here in the past would feel that eliminating non-believers would be all that bad. I think Steven Weinburg's quote best sums up the relationship between good and evil with religion: "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 6:46 AM

Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1121/p09s0...

Liberals like to believe there is no God so they can be the moral judge. If there is no God then morals can change. They want us to believe that Christianity is evil just like they want us to believe in global warming and evolution. Satan the ultimate deceiver enjoys those that deny God. Pray for the atheist God loves them too.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 6:38 AM

Atheism and Mass Murder

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and...

Yes even Christians can deny God. Were they really a Christian? Can an atheist claim to be a Christian? Who would know the difference? Real Christians we can see. We also see those that deny God.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 6:26 AM

Atheism's Body Count - Ideology and Human Suffering

http://scholarscorner.com/apologia/death...

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 6:18 AM

Why Dosn't God heal Stupidity?

http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2006/05/wh...

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 6:16 AM

"Devil Got My Woman"

Skip James

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB2POWSnS...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 3:09 AM

"Thousands of U.S. atheists turn out for 'Reason Rally"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/24/th...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 3:05 AM

'bout time RT, where ya been?

(lol)

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Mar 25, 2012, at 3:03 AM

The continuous argument from the religious trying to equate mass murdering with atheists the cause does not hold water. Yes, some of the mass murderers were atheist, but they did not commit those crimes because they were atheist. They committed those crimes because they were extremely deranged individuals with no humanist moral values. Neither did those religious individuals who committed equally if not more atrocities. Neither side gets a pass on inhumane actions. One difference is that the atrocities committed by the extremely religious were done in the name of religion against those that did not agree with their religious views. To my knowledge, the atheists did not commit those atrocities to purge religion. The real issue is moral values, and the religious have proven that they do not stand on higher ground than atheists. We are stuck in the "your side committed more atrocities than our side" argument, when the real issue is that atrocities are committed by individuals with no humanist moral values, and many of those crimes were justified in the name of religion.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 24, 2012, at 9:20 PM

Smoke'n, r u saying that the arsenists are atheist?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 24, 2012, at 9:06 PM

SC,

Violence or property damage is unacceptable period. This does not mean that organized religion is not the monster scam of all time.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 11:58 AM

Oh and speaking of the NAZIs, guess which current leader who is an absolute ruler of his own nation, claims to represent the largest Christian sect in the World, was also a NAZI?

Here is a hint:

http://crimemagazine.com/images/popebene...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 7:25 PM

SC,

Hitler was a Catholic, and he made frequent reference to the German's "Christian duty" in virtually everyone of his public speeches. In addition, the Catholic Church inside and outside of Germany was a most willing partner of NAZI Germany and the German population was largely Catholic and Lutheran. In addition, Hitler consistently stated that it was the Christian duty of every German Christian to destroy, by war and all other means, what he called "the World-wide, Jewish/Socialist Conspiracy" Its not difficult to see his motivation for the extermination of 6 million European Jews and 6 million Russian Prisoners of War -- after all, he gave so many speeches outlining his primary motivation -- his "Christian duty."

While Stalin and Pol Pot may have been atheists, there is no evidence that their atrocities were motivated by and committed for the purpose of ridding the World of the Christians or any other religion. In fact, many of their victims were atheist and agnostic. Their only interest was political and had no direct idealogical connection to anything religious although certainly many of their victims also happened to be religious. Their goals were political and economic -- not to launch a war on religion, and in fact many socialists are also devout Christians.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

http://jdstone.org/cr/files/hitlerworkin...

http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm

"Reichskonkordat (with Hitler, 1933): Full text"

http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showkb.php?...

"The Great Scandal: Christianity's Role in the Rise of the Nazis"

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/f...

http://jesuswouldbefurious.org/Catholic/...

http://www.remnantofgod.org/nazircc.htm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesiz...

http://www.evilbible.com/hitler_was_chri...

This is about the 3rd time I have debunked this same argument. Making the same debunked argument over and over again does not make your argument any truer than it was the first time you posed that false argument.

One has to wonder what part of "that dog just won't hunt" that some Christians don't understand?

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 6:13 PM

SC,

I trust the editor's ability to enforce the MDN posting policy.

If Editor Crump deleted the comment then it also means its contents did not comply with even the minimal policy requirements.

I think its probably safe to say that it offered little or nothing constructive to the topic under discussion and a pretty safe bet it contained nothing of any significant interest to me.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 6:35 AM

Excerpted from "The Evolution of Bruno Littlemore" by Benjamin Hale. p. 299 "it is natural that we should think language somehow created matter itself since, language creates thought in our minds, creates the very question itself." "What happened in the beginning? But maybe a wiser question to ask is, What IS beginning? If we had begun with THAT question, then maybe we wouldn't get so twisted up in wondering what happened before the big bang, who uttered the cosmic word that brought us into existence, and what the turtle is standing on. Thus men forgot that all deities reside in the human breast."

This blog, for some reason, crossed my mind as I read this passage. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Mar 20, 2012, at 10:54 PM

RR,

It was necessary to get it cleaned up.

Apparently, the local folks were complaining about the stink that was left behind by the christian witch-doctor who had applied christian curses to the road -- which the christian witch-doctors call "blessings," and which some of the locals there reported was causing mass nausea through out the state.

Fortunately, the local community there got together, cleaned up the mess the christians made, and have restored the road back into a useful condition again.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 20, 2012, at 4:25 PM

Baffles me as to why an atheist would need to unbless anything.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, Mar 20, 2012, at 11:57 AM

"Creationist Junk Debunked #1 - Introduction"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwywMP4Sx...

This is a great series.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 19, 2012, at 8:43 PM

"Atheists use 'unholy water' to 'unbless' Florida highway"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/19/at...

Thank goodness someone is finally cleaning up the mess.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 19, 2012, at 2:25 PM

What is beginning?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Mar 19, 2012, at 12:35 AM

lol...

I am sure you do..

I am pro proven hypotheses.

I am opposed to unsubstantiated, extraordinary claims.

I am opposed to Christianist crime and Christianist terrorism and Christianist immorality which is based, in large part, on their worship of a mythological war god who is, according to their own gospels, guilty of rape, pedophilia, murder, genocide, infanticide, torture, and so many other crimes.

Am I cautious around Christianists? With their of history of crime and violence? You bet I am!

You may call that whatever you wish, but I call it prudence.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 17, 2012, at 2:10 AM

Nah. I'm pretty sure it's reasonable and logical.

Major premise: You disdain SC's beliefs

Minor premise: SC is a Christian

Conclusion: You disdain Christian beliefs.

That fits the definition of anti-Christian.

Anti = one who opposes.

It's nothing to be ashamed of. Labels are just efficient descriptions, is all.

-- Posted by taxedpayer on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 8:55 PM

taxedpayer

If one uses your and SC's reasoning, wouldn't that make make you both ant-logic, ant-reason?

...you know, just sayin'...

Lol...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 8:33 PM

"Checkmate, Atheists!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P47OC439x...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 8:16 PM

taxedpayer

Yeah it looked like a solid case to you that anyone who questions SC highly questionable belief, and rejects same for lack of objective supporting evidence, is anti-christian.

Well isn't that special.

ROTFLMAO!!!

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 8:11 PM

news, SC did exactly what you always ask people to do -- provided evidence to support the claim. You've made frequent comments against Christians and Christianity. He quoted a few. The dictionary definition of "anti" is "A person who is opposed to something ..." so if you make comments opposing Christianity, that would make your comments anti-Christian. Looked like a solid case to me.

-- Posted by taxedpayer on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 7:12 PM

"People's Religion Should Be Respected!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0Alhhe-J...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 5:43 PM

oh and by the way, it sounds like you are accusing anyone who doesn't buy into your empty faith and empty beliefs an "Anti-Christian."

That would be almost everyone in the World.

What else ya got mate?

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 4:53 PM

It sounds like a made up definition -- an instafact unsupported by anything short of your on empty opinion to me.

What else ya got mate?

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 16, 2012, at 4:49 PM

"Heaven Can Wait" -- Excerpt:

Nobody tells it like it is better than Hitchens:

"As for that longed-for conversion, it never came, despite the fervent wishes of such clerical mountebanks as the Reverend Rick Warren. Said reverend, who portrayed himself as my "friend" while consigning homosexuals and nonbelievers to one of Dante's outer circles of Hell, proclaimed with the arrogant surety of the devout: "I loved & prayed for him constantly & grieve his loss. He knows the Truth now." Indeed I do, and much better than he. Albert Mohler, the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, for his part, did not fail to use my death as an opportunity to stoke the fear of damnation among the credulous. Having somehow managed to evolve the thumbs needed to "tweet" his followers on his BlackBerry, he declared that my end--as if death were not a natural process common to all mammals--was "an excruciating reminder of the consequences of unbelief," while observing with the religionist's usual condescension that my "brilliance & eloquence" will not matter "in the world to come."

For the full article:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazin...

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Mar 15, 2012, at 9:02 PM

"Australian Atheist Bus Ad Says God Better Have 'a Good Excuse"

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyath...

News, have you seen this one? Love it!!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Mar 15, 2012, at 8:35 PM

One of the bullets of the Unitarian organization surprised me: "Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit." Based on their Universal Principals, it sounds like the best of all possible religions, maybe even secular. But, I assume based on the Jesus fantasy? Regardless, it would be much easier to respect than any religion I've heard before.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Mar 15, 2012, at 8:17 PM

"Texas man allegedly killed soldier for not believing in God"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/15/te...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 15, 2012, at 3:37 PM

Have you experienced this personally Nana? They ought to suit your beliefs perfectly. Especially the GIVIG AND GENEROSITY section they mention 'fair share'. That would be a requirement of any liberal religion wouldn't it?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Mar 15, 2012, at 11:50 AM

"WHAT IS LIBERAL RELIGION"

http://www.northwestuu.org/old_site/serm...

"It's not easy to be uncertain all the time."

"You have to be willing to say "we" don't know. We have to be willing to say others might be right."

I think some of you have slipped into orthodoxy.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Mar 15, 2012, at 6:15 AM

Suit yourself.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Mar 14, 2012, at 1:24 PM

RR,

I don't think that will do.

I believe what we require here is a qualified definition.

After all, your meager attempt to define it may be nothing more than a by-product of your anti-rationalist tendency, influenced by your conservative bias, rather than a genuine attempt to assist SC in coming up with a real definition.

I will wait for SC's answer instead.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Mar 14, 2012, at 1:18 PM

Find a mirror!!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Mar 14, 2012, at 5:48 AM

SC,

What is an "anti-Christian"?

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 13, 2012, at 2:27 PM

Friends and neighbors,

I found these "public service announcements" from the old days on you tube.

I recommend that everyone watch and memorize them so well that you can repeat them in your sleep,...just in case Santorum wins. Its best we just get used to it now.

ND, you may want to pay close attention to the second one down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3S24ofEQ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Pwl8jTL...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkYl_AH-q...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 13, 2012, at 2:34 AM

Actually the figures I typed were a little in error. It is worse than the stats I typed.

http://freakoutnation.com/2012/03/12/pol...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Mar 12, 2012, at 11:25 PM

This would fit the politics, or religion blogs.

New poll: Mississippi; Only 12% believe Obama is a Christian, 52% claim he is a Muslim, 70% are Evangelicals, 60% don't believe in evolution. 51% have a favorable opinion of Rush.

Alabama: 14% believe Obama is Christian, 45% Muslim, 75% identify as Republicans, 4% identify as Democrats, 53% have a favorable opinion of Rush. http://freakoutnation.com/2012/03/12/pol...

I started to not post this because I know that my proposed house swap with rr3, my Oklahoma home for his Missouri home, is now dead in the water.

Ignorance is the hand maiden of fascism. If those states ever try to secede again we would be darn fools to not immediately cut them loose.

It shouldn't be much more of a burden to us to extend our southern border restricting third world culture further to the east.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Mar 12, 2012, at 11:20 PM

SC,

I thought you already knew that the general religious and scientific topics are discussed in this particular forum.

Since many topics within theses schools of thought are mutually inclusive, it should not be surprising to see previously discussed topics re-emerging from time to time. Why, even the Christians have been regurgitating the same nonsense over and over again for 2000 years.

Don't let it ruin you day mate.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 12, 2012, at 6:12 PM

I prayed last nite and gas prices still went up. What's up with that?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Mar 12, 2012, at 12:18 PM

News,

He means we keep talking about the same things, hence "needle skipping."

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Mar 12, 2012, at 6:24 AM

SC,

I hope you will be patient with me, I am not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, but...uh...in plain English, what does your comment mean?

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Mar 12, 2012, at 2:40 AM

Religion = the root cause of all of our problems.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 8:24 PM

I know one thing, RR,...

...there is no way I would ever worship or praise the Christian/Jewish God -- a megalomaniacal, genocidal, infanticidal, homicidal, psychotic, ego-maniacal, pedophile rapist murderer God.

I would rather burn in Hades, thank you very much.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 7:53 PM

rr3, religious ignorance abounds in other faiths beside xtianity. Each think there's is the ONLY way, and all else are doomed. That is why we cannot allow this massive amount of ignorance to invade our government and education systems or we will be no better than Afganistan or Iran. As long as people are free to choose or not choose a religion, we will remain free. When we give into to the Santorums or evangelicals who want our govenment to embrace xtianity, we will be headed toward a theocracy not unlike Iran. Can you not see this?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 7:34 PM

Exactly RIGHT again!!!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 4:59 PM

Sure Nana!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 4:57 PM

Another example RT is if one of your children is convicted of a crime. I trust you would do everything you could to help them. Let's say they are sentenced to life in prison. You would still love them but there would be very little that you could do. God loves us but he also tells us what the consequence of our actions on this earth is. He does all he can to convince us to accept Jesus to avoid eternal damnation but some never listen. Just the same even though we may know what the consequence is for a crime we commit but we do it anyway. We are born into sin and we cannot earn our way to heaven. God will give us a free pass but if we choose to live in our sin we won't be forgiven.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 3:04 PM

We are all going to be compost. The bible tells us that and I believe it too just like you.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 2:56 PM

Nana plenty of evidence that you ignore or refuse to believe. You deny God in spite of the evidence. I don't know how a person could have such hatred for something that supposedly doesn't exist.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 2:55 PM

What kind of dog are you talking about RT?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 2:52 PM

RR3: "God loves you the same that he does you even though you deny him."

I am confident that others reading this blog will see the hypocrisy of you last several statements with this one. You have told me that I am going to hell, but dog loves me anyway. In family matters, that is what we categorize as child abuse. Daddy or mommy loves you with all our heart, but because of your actions of doing what I told you not to do, we are going to lock you in the basement until, well, forever. My advice for you is in the words of an old Johnny Paycheck song, just substitute job for god (and I mean that in a kind way.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Mar 11, 2012, at 9:49 AM

RT so you are saying that you are worthy to decide if prophecies in the bible are true or not?

Moral dilemma? By whose standard to you go by? You can be a good person but if you don't accept Jesus you are going to hell. It is not a question whether you think it is moral or not.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Mar 10, 2012, at 2:21 PM

Nana wouldn't you rather live your life here knowing that you were going to heaven and share with others so they can go to heaven with you? Or live your life denying God and influencing others to believe the same so they could go the hell with you? I mean I would rather share joy and peace with others then doom and gloom.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Mar 10, 2012, at 2:19 PM

RT there is evidence but you choose not to see it you only see the evidence that there is no God. You would have to know all evidence to know that there is no evidence for God. There is just none that you know of or believe.

RT God is love but you choose to see otherwise and you may be right you may die an atheist that will be up to God not me.

God loves you the same that he does you even though you deny him. If you treated a fellow human the way you treat God would they still love you?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Mar 10, 2012, at 2:12 PM

Rr3: "Can an atheist rationally say there is no God?"

YES, that is the rational conclusion based on no evidence

Rr3: "Wouldn't you have to know all things to know that there isn't a God?"

NO. I don't have to know all things to know there really isn't a Tooth Fairy either.

Rr3: "What about the prophecies fulfilled in the bible with more to come? The bible has never been wrong and it won't be in the future."

Pure hogwash. You could claim the same thing about the farmer's almanac, or Confucius sayings, which by the way, make a lot more sense.

Rr3: "2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness"

Is this part of what you call fulfillment of prophesy?

Rr3: "Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, "I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself And spreading out the earth all alone"

Wow, this anecdote must mean there really was a god

Rr3: "Since God is the creator of all things including time he is in control."

If true, he must have intended me to be an atheist??????

Rr3: "Just consider the possibility of 8 prophecies to be fulfilled as written. It is 1 in 10^17 for all to be fulfilled. Let's consider 48 prophecies. That would be 1 in 10^157. Are all these prophecies fulfilled by accident? Did Jesus fulfill these by accident? I think it is quite evident is wasn't by accident."

My degree was in mathematics and I'm really having a hard time with this. List your top 10 prophesies and let me consider them worthy of being true or if they could just be an allegory like your "since god is the creator....".

Rr3: "Do you want to take a chance that there is no God? If there is no God then when I die I lose nothing, but if there is a God then when you die without him you lose everything."

Ahhh, you keep trying to justify wasting your life on pure nonsense by using Pascal's wager. It is a false wager, and quite ridiculous when you consider all the ramifications (even mathematically it is false). There are so many reasons Pascal's wager is flawed, you won't be able to read them all with a Google search. Here is a pretty good link that discusses many of the fallacies:

http://arc-t.org/arc-tiquities/debates-p...

For those who want to read just one flaw (of many) without going to the site or reading others:

"It creates a moral dilemma. You, by using this, are sending the most dedicated humanitarians, who just happen to not be Christian, to Hell, while you set a place in Heaven for those mass-murders who happen to be Christian. Since [the Christian] God is supposed to be a loving god, how then could he entertain the embodiment of hatred, yet turn away the embodiment of love?"

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 10, 2012, at 9:58 AM

Can an atheist rationally say there is no God?

Wouldn't you have to know all things to know that there isn't a God?

What about the prophecies fulfilled in the bible with more to come? The bible has never been wrong and it won't be in the future.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, "I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself And spreading out the earth all alone,

Since God is the creator of all things including time he is in control.

Just consider the possibility of 8 prophecies to be fulfilled as written. It is 1 in 10^17 for all to be fulfilled. Let's consider 48 prophecies. That would be 1 in 10^157. Are all these prophecies fulfilled by accident? Did Jesus fulfill these by accident? I think it is quite evident is wasn't by accident.

Do you want to take a chance that there is no God? If there is no God then when I die I lose nothing, but if there is a God then when you die without him you lose everything.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Mar 10, 2012, at 5:49 AM

RT,

If the Christians had just one spokesman who could debate as well as you, we rationalists would be in trouble.

Fortunately, they don't.

Also mate, I ran across a good video of some of the best quotes of Chris Hitchens. That man was so brilliant, and his thinking so clear and well articulated.

Anyway, I thought you might enjoy it mate.

"Christopher Hitchens quotes - best of his life"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHPzgj0ph...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 10, 2012, at 2:50 AM

Thanks News. I believe we all contribute to a discourse that perhaps others who only read can at least be exposed to differing ideas regarding the important topic of religion and the role it has played for our species. A role that I and many others maintain has at best held us back considerably, and at worst has helped spread ignorance and major suffering for several thousand years. However, as I have optimistically stated before, I believe because of the internet, we are on the verge of putting religion back where it belongs, and that is in the churches and private settings of their homes, and out of government and public education. There are some religious leaders who agree with that, but the evangelicals will continue infringing their limited view of humanity on others until their numbers dwindle and become irrelevant. And then when I start to become optimistic, stark reality sets in when I see legislation being passed around our country continuing to push fear and ignorance when it comes to birth control and pushing religion in our public schools. The power of ideas with the internet should be an overwhelming force for justice against this massive amount of ignorance.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Mar 10, 2012, at 2:15 AM

RT,

You are a voice for reason mate.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 9, 2012, at 7:27 PM

The thought has occurred to me that I do sound very strident toward all religious people, when in fact, I do believe that the vast majority of "church going" people are very good with strong ethics. They are basically "part of" the system of religion, however, that does poison everything collectively. In general, they vote as a block that supports their church's stance on promoting religion in our public schools and our government. In that regard, the church is very much like any corporate entity, where the powers of that entity evolve (rise to the top) that promote that entity over the good of the individuals that work for that entity. Many of us who have worked for large corporations joke at the effort of that corporation to "buy into" their feeble attempts at motivating everyone to work harder and smarter. Unfortunately, the individuals of religious institutions do "buy into" the church's attempt for them to "drink the cool aid".

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Mar 9, 2012, at 6:29 PM

NanaDot

Good points, all.

The problem is not necessarily religion in general, but rather specific religions that are inherently intolerant of any and all other religions, even other religions that worship the same deity, and which is the dominant religion in a region.

Indigenous religions, such as those in America and in Australia do not share those characteristics.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 3:36 PM

You may be right rr3, but don't include me in that group. I know I have been fooled plenty of times. Gotta say though that it has made me more vigilant, and humble. I am not the fool I once was. I like to think that I have profited from all my experiences, good, and bad.

How was it that George W. Bush said it? "fool me once, shame on-shame on you. Fool me-you can't get fooled again." Now there's the poster boy for your statement. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 12:58 PM

Some believe that people are fooled too easily, but do not believe they can be a victim of the same weakness.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 11:40 AM

Nana,

In a nut shell, everything's going to hell because grown-ups still want to believe in Santa Clause.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 10:22 AM

If you look deep enough, you'll find religion at the core of most of our problems.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 6:16 AM

RationalThinker

That is a darn good point.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 4:11 AM

ND, News, our past sins are well known, nor will reparations ever be made, nor can they be made fairly. Where do we stop? Perhaps we should give our land back to the British, French, or Spanish as well. Let's turn it over to the native Americans? Just what are your solutions for the world? Science can provide answers, but we have large numbers among us that look to their god for answers that aren't there, yet try to interpret ancient allegorical writings to justify burying our head in the sand. The religions of the world keep holding us back. We know the world is overpopulated and the cause of most of our environmental problems, yet religion guides the ignorant to stay away from birth control and not trust proven science methodologies. Religion is the problem that is holding our civilization back. Religion IS ignorance.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 2:32 AM

In the immortal words of Butch Cassidy, "don't worry about not being able to swim, hell, the fall will kill us":

http://bigthink.com/re-envision-toyota-b...

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 2:20 AM

NanaDot

Funny that how we can sometimes get bogged down in the details.

I think the important question is will Mother Nature soon make corrections to our over-population?

She always has in the past.

I believe real hard times are a comin'and comin' right soon.

And to those christanists that think these climate change things take ages to happen, I would remind them that the last ice age, the Younger Dryas, took only 10 years to spread 2 mile thick glaciers across 2/3 of each of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres and lasted over a thousand years - a rather short period for glaciers. Of course, the People will have probably tried and executed most of the climate deniers by that time.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 8, 2012, at 12:00 AM

ND,

If you watch the doco I linked to, you will see what the science has to say about this. We know exactly how cities developed. We know exactly where, when, and who discovered farming and exactly how and why it spread and why it never spread to some places until modern times. No one is doing any guessing and we have the archeological and geological and genetic evidence now that has allowed us to determine exactly why and how cities came to be and what cycle lead to cities and our over population -- farming discovered in the Middle east about 12,000 to 14,000 years ago by the Nefarians.

Also it explains why some indigenous populations, such as the aboriginal people of Australia, never ever had farming.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Mar 7, 2012, at 8:33 PM

ND,

Farming is probably the worst thing that ever happened to mankind. It lead to communities, cities, and "civilization." It tied us to one place in the land and in order to sustain the farming, populations had to increase in numbers. This meant increasing the farm to feed the growing population. It was an endless cycle that lead us to where we are today -- 7+ billion people teetering upon the edge calamity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7bqi70B3...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Mar 7, 2012, at 5:55 PM

And then there is the matter of the USA stealing half of Mexico...which we did...at gun point.

It was one of our many wars of aggression -- a tradition that lives on in America.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 6, 2012, at 1:45 PM

LOL ND. Also, if they are not Catholic they are Evangelicals. There are fundamentalist iglesias all over OKC.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Mar 6, 2012, at 10:01 AM

OKR,

You said some Americans would say,

"OMG how can we protect our daughter."

While I can't answer such a question myself, and I may not be much help addressing that question, may I point out that Republicans, in their infinite wisdom -- and yes all conservatives are experts in such matters --have suggested aspirin to prevent even more complex scenarios.

Oh where oh where would we be without those oh-so-wise Christianists?

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 6, 2012, at 3:27 AM

RT,

If you think only persons born inside the United States has the right to come and live in the U.S.A., you are factually incorrect mate.

Any person, anywhere in the World who is the child or grandchild of a natural or naturalized American citizen is entitled to their American citizenship -- so says the U.S. Supreme Court. And that is a long-standing precedent. Such a person is, under our law, born with that right, regardless of the circumstance or place of their birth.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Mar 6, 2012, at 3:15 AM

And, to expand upon a point mentioned.

The impetus for Amerindians to cross our southern border illegally until recently has been primarily an economic one. We have not been able to thwart illegal immigration when that was the singular stimulus for them to emigrate.

Now Mexico is wracked by a de facto civil war that is causing many good people who stayed home, stoically enduring dire poverty, to flee the drug war bloodshed.

Just as we could curtail the original motivation for emigrating by ending the hiring of illegal immigrants, we could end the civil war in Mexico, and thus the secondary stimulus by decriminalizing illegal drug use, and supply. We will do neither, the nightmare will continue.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Mar 6, 2012, at 12:10 AM

One other point.

Throughout the history of the world, peoples, and their states have risen, they have fallen. There is not now, nor will there ever be a society that is destined to last perpetually. We will at some point bemoan our fate, as others at that point celebrate their (also momentary) ascendance. It is never if we fail, it is always when we fail.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Mar 5, 2012, at 11:47 PM

RT sorry for the late response to your queries.

You said, "I hope you are not saying you want this to happen?", and "If you were born in another country than our borders, then you do not have a right to come here illegally. Can you agree with that?"

Regarding the first question, no I was not saying that I want that to happen. Regarding the second, I agree that foreigners do not have a legal right to come to the United States illegally. However I can envision some circumstances wherein a moral right exists where a legal right does not. That is an ages old conflict.

Actually whether I want an influx of Amerindians, or not is irrelevant. The fact is that it is happening, and I do not believe we can stop it by other means than harsh penalties on those willing to pay the pittance that keeps them coming. As we do not have the will to do anything counter to the wishes of the Corporatists, such reform is not likely in the near term.

I do admit to having a good laugh at the ironic twist presented by the inevitability that people of the same stock that we nearly destroyed are to become the majority in our country. That laugh is extended because I know that to the ignorant dolts on the right so many people of color is a nightmare. "OMG how can we protect our daughters" and other such utter rubbish.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Mar 5, 2012, at 11:08 PM

"Group posts billboards in religious neighborhoods saying God is 'a myth"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/03/gr...

Perfect!!

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 9:06 PM

"Florida bill would permit prayer at mandatory school functions"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/03/fl...

WOW! A captive public school audience? GREAT!!

Finally, rationalist students will be able to publicly instruct the Christianist kids about the facts that confirm the Evolutionary model. After all, if they the Christianist students get their invocations, then we all do.

Oh, and hey this will provide a great opportunity for the Satanist kids to get a public forum from which they can force the Christian kids to hear their argument...ahem...I mean invocation.

I love it!!

We need a lot more laws like Florida's laws in the other 49 states (lol).

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 4:44 PM

Hey, here is a good example, on a smaller scale, of what happens when the oppressed minority suddenly becomes the majority.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNypI7Lqj...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 3:33 PM

RT,

Let's hope we can maintain our borders well.

However, OKR is correct in that brown and black skinned folks will soon be the overwhelming majority in America.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...

I guess white folks who are religious might want to start doing a lot of praying that the new majority will be far kinder to the white folks than white folks have been to people of color.

Because I know that this Shawnee Brave agrees with the late, great Richard Pryor who said in reference to forgetting what the white folks did to people of color, "...I ain't never going to forget."

It would appear some chickens are coming home to roost.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 3:20 PM

OKR: "Now his people, the Indians of Mexico, are coming back flooding Arizona with so many people that they can not be the victims of conquest again."

I hope you are not saying you want this to happen? We have long been a sovereign government, and we cannot allow our country to be illegally infiltrated because of many years ago past sins. That logic would mean that most countries of the world could be "taken back" by former occupiers. It is already putting a huge strain on our entire country and will continue to do so. There has to be a legality line drawn in the sand of time somewhere for a country to have the right to exist as a sovereign nation, and that time line has been drawn for over 100 years. This is a collective OUR land for all US citizens who want to participate. If you were born in another country than our borders, then you do not have a right to come here illegally. Can you agree with that?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Mar 2, 2012, at 3:52 AM

"US governor signs bill legalizing gay marriage"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46592488/ns/...

CAN I HEAR A HALLElUJAH!!

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Mar 2, 2012, at 12:01 AM

Geronimo was a member of the Beonkohe band, and the Chiracahua sub-tribe, of the Apache tribe. Their historic territory was the mountainous area of Arizona, and Old Mexico. He, and the members of his band battled both Mexican, and American soldiers over invasion of their territory. In fact it was the Mexicans, who during battle, first called him Geronimo. Geronimo was as much a Mexican, as an American.

Now his people, the Indians of Mexico, are coming back flooding Arizona with so many people that they can not be the victims of conquest again.

You have to go to Mexico to get Montezuma's Revenge. Now the indigenous peoples of the Americas, are bringing Geronimo's Revenge to us. It seems almost poetic justice from this perspective.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 7:09 PM

"Catholic diocese sorry after punishing girl for speaking native language"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/01/ca...

Catholics, I want ya to know I try, I really try...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXXyms5g5...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 4:14 PM

News the hispanic (amerindian) population of the United States will be somewhere between forty, and fifty percent of the total population in forty to fifty years. They will be the largest ethnicity in the country. They are of the same genetic base as the indigenous people that we eradicated, or isolated. That to me is one hell of a homecoming. They will be a majority in all facets of our society, hence will return to an extremely influential position, if not one of dominance in our culture.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 10:49 AM

"Forget Jesus, stars died so you could be here."

Dr. Lawrence Krauss

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaGktVQd...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 2:52 AM

OKR

My Mom is 100% Shawnee -- aka, the Loyal Shawnee, aka, the Cherokee Shawnee.

As you probably know, the United States finally recognized the Shawnee Nation in 2002. We sure came a long way since the days of the Indian Removal Act of 1831 when the U.S. forced us by gun to leave our sacred homeland in the Ohio Valley and forced us to march to a reservation in the Kansas territory. Not all of us made it by the way. In fact, we lost a lot on that trail of tears.

Kansas passed their own "Indian Removal Act" some years later, stealing the land they said was ours as long as the grass grows and the wind blows, and they forced us to move to the Cherokee Reservation in Oklahoma (hence the name, "Cherokee Shawnee"}.

Most of my cousins moved off the reservation years ago. I asked my cousin David why he and most of the others moved off the reservation, and he just shook his head and said, "our old ways are long-gone. Its a white man's World now and we needed to make a white man's living." His statement kinda said it all.

Mate, trust me when I tell you that we Native Americans are just living relics of a age that has long since passed.

We won't be taking anything back and the U.S. isn't giving anything back.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 1:38 AM

More on language commonality, and distribution that is indicative of genetic kinship between the indigenous peoples of the United States, and Central America, especially Mexico. The Comanches for instance were on both sides of the border before there was a border. http://www.enotes.com/topic/Uto-Aztecan_... The border is an artificial politically inspired device to separate peoples.

Our southern border is in many ways akin to the border between Ireland, and Northern Ireland. It would be even more similar if the British had wiped out all the Catholics in Northern Ireland at the time of the plantation. Fortunately their blood lust wasn't as great as ours as we pursued manifest destiny.

Just something to think about.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 1:12 AM

How about this for a reason to emigrate to the United States. To take back the land from which their relatives were eradicated, or evicted by the western expansion of whites.

Most of those filtering north from Mexico have a direct kinship to those unfortunates that we treated so badly. Many share the Uto-Aztecan, or other native language with those that once occupied the United States. In a very real sense, and ironically so I might add, it is at the core simply a homecoming. ;) http://www.enotes.com/topic/Uto-Aztecan_...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 12:52 AM

RT,

It is not racist to be concerned about border security.

Our Government has an obligation to keep our border's secure, and they have an obligation to make sure our immigration process weeds out undesirables, such as convicted criminals.

Of all of us who comment here, I am probably the only one of us that has actually been through the immigration process. I can tell you first hand, its a very thorough process. They look into every nook and cranny of a person's life -- including extensive background searches which involve both the FBI and local police. Nothing is taken for granted and everything must be independently verified. Its a long and difficult process.

But as an immigrant myself, I can tell you it was worth it to be able to live in a democracy where I have civil rights and especially the most important right of habeas corpus. After all, if you don't have the right to a trial then you have no rights at all. For me, living in freedom was worth the long, expensive, and thorough immigration process.

But what I can't figure out is why would anybody want to emigrate to the USA?

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Mar 1, 2012, at 12:18 AM

RT on top of all else Blunt, and company are doing, to put it in the vernacular, keep women knocked up, and barefoot, is continuing to insist on insurance coverage to assist men with erectile dysfunction problems in order to make sure as many women as possible become pregnant. Christian chauvinists are ruinous recidivists.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 29, 2012, at 11:58 PM

Actually it isn't much of a stretch to say that our immigration policy in itself is a gift to the rich. Who profits most from the underpaid, under-benefited illegal labor force? The rich, of course. Not only do they reap the direct rewards of low labor costs; they also benefit indirectly by the way the illegal worker wage scale drags down wages all across the economy.

The problem could be solved in one year if the owners of companies, and chief executives were subjected to harsh prison sentences for hiring illegals. Has any one in corporate owned Washington even broached that solution? Has it been bally hooed on the evening news? Of course not.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 29, 2012, at 10:13 PM

I see Mr Blunt is now proposing that any organization can deny any aspects of health care based on religious OR moral grounds. So, besides not providing contraception to women, a company can refuse health coverage for anything they morally do not agree with. How absurd can this continue to get? Let's see, they are going to stop providing birth control to save money, force ultra sounds prior to abortions to shame the woman into not having the abortion, remove funding for women's health care clinics (of which abortions services is a small part) which help reduce unwanted pregnancy, AND when you do have a child out of wedlock they sure won't help by funding agencies that provide a safety net of services and education needed to stop the unending spiral of poverty and ignorance. THEY really do want to move a large number of middle class to poverty so they won't have to use illegal Mexicans for their services. And, to stay with the theme of this blog, ALL in the name of religion.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Wed, Feb 29, 2012, at 9:34 PM

Nana, agree with almost everything in your post. Although I am a liberal in virtually every current political issue today, there is one area I am more conservative on, and that is immigration. I would like to see a comprehensive immigration policy that would secure our borders and stop the flood of illegals as well. Unlike the GOP, I do not believe in rounding them up and deporting. However, as decades go by without a comprehensive solution, we have been flooded with over 20 million illegal Mexicans. BTW, I have some close Mexican friends as well as close Mexican relatives. And I do fully understand why Mexicans have fled their country to ours. So, I don't consider myself racist, but I do believe in having very secure borders along with a fair immigration policy. But, I consider the border issue similar to having a severe wound that needs to be addressed immediately before we try to tackle the so called "comprehensive immigration" problem. I think there are a lot of Democrats that believe that needs to be done in that order as well, and this is one area the Dems are not listening to their constituents and assuming because the GOP is so anti-illegal that they need to be completely opposite. I believe we must seal the southern border first before starting to work on comprehensive immigration, and not until it is sealed to "stop the bleeding". Do you think this makes me sound like a racist?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Wed, Feb 29, 2012, at 9:21 PM

Yeah tried Dentine years ago. Its pretty good for freshening up when you can't brush, but it looses its flavor fast, and its nearly impossible to blow a decent bubble with it.

Oh,...sorry, I couldn't resist.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 29, 2012, at 12:09 AM

OKR,

I was raised Roman Catholic, went to Catholic schools, and well, basically grew up in a big Catholic family, and, unlike der fuhrer, Rick "Little Goebbels" Santorum {or "El Duce" as he is known by his close friends and family), we adored JFK.

So I know a thing or 2 about Catholic dogma.

Rule number 1: The Pope is God's official Govenor of the entire Earth. He is the Vicar of Christ and the absolute king of 1.5 billion Catholics around the World.

Rule 2: See rule 1.

And here is another little factoid about the current absolute king who Rick Santorum worships -- he was a full-fledged, card carrying, Jew hating, NAZI during WW2.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 10:44 PM

While we are on the subject; "Replacing Church, State With New Entity Called 'Sturch'" http://www.borowitzreport.com/

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 10:43 PM

Lol...yes we can...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 10:08 PM

I am wondering if Reich Sanctomonori if elected President will make a secret pact with the Catholic church as did Hitler? Perhaps he will use Hitler's as a model. After all he favors many of the things that were ptomoted by the Third Reich. Were the sanctimonius one not so ridiculous he would be down right scary. Oh wait, Hitler was also ridiculous Uh oh!

Template for Santori's agreement with the Catholic church. http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showkb.php?... However to be fair, just because he wants to bring the church into government doesn't mean he is talking the Catholic Church. We can't assume that just because he is a rabidly devout radical right wing Catholic can we?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 8:57 PM

Whoever thought the NAZIS were not devout Christians has apparently not perused the many photos that indicate a strong foundation of Christian belief upon which the NAZI Party was built upon. The Catholics had a particularly close Relationship with the NAZIs.

Have a look at these photographic gems.

http://nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 7:39 PM

"Reichskonkordat (with Hitler, 1933): Full text"

http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showkb.php?...

Well, this is interesting.

and so is this:

http://nobeliefs.com/images/NaziPriestsS...

...I hear a picture is worth a thousand words.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 5:45 PM

ND,

The "America First," Christianist crowd slipped NAZIism in where the free society used to be.

...and I don't see any reason to believe this fact is going to change anytime soon.

Welcome to Christofascist America.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 3:16 PM

Great video RT.

I enjoyed that.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 2:58 PM

This is a very short video link with some appropriate music I think makes it's point about religion extremely well (while you tap your foot). I don't know if they support embedded links here, but if not, click on the last link at the end of this....

Crazy Watering Can from vania heymann on Vimeo.

http://vimeo.com/25149893

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 1:48 AM

I guess it is not hard to understand how anyone who can see the virgin mary in a burnt piece of toast as a true sign from their god could easily see the black man with big ears as satan. We've come and extremely long way in racial relations over the years, of which I have as well, but the hatred shown by many in the GOP and religious right IMHO has its roots in ignorance and racism, both of which go hand in hand. I guess we have farther to go than I had hoped.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Feb 28, 2012, at 1:41 AM

RR,

Well,thanks for praying for me. I know you mean well buddy.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 3:42 PM

Exactly WTF,...

"Rick Santorum Iowa Speech (parody)"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSZP34ymv...

"Rick S-Word for President 2012 (Santorum parody)"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipnBGZVwi...

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 3:38 PM

News you don't understand even after an explanation because of your denial of God. Satan is doing a fine job with you. Until you come to that realization then you will never understand. All I can do is pray that God hasn't hardened your heart to the point of no return. I love you mate but I can't save you.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 3:25 PM

Onward Christian soldier.......

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 2:42 PM

rr3yv0

Exactly what sin did those first-born infants in Egypt commit?

As to Abraham, he had every intention of carrying out your God's order to murder his son.

You said in reference to my question that God would not do that -- clearly you were wrong since your Bible says he already has -- multiple times.

So, how about you RR, is your faith as true as Abraham's faith?

If you believed God was ordering you to launch a bloody suicidal, terrorist act on the United States, would you obey Him?

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 2:40 PM

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

The bible is but an ancient manual of how to control those who don't know any better.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 1:36 PM

Nana you're the one always talking about "destructive', 'wasteful', 'profligate', or 'consumptive'... The bible tells us to be good stewards and we can use all the resources we use now and still be good stewards unless you want to be a naysayer or doomsdayer. The bible will give you comfort and peace if you read it and study it. You might try if sometime. I know you will say you already have but you haven't really tried it.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 12:05 PM

For one Abraham passed the test and he provided a ram and spared Isaac's life. When something bad happens in the bible it was because of sin. That's what you can't understand is how a good God can punish someone. You reference the bible like you believe it but if you don't believe it then your reference means nothing. You would believe Raw Story over anything in the bible anyway. And if we get 4 more years of Obama we may all be forced to get up every morning and bow toward Washington because they will be providing for all our needs. But I guess anything would be better then God, right?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 12:00 PM

Darned if I know RR, no-one has told me that -- yet.

Anyway, yeah it has happened, according to your bible.

God ordered the Israelis to attack many, many other countries and people. Heck he even ordered Abraham to murder his own son, and how about the murders of all those Egyptian babies he ordered? -- terrorist acts today pale in comparison to the violent acts of murder, genocide, and infanticide your God has ordered. So, yeah it has happened.

I see you don't want to answer the question. That says a lot about your faith -- not quite as strong as you thought, eh mate?

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 27, 2012, at 1:22 AM

Wouldn't happen news. Of course if they told you that God was telling them that you would believe them wouldn't you?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 26, 2012, at 11:27 PM

One thing about it discussing climate change/global warming on the religion blog is quite fitting since it is a religion. The only apocalypse we will be closer to in 5 years is Jesus return if he doesn't return before then. Of course with green energy going bankrupt at every turn our financial apocalypse will begin sooner then that especially when people in the cities have disruption in their food supplies because of the high cost or availability of energy. It's coming folks especially if we vote for 4 more years of this. Satan is the great deceiver and its working. God didn't give us oil so we will destroy the only planet able to support life. God gave us the resources to survive a live life abundantly and if we have twice the population in the future we will still have the resources to live. It may be something we haven't discovered yet but it will happen. That's why I put my faith in God not man because we can't control anything.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 26, 2012, at 11:26 PM

I wonder how our Christian commenters would react if they believed that God was ordering them directly and personally to commit a violent terrorist attack on the United States of America?

Would they do it?

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 26, 2012, at 3:48 PM

rr,

Looks like that culture war thing ain't working out too well.

i think you fella's lost that one.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 6:43 PM

"GOP reliance on 'culture wars' turning off younger voters"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/24/go...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 6:40 PM

rr,

I have seen the data so the con won't work on me. the data doesn't lie. its a fact -- in fact mate, no one who has viewed the data from the ice and Earth cores has any doubt in their mind as to what is happening and what is causing it -- that 3%+ carbon we are adding to the atmosphere each year which accumulates and accrues. debate's over mate -- your side lost. the only issue now is do we hang the denier's and their families or do we slap them onto the Guillotine? but don't worry because that issue is easily resolved.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 5:15 PM

What will we do when the irreversible climate change doesn't happen in 5 years just like all the other predictions that haven't happened. All prophecy in the bible has happened though 100% correct. What are the odds?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 6:32 AM

Yea but news don't you need proof, evidence and then it has to be peer reviewed and all that other stuff. You would accept a persons word on faith. I don't believe it.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 6:29 AM

RationalThinker

Either that or we will have mass hangings of them and their families ensuring that their genes will not be passed on to the survivors of the climate change.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 4:21 AM

Haven't you hear, News, the world is our dominion, according to the bible and Santorum. Therefore, it doesn't matter what we do to it. Drill, baby, drill. And when the climate change becomes immenently dangerous, the 1 percenters and their offspring will live very well with all the luxuries they can still buy with their fortunes for quite some time while the rest of live off of their castaways. It will still be trickle down economics.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 3:03 AM

Here is the link for the folks who do care if our species survives into the future.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 2:38 AM

"World headed for irreversible climate change in five years, IEA warns"

"If fossil fuel infrastructure is not rapidly changed, the world will 'lose for ever' the chance to avoid dangerous climate change"

Thanks a lot climate change deniers!!!

Thanks a heck of a lot.

Now the whole World is in serious trouble and we know who to blame -- the "do nothing and yell NO!" crowd.

Well, it looks like their chickens are coming home to roost, the problem is its not just the deniers who will suffer.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 2:33 AM

But ya know RR,

When you have a faith based entirely in a 2000 year old book of porn...well, lol, I don't think there is much criteria for that faith anyway...just a perverted lust.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 8:50 PM

RR

Anyone who says they are a Christian is a Christian as far as I am concerned.

Its that simple.

You may have some criteria by which you decide who and who is not a Christian but I don't think you have any real authority on the matter.

Neither do I.

So I take them at their word.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 8:39 PM

RationalThinker

No, the Queen has no direct action in passing our laws nor can she stop our laws she does not like.

She is the Head of State, yes for now. However, we are in the process of breaking that relationship soon with a new Constitution. We have already decided to establish a Republic instead. Interestingly enough, it was the Queen who privately urged our Prime Minister to begin moving in that direction.

The only Authority the Queen has in Australia is that she can fire the Prime Minister and call for new elections but only under very special circumstances and she has no influence what-so-ever in that election. However, to my knowledge she has done that only once and was severely criticized for it.

If you are trying to determine our statehood, its this -- we are an independent nation that is, like Canada, South Africa, and the United Kingdom, a member of the British Commonwealth. This is basically a treaty requiring the UK and all Commonwealth Nations, to come to the military assistance of the other member-states when requested to do so. Also, there are some trading advantages for the members as well. Other than that, the Commonwealth is merely a loose confederation of independent countries who share a common language, common history, and common interests...and nothing more.

However, again, no the Queen has no say so in the laws our Parliament passes nor do we require her signature or permission to anything.

Also, a bit of a side-note, if you ask the Aussies if the Queen is their Queen they usually just start laughing real hard and will tell you "yeah sort of but she has no power here." Thy don't take her seriously mate lol.

By the way, even though the Queen does not sign our legislation and has no say so in it, I understand all legislation passed in the US must be signed by the President, the Head-of-State, or it does not become law.

Of course in America the President has absolute power of life and death over every American citizen -- say say the Federal Courts -- and in fact Obama has already killed 2 American Citizens -- neither of which were wanted by any law-enforcement and neither of which had been indited by a grand-jury.

Nobody in Australia can order the death of an Australian citizen -- even ones convicted of a crime -- not our Prime Minister, not the Courts -- nobody.

When you have a Head of State with the power of life and death over every one of the citizens of his country, democracy is no longer present.

As to Australia, most of our Federal and State laws are either English Common law or International law -- laws such as those listed in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights which is law here in Australia.

Civil rights and democracy are alive and well in Australia.

I wish I could say the same for my other country, the United States.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 8:34 PM

News what criteria do you use to qualify someone as a Christian?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 8:27 PM

News you made my point thank you.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 8:20 PM

Hey News, don't y'all down under still have to get the Queen's (of England) to approve any laws you pass? When I was there a few years ago, I think tha was some archaic formality.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 7:59 PM

RR,

I am absolutely not a Christian. nor would I ever do myself the great disservice of telling people I was.

From what I have seen RR, a lot of the Christians seem to base their faith on a pretty nasty book of porn and even allow their children to engage in porn.

No way would I want to be affiliated with something like that.

And then there is the matter of so many pedophiles in the Christian belief. Almost all convicted pedophiles are Christian according to their self-reports, all those priests who raped kids are Christian, and that porn book you call the Bible is the root and source of your Christianity according to most Christians.

It looks pretty clear to me that when you base your religious beliefs and faith on a book of porn and a God who orders the murder of babies and rapes 13 year-old Palestinian girls...well its not hard to see why the leaf does not fall far from the tree, and it helps explain why so many people feel Christians to be a dangerous criminal element in today's society.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 7:42 PM

News if you would tell me you were a Christian should I believe you?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 7:20 PM

If you read the whole thing okr Jesus is telling a parable emphasizing what it takes to follow him. To be a disciple of Jesus means he has to be first and everything else comes after that. Jesus, family, work, church, something to that order.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 7:03 PM

You Christian apologists who have left the blog shouldn't feel too bad, nor guilty. After all, as Homer Simpson said; "Judas betrayed Jesus, but he still got paid". ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 6:54 PM

So many Judeo-Christian mysteries and so few Christians to "explain" these mysteries.

Gee...I wonder why they are so quiet?

Perhaps its because their fantasy of what a Christian is and what Christianity has wrought in reality are two complete opposites.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 5:20 PM

Wow!!!!

I did a little research regarding the Christian worship of pornography. I am shocked at the number of sex crimes that Christian worship of pornography has wrought.

These lists are huge lists of Christians convicted of sex crimes.

Check 'em out.

"Christian Priests Convicted for Sexual Abuse"

http://www.ranker.com/list/christian-pri...

"List of scandals involving evangelical Christians"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sca...

"Evangelist Scandals"

http://webspace.webring.com/people/bt/tr...

"Religious Affiliations Among Adult Sexual Offenders"

http://www.springerlink.com/content/6wnv...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 3:58 PM

OKR,

Given their worship of pornography, its not surprising Christianity produces so many pedophiles.

What a bunch of sickos!!!

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 3:17 PM

OKR,

That porn book, the one the Christians read, the Bible, is that regularly kept within reach of children?

The reason I ask is I am concerned for the welfare of the children who are exposed to that Biblical pornography.

Well one thing is for sure, the Christian lust for pornography certainly exposes them for what they are. And they worship that "God"?

Do Christians also worship the porn in their books?

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 3:07 PM

Yeah it was named by its owner who is an Irishman who emigrated to Australia. Intrestingly enough, he imports all his employees from Ireland. Everyone that works there is originally from Ireland lol.

...and those folks are pretty rough and tumble.

In fact, one time I was there and there as an Englishman (we call them Pomies -- Property of Her Majesty) and he was at a table outside singing English patriotic songs -- at an Irish pub -- not a good idea. 2 Irish boys there who had not been in Sydney more than a day were busy deciding what to do about the situation. They were extremely troubled by it. They discussed several ideas -- some of which probably would have landed them in jail -- but finally they settled on singing Irish patriotic songs in a kind of song competition with the English fellow.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 3:03 PM

Scruffy Murphy's Hotel? I had a dear departed dog I named Murphy, but I wouldn't even name a dog Scruffy. You folks are really hard on each other News. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 12:08 PM

There are two to three of those Bible quotes that I linked to that are blatantly pornographic, and sexually deviant to the point that they could not be posted here without compelling Eric to delete them, in actuality, censor passages from the Holy Bible. I would not put Eric in that position.

Can you imagine the anger if fundamentalists found out that the Democrat News was expelling The Holy Bible from its on line newspaper?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 8:51 AM

Well RT,

Recently I had an out of body experience while chugging down a pint of Guinness over at Scruffy Murphy's Hotel down in the CBD.

It was amazing!!

(scroll down for the complete out-of-body-experience description)

So the way I understand it, if RR is correct, I will be spending eternity floating around to and from various Sydney pubs sampling the bitter-beer and on occasion a lager and probably enjoying the company of others who refuse to leave Sydney -- even if it means by-passing the Sky-daddy's offer to hang out in the clouds.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 4:50 AM

I keep thinking about the hope the religious have that they will someday soon join their Lord and Savior for everlasting life in His presence. What do they think that will be like? They don't know; they only know it will be eternal bliss. Is just being in the presence of the Lord eternal bliss? What could you possibly do with your time (oh, that's right, time has no meaning with the Lord) forever? This is the part that really scares me about extremely religious individuals. This "pie in the sky" view of Heaven is total delusion. They need to "WAKE UP" and figure out that there is no sky daddy, enjoy living a good life using your morals that are "built in" to your genetic code which will provide happiness for the relatively short time we have on this planet.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 4:41 AM

Those bible quotes can probably be interpreted other ways, and undoubtedly will be by those gullible religious individuals who always cherripick passages and dismiss sections they do not really understand. Santorum believes that stuff; does that scare or embarrass anybody?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 24, 2012, at 4:27 AM

Some pretty sick stuff News, but who in the hell reads Deuteronomy? I have heard people say that Job, or Mathew, or Psalms, or Ecclesiastes, or Paul are favorites, never Deuteronomy. There are certain classes of people who can never announce publically what they like to read. Do you think Deuteronomy readers might be the Christian portion of that class?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 11:44 PM

Golly, I just had a look at those OKR.

The Bible is disgusting!!!!

...and they let children read that?

No wonder there have been so many Christian terrorist attacks on the United States.

Those people are sick!!!!

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 9:13 PM

Nope there are ten slides at the link rr3, you must have missed the rest some how. I just checked them. Most of the ten slides have more than one verse. Back on point, what do you think of the one about having to be hate filled to be a disciple. What do you think that means? I think it is slide 4 or 5. Here is the link again so you can read the exact words your self. http://www.chacha.com/topic/bible/galler...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 8:45 PM

The discovery of an error in the measuring equipment within the collider is peer review in the process.

The scientists who made the extraordinary claim turned their equipment and all test results and their methodology over for independent inspection and verification -- and so the process began.

That is what science is all about -- repeatable, verifiable, testable, describable, measurable evidence.

The extraordinary claim was refuted by the peer-review process which inspected the equipment used and discovered the flaw in the measuring devices.

Its beautiful.

The scientific process works.

The error was discovered because of the scientific process.

Einstein was correct. There is a Universal speed limit.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 8:15 PM

RR3, yes, science makes mistakes in many new areas of discovery. However, it continually allows for the refinement of scientific theory any time someone presents evidence that would change the way science looks at it. Science is "open" to challenge. So much scientific knowledge in many areas has become irrefutable evidence over years, yet the deeper we get into many areas, the more we know we have to do and learn. I fail to understand your thought process which appears to conclude that because we found out something about the characteristics of the neutrino we didn't know, or because we thought it was something that it turns out not to be, that you can justify the existence of a God. That is totally illogical. And the bible with just a few hundred pages of allegory and "Chinese Proverb" like wisdoms is not comparable to the millions of pages of scientific proofs about the way the physical world works. The bible simply tries to tell the story of the supernatural for those gullible enough to believe it. And if you were brought up somewhere else in the world, each region has their own version of how the supernatural god or gods rule and watch over us. I cannot help but feel some sorrow for the multitudes who live their entire life thinking a supernatural being is watching over their every move and if they continue to show allegiance to him (not her which tells you something) they somehow will end up in some heaven where they will be totally happy by being in His presence. Yes, I do feel sorry for those who think there will be happiness after death being in His presence and don't have a clue as to what you will be doing that is part of that ultimate happiness. Maybe pity is a better word than sorrow.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 7:43 PM

"BREAKING NEWS: Error Undoes Faster-Than-Light Neutrino Results"

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinside...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 4:34 PM

Okr your link only referenced 4 verses which is exactly what I referenced unless I missed one of your post.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 4:32 PM

Oh, also,

here is some good listening music while you contemplate your answers...for anyone with the courage and integrity to answer the question.

Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu9dmXGlk...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 4:15 PM

I have a question for our religious pals...if any have the courage to address the question.

What are you folks doing about the overpopulation of our Planet?

With 7 billion+ people and dwindling water, land, natural resources, and energy sources, our World is in big trouble. How are we going to feed our growing population in the near and distant future?

So what is the Christian approach to reducing the rate of population growth on an already overcrowded Planet with limited resources?

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 4:10 PM

"Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 1)"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4Gk...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 11:46 PM

"Science Is The Dumbest Religion!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNf3Bfvxm...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 11:42 PM

Test Your Faith-Vision

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HE79YwIm...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 11:33 PM

Actually RR,

We do have some possible explanations for Dark Matter -- I recommend you take a few physics course, some additional calculus courses, and read up on String-theory for which the math works perfectly.

Science never claimed to have all the answers...yet.

Science is a methodology and nothing more.

Its a method of arriving at truth.

Its objective.

It nothing more than a method.

Unlike religious explanations, all scientific method requires vigorous testing.

Oh and you are dead wrong on the "we can't test things in the past" nonsense. We can and do mate. I think perhaps, if you wanted to be correct, you could say YOU don't know of any testing of the past that we are capable of.

That is why I suggest you further your education in science, because there is no way you can understand the complex science until you have the prerequisites...the basics.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 11:21 PM

Once again bashing science via computer. It's no wonder you belive in fairy tales. So,rr3yvo, eastwood or anyone else. Are you gonna take me up on asking your church to relinquish it's tax exempt status? Can you make it on your own without a govt. subsidy? Can you make it without a govt. handout? I'm still waiting to hear a report on this but things are very quite on this subject.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 10:21 PM

rr3 I see your point on the God's backside verse, but you are cherry picking the easiest one for your answer out of ten verses. Some really stretch credulity. For instance, the one stating that you have to hate your father, mother, wife, brother, children brothers, and sisters, even yourself to be the Lord's disciple. Taking it verbatim it says you have to be filled with hatred of all those you normally would love to be the Lord's disciple. That seems to me sick, and twisted nonsense. What say you?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 10:10 PM

For example 'dark matter' is something science has been studying only in the last few years. First brought to light in 1932(no pun intended). We assumed the universe was mostly light but could actually be over 80% dark matter. Some claim the be over 99%. Generally accepted by the scientific community but can't be explained. Maybe one day. Until then my faith is in God not science.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 8:48 PM

If science tells us what happened in the past but there is no way to really test it. We have to have faith that their information is valid and true. We are able to look at the size of the universe to determine how old it is but we don't know exactly how it came to be. Things that scientist told us 20 years ago and people believed them then, they have found not to be true today. So what you believe today may change as we continue to gain knowledge. Does the bible change? Does God change? The bible has proven to be historically and scientifically accurate. Science not so much.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 8:27 PM

Okr God says that man cannot see his face and live so why can't we take the bible literally when it says Moses seen his backside. What do you see when you stand behind someone?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 8:18 PM

RT

" If you really understand the methodology behind science and mathematics, you will then realize why "faith in science" is some type of oxymoron"

Well said mate.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 7:41 PM

Nana: "I was saddened to see that you view indigenous cultures with such contempt."

It appears that indigenous cultures has a very sentimental spot with you. I can certainly understand and have a great appreciation for much of what they represent. Most, if not all, have a great respect for the physical world they live in and appreciate all things that aid there survival. They are usually the ultimate "green" culture. Unlike many Xtians, like Santorum, who believe the earth is man's domain and we should take from it without worrying about giving back. Indigenous peoples also appear to be at peace with their environment and self, something many of us struggle hard to achieve. In that regard they beat us all. What they haven't had is the ability to understand how and why many things they regard with importance work, attributing much to superstition, not unlike xtians believe in their bible. However, unlike indigenous peoples. Xtians DO have the education and background to understand how physical laws work. They attribute everything to one supernatural power and being, one who is the embodiment of a king, with no real respect for the earth and our environment. Xtians believe the earth is man's domain, whereas indigenous peoples understand the importance of "being one" with our earth. Without the benefit of science, indigenous peoples have an understanding of the importance of our earth way beyond the super religious. But respecting the cultures of indigenous peoples does not make their superstitions believable.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 7:32 PM

Rr3: "..but as atheist and agnostics you have nothing to stand on except your faith in science."

OK, this "faith in science" I keep hearing is absolutely ridiculous. It is like "faith in mathematics", no such thing. It has to do with credible understanding of the subject matter that you can comprehend the rationale of their conclusions. If you really understand the methodology behind science and mathematics, you will then realize why "faith in science" is some type of oxymoron. Can you understand that there is no correlation between "faith in religion" and "faith in science"?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 7:30 PM

RR

Its as good an option as any.

OKR...the light was a blinding brown, bitter beer colored extravaganza of liquid happiness.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 7:29 PM

Do you really believe that is one of the options?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 7:25 PM

LOL News so did ya see a white light at the end of a tunnel or was your vision obscured by the liquid darkness?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 6:29 PM

Well folks it happened.

I had a near-death experience.

I was down at Scruffy Murphy's Hotel in Sydney. Its near Central Station and Town Hall. I was there enjoying a few cool pints of Guinness Stouts with some of me mates, when one of me mates says, "hey I bet I can down my pint of Guinness before you can down yours."

Well not being one to pass up a sure deal, I agreed to the challenge.

We both started chugging fast, I knew it was going to be a tough competition. My opponent was 20 years younger than me, so I knew he had the youth-fitness advantage. But I had experience on my side. So we both plowed into our pints determined to win. It was close but I had nearly won the competition when all of a sudden I found myself floating above my body. I could see my body slumped over the table, hand still clenching the pint. My friends were working feverishly to revive me but they did not appear to be having any success. Apparently downing a pint of Guinness down fast can kill a person. How was I to know?

Anyway, all of a sudden I saw a bright light coming from the direction of Central Station.

I felt my spirit being drawn away and towards the light. I couldn't stop myself from floating towards it. It turned out to be a pub about 2 blocks down the road. I decided that since I was there anyway that perhaps I should enjoy a cool one -- a Tooheys Old. Well I had a couple of 'em and all of a sudden I began floating back to Scruffy's for another Guinness.

My friends apparently managed to bring me back to life because all of a sudden I was sitting there at Scruffy's again with a fresh pint in front of me.

It was really scary.

So anyway, that is how I know that after I die I will be spending eternity in Sydney.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 6:15 PM

Excellent selection OKR.

Tom Wait's "Tom Traubert's Blues" is my all time favorite Tom Wait's piece.

Of course you probably know that "Waltzing Matilda" is an Australian Song and is the unofficial National Anthem of Australia.

Its a song about drinking lol...which explains why the Ozzies love it.

If one happened to be in one of our Hotels (pub with accommodations) and someone happened to start singing "Waltzing Matilda" -- which happens frequently, -- one might be surprised when everyone in the pub joins in on the song.

Sadly, the Ozzies are mad at Mr. Waits. They feel its a case of plagiarism. I often point out, when the subject comes up, that in fact Mr. Waits was simply improving it (lol).

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 5:12 PM

rr3 one other thing as I continue on my good will mission. I don't believe I have ever said that the Bible was not a source of wisdom, I believe quite the contrary. Those early folks had a lot of things figured out. Some things are for the ages, and are passed on to us, at times from concurrent cultural sources, not just that one.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 4:50 PM

OKC has its good points News, it hasn't blistered me too badly yet.

Back at you-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGpwgHqlfWo&feature=related

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 4:39 PM

OKR,

I sympathize with your situation.

I hope this short music video will help.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0S5oodV-...

or maybe this one mate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7O5scQhb...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 2:29 PM

OKR,

ROTHFLMAO!!!!!!!!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 1:56 PM

News I am sorry that I can't say the same about the city where I abide. Oklahoma City has some aspects of what many would consider a hellish environment. Nevertheless it is where I will stay, at least until my somewhat protected ashes are gone.

However it gives me some confidence that I am well conditioned for the coming rigors of hell if rr3's prediction is correct. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 1:42 PM

rr3yv0

I was reading your comment and your suggestion that OKR (and I guess me too) consider "...where you will spend eternity."

I don't know about my buddy OKR, but I gave it some thought.

I have been thinking about where I want to spend eternity all day as a result of your suggestion.

I have made my decision.

I would prefer to spend eternity in Sydney.

This town rocks!!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 1:28 PM

First of all rr3 thanks for responding to my post asking what you make of the unusual scriptures to which I posted a link. Thanks even more for sticking around here. It has become a lonely place for you I would think. At the least you, in your doggedness, continue to provoke comment from those of us who believe differently than you.

Actually I was a bit disappointed in your reply which essentially dismissed my question as to your thoughts with, it doesn't matter what I think, what do you think about them? I can understand that response because at first blush it could appear that I was sarcastically poking fun at biblical wackiness. I was not, but I should have expanded upon the question to clarify my intent.

Therefore I will give you first, my honest opinion as to those quotes, in the hope that it will provoke a thoughtful response from you.

I was not aware that those verses were even in the Bible, but then I have never claimed to be a biblical scholar, so that should be understandable.

My take is that they are allegorical, or perhaps better said, a utilization of extremity to focus attention on an underlying issue. I realized when that thought came to me, that you would not likely have the same response, because it would lead to some concession that it may actually not be God's will that an absolutely literal interpretation of biblical text is proper. Such a conclusion would break the dam restraining further muddy waters, and you might figuratively drown trying to swim out of them.

At this point I hope that you see that my question was neither taunting, nor facetious, so I ask again, what is your take on those particular scriptures?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 1:16 PM

ND,

If you believe the peer-review process has failed in the work of Dr. Frans de Waal, I recomend you contact him and let him know about it. Or you may want to contact the American Association for the Advancement of Science or the University and let them know of your concerns.

Contacting Dr, Waal would be your best bet. He can probably address the concerns you have much better than I can since he is the expert who conducted the research.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 12:36 PM

NanaDot

That is how I view all Bronze Age religions, yes.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 12:19 PM

rr3yvo,

More Chirstians don't post here because they are asked real questions to back up thier claims.

Christains don't like that because they may be forced to question thier own faith and that just won't do, will it? Here's a fun little website you might enjoy.

http://www.clergyproject.org/

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 6:43 AM

You know Okr it doesn't really matter what I make of the bible verses you reference. What do you make of them? As an unbeliever do you want to understand or just display you sarcastic wit? You like to think of yourself as a commendable opponent of Christianity but as atheist and agnostics you have nothing to stand on except your faith in science that can show you evidence and speculate how it fits the theory. You accept many things on faith much more then the bible asks of you. You wonder why more Christians don't post on here well there are some things even we can't fix. Hope you have a blessed day and think about where you will spend eternity.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 6:23 AM

RT why do you think the earth is only 6,000 years old? Is that one of your Christian presuppositions?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 6:12 AM

Plant Blooms After 30,000 Years:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21...

Can't wait till they get around to the Wooly Mammoth!! Oh, this can't be. [begin-sarcasm] I almost forgot that the earth is only 6,000 years old. How do we know? Because some individuals interpret anchient texts about supernatural events literally [end-sarcasm].

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 4:59 AM

As regards the goat-herders,

The average knowledge level of Bronze Age people was not very high.

Even their most learned could not tell you such trivial things as thought processes occur in the brain (they thought it occured in the heart), that gravity holds us upon the Earth, that space is a vaccuum, that falling stars are not stars but meteorites, that the Sun is a star, that the Earth orbits the Sun, the Moon orbits the Earth, that diseases were caused by bacteria and viruses (not curses from God or devil-possession), that there is no Heaven up there floating around in the clouds, that time and space are relative to the perspective of the observer, basic physics, basic psychology, algebra, calculus, and the list of knowledge they did not know then -- but are commonly knowledge -- today is far, far, far longer than the list of things they did know.

And I don't base my entire life on what a bunch of ignorant Bronze-Age goat-herders and witch-doctors regarded as "knowledge" or "wisdom."

How 'bout you? Have you replaced your physician with a witch-doctor lately and if so, how did that work out for you...lol.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 12:34 AM

Rr3 what do you make of these Bible verses?

http://www.chacha.com/topic/bible/galler...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 12:34 AM

NanaDot

The data is what it is.

As regards what groups are included in said behavior and what are not, other iines of evidence have to be considered as well. Relatively few conclusions are drawn from only 1 study.

I have not read his entire study though I may at some point. Its certainly an interesting study and it provides us with new information we did not have before.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 22, 2012, at 12:14 AM

Well RT, I learned all that after I emigrated to Oz. It would seem some aspects of our American history somehow were left out in high school and college.

For example, we hear a lot about the Pilgrims and their journey to Plymouth Rock and their celebrating the first Thanksgiving, which the sorta did do.

However, here are a few tidbits I know I didn't learn until I reached University.

(1) The Pilgrims were not exactly fleeing persecution the way you and I understand it, they were upset because the Dutch were not willing to turn the entire public court system over to the Pilgrims -- radical, breakaway Puritans. The Church Fathers demanded that Holland abandon their entire system of Jurisprudence in favor of a Court consisting of the Pilgrims members and based upon Pilgrim religious/legal beliefs. Holland refused to even consider it and politely asked the Pilgrims to leave.

(2) The Pilgrims stopped at Plymouth Rock in order to find the ingredients they needed to make beer.

In fact, the Pilgrims, who were notorious beer drinkers, had run out of beer some weeks before while still at sea and they threatened the Captain with a passenger mutiny if he did not stop as soon as possible so they could find grain to make beer with.

They were never lost as some would have you believe. In fact, the Captain and the crew, who were not Pilgrims at all and had been hired along with the ship by the pilgrims to provide them with passage to America, had made the journey from England to Virginia -- their real destination -- many times before. The Captain and the crew knew the route as well as if it had been tattooed on their right hands.

(3) The first thing those Pilgrims did when they got off the ship was to send a party to forage for grain for the beer and for food. The party discovered the seeds and grains for the Native Americans' next year's crops which the Native Americans depended on for survival, buried in a mound in a Native American village and promptly stole all the seeds and grain. That was mighty Christian of them. You can see why I make sure I know where all my valuables are when every I am around Christians...its things like that.

Anyway, those are some little known truths regarding the Pilgrims, and they represent what may be our own cultural attempt to clean up our history so we don't have to face certain truths regarding Christianity and Western Culture.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 10:06 PM

Science looks forward...research, theology looks backward...reflection,...apples...oranges.

Looking forward to discover the origin of life. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 9:21 PM

Enjoyed the history lesson. Some I knew, but quite a bit I had never read before (or ignored back when I thought history was boring). Funny how the closer I become to "being history" the more I enjoy it :-)

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 8:48 PM

RT

I am glad to read that you are well traveled.

I often think America would be a much better place if more Americans would travel abroad and learn that there are many different approaches in life, culturally, economically, and politically -- it would quickly dispel that notion of "American Exceptionalism."

I would like to note one thing you may not know about Australian and American history. The Brits sent their Irish political prisoners (who comprised the vsst majority of English prisoners exported to other places) to the American Colony's until the treaty was signed by King George establishing the United States of America and removing any English claims to America. No longer able to send the prisoners to America, in 1788 the Brits sent the first Irish political prisoners to Australia and it replaced America as the destination for the prisoners.

Almost all the prisoners sent to America and later to Australia were political prisoners who were demanding an end to the English occupation, oppression, and subjugation of Ireland. They were men and women who's only crime was that they wanted the English to leave their country -- just like we Americans also wanted the British out of the American Colonies. Of course, the Irish had been an independent Nation prior to England's attacking and conquering her by force.

In America the prisoners were forced to work in penal colonies and it was the same in Australia. These political prisoners were sent to America and Australia for 2 reasons and 2 reasons only -- (1) an unsuccessful attempt to quell Irish Freedom Fighters' independence movement and (2) to provide white-slave labor in American and Australia.

So you see mate, the Ozzies are basically the same people as the majority of Americans -- Irish and English and Scottish. One brother was sent to a penal colony in America, the other sent to Australia -- same families, same people.

Maybe that is why the Ozzies love Americans so much and maybe that is why they have fought by our side in every war we have fought since WW1 -- including WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

One side-note:

Although the Brits kept sending the Irish political prisoners to Australia until the 1850's, they had a real problem hanging on to them. Basically there wasn't that much to stop them from disappearing into the bush and over the mountains to the outback of Australia where they were often helped by the Australian People (the First Australians). Almost all our early old, successful farming and business families and our hero's and great, early leaders where either brought over as political prisoners or are descended from political prisoners. My wife is one of the descendent's of those political prisoners.

That is the real story mate. The Ozzies are our kin.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 7:36 PM

News, yes, I've had the opportunity to spend a couple of months in Australia, both Sydney and Melbourne. Got to drive the Great Ocean Road (awesome) as well as take in an Australian Rules Football game or two (better than soccer but not close to American Football in my opinion). But then again, I'd have to get more games under my belt to be fair. The people I was around were awesome as well, and yes, loved the beer there, but then I never met a beer I didn't like :-) Thanks for the invite, and hope I don't have to take you up on it. Somehow the mere fact that a Santorum can be the Republican front runner is a major embarrassment for our country. He would try to take us back prior to Roe v Wade, screw the environment, AND try to defund all public education. I know in my heart he wouldn't have a chance, but his strong support shows just how close we could be to a theocracy like Iran's. As Hitch said, "religion poisons everything".

Let's see, our country was settled originally by people who wanted the freedom of religion, and perhaps that explains some of the right wing mutations that have multiplied so much. On the other hand, Australia was settled by castaway thieves, and have lots of mutations that have turned into crazy partiers. I like your mutations much better than ours!!!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 6:43 PM

NanaDot

Good point.

Also, the goat-herders who wrote that knew far, far, far less about the World than the average person does now.

For example, if a person died from anything other than an obvious outside force, such as being stabbed, sliced, strangled, ect, the folks who wrote that could not at all explain what killed the deceased.

The authors were quite ignorant of knowledge we now regard as mere common sense...and RR wants us to take advice from these folks or listen to their ultra-limited, superstious nonsense?

Lol...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 5:06 PM

rr3yv0

Rsw Story is a news organization and the biggest independent news organization in the United States.

They report the news.

They reported a recent, peer-reviewed study by the World's foremost expert in the field.

That is their job -- reporting the news.

They didn't make any claims. They just reported the news.

Odd how Christianists would prefer to censure the news or attack the messenger rather than addressing reality or attempting to learn something, anything at all, about the news.

Maybe its because the facts ring true and don't support any part of the Christian mythology.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 7:36 AM

rr3yvo,

Fine, schtick with god all you want. The problem is that too much of your delusional, santa clause mentality is injected into our policy making. Perhaps your church would like to give up it's tax exampt status for that reason? Go ask them and let's us all know wha they say. I still haven't heard from eastwood on that very topic. Once again, scripture may sound purty but it still don't prove nuttin'.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 7:16 AM

Psalm 90:2 (NASB95)

Before the mountains were born Or You gave birth to the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God.

God has always been even before the earth was formed. I think I will stick with God not Raw Story.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 6:07 AM

Remember how in "War of the Worlds" the aliens were brought down by a small virus? Religion is our virus.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 6:06 AM

"Stark warning emerges from summit: science is 'under siege"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/21/st...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 3:40 AM

No answer eh RR?

Well that's OK...we already know your answer mate.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 21, 2012, at 3:38 AM

Sorry for the typos in my previous comment but I think you can figure it out lol.

But seriously RR,

Were you referring to that God of yours who your Bible says ordered an Angel of death to murder all those first born babies of the Egyptians?

"Cause yeah, that mythology you think is real sure is full of some real nasty stuff -- like a God who commits genocide, murders babies and children, and who takes liberties with 13 year old Palestinian girls, without their consent (can a 13 year old give consent? I don't think so)' and while they are sleeping.

That guy is scary, real scary.

Hey you worship that God don't you?

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 10:43 PM

rr3yv0

Babies?

who is killing babies and please spare me that nonsense comparing a blastisis or fetus unable to live on its outside the womb with neonates.

So...tell us again who made murdering babies -- neonates who can and do live outside the wound?

Hang it up, We the People will not allow you and your pals to have exclusive rights to a woman's body -- their bodies belong to them and to them exclusively.

Get used to it.

and oh, if you would learn to look for the sources in articles, you would have seen the sources they are quoting and paraphrasing:

"Frans de Waal, a biologist at Emory University in Atlanta, told the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science."

Dr. Frans de Waal

" PhD (born 29 October 1948, 's-Hertogenbosch), is a Dutch primatologist and ethologist. He is the Charles Howard Candler professor of Primate Behavior in the Emory University psychology department in Atlanta, Georgia, and director of the Living Links Center at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center[1] and author of numerous books including Chimpanzee Politics and Our Inner Ape. His research centers on primate social behavior, including conflict resolution, cooperation, inequity aversion, and food-sharing. He is a Member of the United States National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Netherlands Academy of Sciences."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_de_Wa...

No wonder science baffles you lol lol lol....

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 10:30 PM

Wow I guess if Raw Story puts it in print then we have to accept it as gospel. Biological basis because we are created that way. If it is evolutionary why do we kill babies and make it legal. Now that is 'nasty'.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 10:18 PM

He gives power to the weak, And to those who have no might He increases strength. Even the youths shall faint and be weary, And the young men shall utterly fall, But those who wait on the LORD Shall renew their strength; They shall mount up with wings like eagles,They shall run and not be weary, They shall walk and not faint. Isaiah 40:29-31

We get tired at times but God's strength never diminishes.

Fear not, for I am with you; Be not dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you, Yes, I will help you, I will uphold you with My righteous right hand.' Isaiah 41:10

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 10:10 PM

"Science overturns view of humans as naturally 'nasty"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/20/sc...

The source of morals? Why evolutionary biology, of course.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 9:15 PM

Well my Grandmother and my Uncle told me Montague Hill used to be the watering hole of Old Man Montague.

They told me he used to stash his liquor up there and sneak up that way for a drink every now and again up there in the woods.

I asked why and they told me that (1) he was half crazy and (2) his wife didn't want him drinking.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 9:00 PM

lol

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 8:56 PM

RationalThinker

Yeah buddy that is what I said when Dubba was running the first time -- you know the one where his opponent had over 500,000 more votes than he did but he won anyway lol...that one.

Now I live in wonderful, always green, Sydney, Australia -- you know, 30 minutes from the Blue Mountains and 30 minutes from the South Pacific Ocean.

I will keep my fingers crossed for both you and Rick Santorum...may you be as fortunate as your's truly down under.

Come on down and lets enjoy a few schooners of Toohey's Old while we watch the lovely ladies sunning and surfing down at Bondi Beach or maybe take in a game of footy -- these guys don't wear protective pads when they play football (its football the hard way -- great game). And its all year-round -- no ice or snow down 'round these parts -- ever.

There is freedom in this World mate but you won't find it in America, aka the Evil Empire.

Bondi Mayhem!

http://www.lingopal.com/es/bondi-mayhem/

BONDI BEACH AUSTRALIA

THE BRITNEY SPEARS OF SYDNEY BEACHES

http://www.sydneycloseup.com/bondi-beach...

Australian rules football

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_...

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 8:22 PM

Rick Santorum is the embodiment of a christian who would like to interject his beliefs in our federal government and education system. Actually, he made comments regarding geting the federal government out of education and leaving it up to the states or even the local governments. This guy is scary on one hand, and on the other I'd almost like to see him get the nomination because I believe (hope, almost pray, throw salt over my shoulder) he wouldn't have a chance to get elected. If that would happen, I'd seriously consider trying to convince my family to find another country to live in... he is that scary bad!!!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 7:49 PM

Clarification: My last remark WAS an insinuation directed at anyone who the shoe fits.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 5:19 PM

...and ya know...

you can put your boots in an oven and call them "biscuits,"...but they are still boots.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 4:41 PM

...and ya know...

if it walks like a Christianist and it talks like a Christianist, it probably is a Christianist.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 4:40 PM

I love it when a good hammerin' comes together lol, lol, lol....

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 4:07 PM

Clarification: My last remark was not an insinuation directed, at SC, Dlkes, nor others like them who constructively engage in conversation.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 4:00 PM

WTF I think that their ball went flat. That was a practical reason for them to take it and go home. They couldn't even dribble any more. Also there is no home court advantage on a blog. I think that they had been playing all home games before coming here, and they weren't used to the pressure. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 3:54 PM

Speaking of labels (nouns),

one of my wife's young cousins -- around 22, 23, was complaining about labels (nouns). We kept talking about "socialists" and "capitalists" and apparently he took offense to our referring to the supporters of each respective economic approach as "socialists" or "capitalists."

He asked, "why do we have to call them anything?"

So for those of you who are offended by nouns, pronouns,and proper names here in this forum or any other place here is the reason we have them and use them.

We have labels (names of nouns, pronouns, and proper nouns,) because they are a part of human language. Words for nouns, proper nouns, and pronouns allow us to communicate. All languages have them, and without them we would have great difficulty understanding each other or communicating at any level above that of a chimpanzee.

Labels are nouns, proper nouns, and pronouns that we use to describe an object, place, person, or thing.

I personally have no problem with pronouns, nouns, or proper names. I think without them we would still be living in caves and would communicate with grunts and growls.

If a person is still offended by the use of pro-nouns, nouns, and proper nouns, may I recommend you just opt out of any human societies and find a nice cave to live in, 'cause we will most like continue to use nouns, pronouns, and proper nouns.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 3:51 PM

okr,

No problem. What happened to all of our sparring partners?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 2:36 PM

Cheetah, thanks my friend. Your comment provoked many thoughts, including considering the role of labeling in organizing our speech patterns, understanding (categorization to expedite rationality), and many other considerations. It was one hell of a question.

I just am not of a mind to write anything at the moment, beyond off the top of the head inanity that doesn't please me any more than it does others. Sorry WTF. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 1:59 PM

"Student attacked for writing pro-marriage equality opinion piece"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/19/st...

Now how many of you reading this are also thinking, "well she deserved it for goin' again the lord?"

This is what homophobes do.

This is what Christianists do when they don't like what a person is saying.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 10:30 PM

WTF,

Isn't it odd that though we are willing to look, listen, and consider any scientifically derived evidence they may wish to present to support their God hypothesis, they remain silent.

Its almost as if they are conceding that there is nothing concrete what-so-ever to support their belief in something unsubstantiated -- their faith -- that willingness to embrace for life a belief that has no basis what-so-ever in fact.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 6:10 PM

See...that's more like it!

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 6:05 PM

and really WTF,

I am just killing time while I wait for even just one Christianist to provide just one piece of irrefutable, testable, repeatable, verifiable, describable, measurable evidence that (1) God exists and (2) that the God they worship is the only true God.

So far we have all been waiting 2000 years for them to show us something that is real, yet, sadly, despite having 2000 years to just present one piece of proof, they offer us nothing -- not even 1 piece of testable, verifiable, repeatable, describable, measurable evidence to support their God Hypothesis -- Not 1 piece.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 5:13 PM

Well ya know WTF

You can please some of the people all the time.

You can please all of the people some of the time.

But you cannot please all of the people all of the time.

So sometimes you just have to please yourself lol.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 4:10 PM

No offense guys, but.....yawn.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 1:29 PM

I hope you heathens out there learn something from this Holy Scripture.

"the Ten Commandments of Beer"

http://seattlest.com/2010/10/01/i_give_t...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 2:38 AM

I will drink a beer on your behalf OKR.

I hope the offering will be enough to persuade you to accept Jeebus into your heart and accept her as Goddess-the_Daughter.

Yeah its a Trinity -- Goddess Yasigi, Goddess-the-Daughter, and the Ghost of Yasigi.

"Believeth in thy Beer," so commandeth the Goddess, (Beer-Brewer, 26;7).

"Stale beer awaiteth the sinner who denyeth the Goddess" (Mugs, 17;5)

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 19, 2012, at 1:38 AM

It may be heresy, butI don't believe a word you said. I will smite your Goddess with a sepulchral stein. All the yeast in the world will not make her rise again.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 10:47 PM

"Six people the media should have talked to last week about birth control"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/18/si...

loretta lynn -- "the pill"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 10:42 PM

OKR,

I have no fear of your pagan Gods and Goddesses.

I have been saved by the Grace of Yasigi who sent Her only begotten daughter to die in a vat of beer for our sins. Her name is Jeebus and Jeebus was drowned in a vat of beer by the Romans and rose from the dead on the 3rd day. She died so we could have salvation.

Your pagan Gods cannot save you. Only through the blood of Jeebus can you be truly saved.

Your entire beer-drinking afterlife depends on it OKR.

Its time you get right with Jeebus.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 9:35 PM

You have soiled yourself as you shame others respectfully quaffed beliefs. May you drown in a vat of Gluek.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 8:49 PM

I will drink a few beers to the Goddess on behalf of your beer-drinking salvation OKR.

No need to thank me. I am happy to do it.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 6:53 PM

Oh OKR,

You got sucked in by the Ninkaiathlics.

They got to you.

They think the Beer-God's top temple is in the Middle East.

Lol, what fools.

They don't worship a Beer-Goddess, they worship the leader of that "cult" -- the Pop. If the Ninkiathlics had their way she would be working like a slave doing little more than making beer for other Gods.

Yet it is clearly stated in the King Dogon Bible, "the Lb will departith no wisdom to the non-believer nor will he getteth any beer from Yasigi."

What more evidence do you want?

How about this passage from the KDB, Beerguzzler, 3, 72: "...and behold she cometh with beer to quencheth the dry and parched and to bringth merriment to the heart and soul but beware the false prophets and false beer-makers who will try to darkeneth your heart and keepeth you from drinkingith beer."

Don't get sucked in by false idols mate.

Your entire beer-drinking afterlife depends upon it.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 6:45 PM

Gotta go, meeting some friends on this the original sabbath. A Red Rooster, and a pretzel. No trouble getting folks to that communion, and the neat thing is that if folks do it often enough, and in the proper volume they are absolutely committed forever. It is an intoxicating occasion. Bless St. Arnold.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 6:31 PM

I don't need Yasigi when I have Ninkasi, vessel of many of the same attributes in my group. There you go, you zealots, trying to push what is right for you, on to every body else. However Yasigi is in my group, which should keep us from trying to kill each other.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 5:53 PM

Look at it this way OKR,

If you were younger (lol) and at some local pub, safely within walking distance of your home, which would you prefer:

(1) To be served beer by some big fat, sweaty guy buy the name of Bubba?

or

(1) To be served beer by a beautiful, well-built beer-Goddess?

Do you see my point mate?

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 5:39 PM

Uh, OKR,

We Yasigians rarely, if ever evangelize, after all beer has a lure all its own. No evangelizing necessary really but...

I recommend you check out Yasigi's "attributes."

I think you may want to consider a re-think on your Beer God choice.

ALL HAIL YASIGI!!!

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 5:35 PM

Sounds like a very good Goddess NA. I don't know if I am up to one more personal religious search. So, maybe pantheism is best for me, though the Gods know that I respect your choice which is as valid as mine.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 5:30 PM

Beer God? Now this is where it really gets good. As when consuming the wondorous water of life we have choices. First of all we can choose pantheism, which I kind of favor when I feel vulnerable, and want to cover all possible bases. Or we can pick a favorite from among many, including Silenus, Dionysus, Osiris, et al. Note the message of the spiritual duplicating the physical reality. Abundance for the spirit, abundance for the body. Bless St. Arnold!

http://socyberty.com/folklore/10-ancient...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 5:26 PM

May I recommend a traditional Beer God?

I think I may have found our new Goddess.

Her name is Yasigi.

She is described as the "Well-endowed Goddess of Dancing, Beer and Masks."

Sounds perfect to me. She seems to be fully qualified and remember -- the level of evidence that supports out Goddess's existence is just as substantial as the level of evidence supporting the Jesus mythology -- and our Goddess is in the top 10 of Beer Gods.

ALL HAIL YASIGI!!!

http://www.godchecker.com/pantheon/afric...

http://socyberty.com/folklore/10-ancient...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 5:26 PM

Big Cat sounds tasty OKR.

I was stationed in Germany during my service to our Nation. I was there drinking as much German Beer as I could on behalf of America. I had the opportunity to taste quiet a few German beers, and when you consider the fact that almost all German towns have their own local beer brewery, that's a lot of beer.

And did I mention the German food? OMG!!! The Germans know food almost as well as they know beer.

I guess you could say that I have made my Beer Church pilgrimage to our version of Mecca, for indeed the Germans have perfected the art of beer.

I have a question though, maybe I just missed it, but does the Beer God have a name?

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 5:06 PM

Big Cat was cheap, and would slam you. Taste wasn't bad, a little heavier than beer which is as it should be. Bless Saint Arnold. http://www.beerchurch.com/index.php/beer...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 4:29 PM

yeah that's it OKR...no Aussies will drink it lol.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 4:23 PM

Beer Church??

Wow...consider me a believer!!

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 4:22 PM

You talkin about Foster's, News? (the Aussie export?)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 4:21 PM

OKR,

I never even heard of Big Cat malt liquor but it sounds like it may have had a bit of a kick to it.

Any beer named "Big Cat" just has to have a kick doesn't it? lol...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 4:20 PM

And before anyone protests that beer is off subject on the religion blog, I say not so. We are just wandering around the perimeter of Beer Church. ;) http://www.beerchurch.com/

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 4:19 PM

Falstaff, and Hamms, what a blast from the past, I've tripped, and fallen because of each of them.

Do any of you recall Big Cat malt liquor, red can with a leopard on it?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 4:11 PM

Oh and RT, speaking of Hams beer, that was my Dad's favorite back in the day. He always had a can of Hams in the fridge lol.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 3:49 PM

RT Australia exports a beer that tastes just like Falstaff and it comes in a huge can so 1 beer is usually plenty lol.

You can probably find a can of it at any liquor store. I happen to like it and I also enjoyed Falstaff. However, I should tell you that the Aussies call it their "export beer" because no self-respecting Aussie will touch it lol.

My favorite Beer here in OZ is a beer called "Tooheys Old." It tastes like Guinness but without the cascading bubbles. It has the same "kick" as Guinness too.

http://www.australianbeers.com/beers/too...

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 3:47 PM

How about a Falstaff or Hams? I drank both of those beers regularly over different times. Hams as I recall had somewhat of a sweet taste, and Falstaff had a very unique taste I'd like to try again for old time's sake :-)

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Feb 18, 2012, at 3:16 PM

LOL!!!!

That sounds pretty bad OKR...even the name makes me want to upchuck lol.

However, single-malt whiskey is always good. I happen to be partial to Scotch and while I prefer a single-malt of course, I have to admit the bottle in the office is a blend. On the positive side, it is imported from Scotland.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 4:46 PM

Gluek was nasty, though at about seventy cents a six pack who complains? IMO it was the result of just another case of corporate of an old family brewery (1964) and bastardizing the crafted product.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 4:38 PM

Actually News I just poured my self a shot of Jura, my favorite single malt whisky, respect it so much that I named my pup after it.

Liquor is quicker, and when you get to my age, quick, enhances the chances of conclusion. Just one mind you, sipped as if I have all the time in the world. Ah, grand illusion.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 4:27 PM

Schlitz...oh yeah, I remember Schlitz. Been there, done that.

Have you ever drank America's worst beer?

I know you are probably thinking I am referring to Blatz beer -- which is a terrible beer -- but nope, there is one worse.

Alpine Beer -- stay as far away from it as you can.

You would be better off drinking warm, soapy dishwater.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 4:22 PM

I wrote my last post as you were writing your last post. It seems we have arrived at the same conclusion independently. Not the first time huh brother?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 4:00 PM

Yup, and about three bottles of good stout is all I can handle these days. It is a mixed blessing. In my salad days I drank copiously, Schlitz was my starter beer. It cost me a lot to get to the same place I can today on three.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 3:57 PM

Oh and why 3?

Well...I have been conducting an experiment for the last 30 to 35 years now of what the exactly correct number of beers is right.

After all, 1 is good, 2 is better, 3 = fuzzy warm feeling, anything > 3 = not so fun anymore.

I have been imposing this limit on myself for quite a number of years now -- the 3 beer limit -- and it seems to work out well.

For one thing, I have options. I could drink 1 beer, and move on feeling refreshed. I could drink 2 beers and feel even more refreshed. Or I can go for the whole deal and drink 3 beers.

Of course I never drive after consuming even 1 beer -- another self-imposed limit, any amount of alcohol = absolutely no driving or getting in the drivers seat. That limit has worked out rather well too. Fortunately, here in OZ all the pubs will send a van to pick a person up and then return them home when they are done drinking, gambling, or whatever at the pub. So there is no need to drive.

So anyway, I have learned that 3 beers is just right.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 3:55 PM

Trust me mate, 3 stouts and the whole World is just fine...lol.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 3:46 PM

News I don't drink a lot of beer these days, but I do share your affinity for Guiness Stout. :)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 3:26 PM

"Atheist intolerance"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbjIYvXpv...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 3:09 PM

OKR,

Take a break buddy.

I had my break with my visit with the Ngemba Tribe in the Australian outback.

Now I am back on watch.

Listen, get yourself a few good, tasty beers -- I recommend Guinness Stout -- anyway get a few beers and kick back and relax. Stop and smell the roses for awhile.

Rest.

Relax.

Then when you are refreshed, come on back and bring your good sense with you.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 3:07 PM

Oh, in case anyone has further interest in the book, "The Evolution of Bruno Littlemore" at the following link is a short review. http://bnreview.barnesandnoble.com/t5/Re...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 2:35 PM

Dlkes I am glad that you were also exposed to the book "Honest To God". By the way, I am sorry I am so late in responding to your comment. I am still on my semi-hiatus as exhibited by the brevity of my comments at the moment.

Back to the book. I read it at a formative period in my life, and I am glad that I did. Funny how a book can effect different people differently. I think that book may have helped people solidify their believe in Christianity, but for me it made me feel comfortable with my budding secular humanism.

Their was a passage in it, forgive me, I do good to paraphrase it after all these years, that went something like this: Robinson, on berating "Christians" for their lack of living what they spoke said, I see more of the living spirit of God inside good hearted humanists than I do in many Christians. It was for me, a release from guilt over betraying my social environmental upbringing. I reasoned that to be good at heart is enough, and that I don't have to attribute it to a source, that maybe it is just an altruistic biological development, maybe not. Ultimately it does not matter, acts do matter. So there you have it.

Now this is as lengthy a comment as I care to write at the moment, so Cheetah please be patient, I am still pondering a short comment you wrote regarding labeling, and for the life of me to this point, can't make my response concise. ;)

I am reading a what I believe to be a really good book at the moment, and am really in to it.

"The Evolution of Bruno Littlemore", a first book by Benjamin Hale. It is offered by a publisher "Twelve" that only publishes twelve books a year, based on what they believe to be books of extraordinary moment. Thus far I tend to agree regarding this one.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 2:07 PM

"I'm A Tea [Partier] For Jesus"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvw...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:53 PM

RR,

It would seem you and Edward Current are in the same business of deciding who is and who isn't a real Christian.

You may enjoy this one.

"That Fake Christian Got Powned"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkXFYCKSv...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:41 PM

Oklahoma Reader

Well there certainly are some good people out there of every faith, but for some reason we sure do see a lot of Christians do a lot of real un-Christian things.

Take the Crusades for example, or the Christian concept of "Manifest Destiny" -- you know the idea that it was and is the duty of Christian Americans to kill, rape, and butcher brown-skinned people who live to the West of us? The one good Christian folks used to justify their genocide of Native Americans and the stealing of their land? Both are good examples why so many people get nervous when Christians are around.

I could actually provide a long list of the evil Christianity has wrought upon this Earth over the years here in this forum but I won't...yet. I figure the 2 I cited are reason enough...for now...to be nervous about at least the majority of Christianists.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:31 PM

"Responding To Deluded Atheists"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYsUKws_A...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:23 PM

Gotta add News that I tend to shy away from businesses that prominently display the fish, or cross, in their yellow pages ad. Far too many of them are wolves in sheep's clothing, that just use it to slaughter the lambs.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:15 PM

"I Hate Phony Christians!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkHarZHrW...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:13 PM

"A Christian's Guide To Sinning"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UtcJ4PdG...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:04 PM

"Real Christians" RR?

Lol so now you are in charge of defining who and who isn't a Christian?

That's mighty Christianist of you mate.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 12:39 PM

RT

The reason I check my valuables when Christianists are around is because there are so many Christians who have been convicted of serious crimes. Most convicts in prison are Christian and I could give you a huge list of prominent Christianists who have either gone down in disgrace or been convicted of some serious crimes or both. If it were not for the fact that so many Christians also happen to be criminals, I would not feel the need to be careful whenever there is a Christianist around me. But as it is now, I check to make sure my valuables are safe when a Christianist is anywhere near me.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 12:36 PM

rr3 re: your comment to me, "Okr I was just kidding you". Whether sarcastic, or straight on I found it funny. You know how it is with we Secular Humanists, love the spinner, hate the spin.

RT, don't think I commented on News "where my valuables are are at all times", believe that was SC, not that I would be hurting my rep.to steal credit for his work mind you, but he deserves it. Easy to see how you erred with all the alphabet soup, morphing, and shapeshifting that goes on here these days. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 12:33 PM

Smokin' Cheetah

Oh I wasn't confused about your point.

I just thought I would point out a few things you may have missed in your observation.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 12:05 PM

Such is the folly of man and of religion.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 12:02 PM

Unfortunately Cheetah, most religious folks just aren't as rational as you are. If they were they probably wouldn't be at church in the first place.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 8:41 AM

rr3yvo said:

"What proof do you have of that? You really don't know."

Gee, where have I heard that before?

Maybe he just had "faith" that they were "real" Christians.

Faith is all it takes is it not? Faith over facts? Who needs proof when you have faith?

I guess it works both ways doesn't it?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 7:48 AM

It makes me wonder news if any of the people you refer to were real Christians. What proof do you have of that? You really don't know. It seems the unbeliever always knows how a Christian should live and act. Do Christians make mistakes? Yes! I do everyday, does that make me a no good Christian? By your standards it probably does because the only examples you bring up are bad examples. It's like turning on the news and it is always bad news but we keep watching it. They will come as wolve's in sheep's clothing twisting scripture and speaking perverse things to get people to believe them. Is that you?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 6:15 AM

Okr I was just kidding you. Your comments are always uplifting and full of love. Thanks. As for taking my ball and going home why would I when I have the ball and home court advantage.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 5:45 AM

News: ""In fact, whenever I am around Christians, I make sure I know where my valuables are at all times."

OKR, that comment may sound bigoted, but in many ways reflects a legitimate feeling about the trustworthiness of extremely religious people. I've talked with bank lending officers who had to quit lending to seminary students because they had the highest rate of loan default... seems like their belief that god would somehow take care of everything justified them not making payments. I have a close friend who was sold an auto that the engine went out right after purchase from a retired preacher, and come to find out, they had put sawdust in the crank case to help it keep running long enough to sell it. That is just a few real life stories. At best, I see no reason to give extra trust to anyone just because they are "very religious". Extremely religious people often exhibit irrational behavior in other areas besides religion. Trustworthy is not a trait that comes to mind.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 5:34 AM

News: "That is difficult to gage at best. The best answer is the probability that there may be a God is greater than zero."

Come on News, I think that is a copout answer. Give it your best shot. What chance do you put on there actually NOT being a dog (whoops, dyslexia)? Here is my guess... 99.99999999% - so, does that make me an agnostic?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 5:21 AM

News, that Bill Hicks video clip was hilarious. What did you think of it RR3?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 5:12 AM

News: "Can you imagine a White House with Rick Santorum's finger on the "Button?'

It was scary enough with Bush. But Santorum for sure believes in the revelation. How about his stance on birth control? Did you see the GOP's committee testimony on health issues with all the clergy and not one single woman on the panel? How long can this insanity last? I hope this craziness gets enough bad taste in people's mouths that we get a majority of Dems back in office for a long time and perhaps we can finally address universal health (should be God's given right, right?) and fair taxation. I predict the first woman President to be Elizabeth Warren, someone I've been admiring for several years. What a wonderful combination of intelligence and compassion. Yes, political decisions ARE related to religion, and that is trying to keep it out of politics!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 5:11 AM

"Let's All Pray For Armageddon"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oK-dRXKm...

"I Built A Prayer Amplifier"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvM-6iiCF...

"PrayerMAX 5000 Commercial"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVUfLJVSd...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 2:12 AM

"Tea Party Jesus"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=end...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 1:51 AM

Can you imagine a White House with Rick Santorum's finger on the "Button?'

All of a sudden its not funny anymore.

Thank goodness I live in a non-nuclear country on a non-nuclear Continent, surrounded by oceans, and far away from America.

Good luck mates.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 12:56 AM

Funny news.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 12:21 AM

OKR

As you know, sometimes the best points are made with comedy/

"Bill Hicks roasts Christian Fundamentalists...Classic!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq4Srd0P2...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 11:06 PM

Shoulda said, All it takes is a seed of truth at the core of a comic comment to turn buffoonery to sophisticated comedy.

I'll split my own hairs thank you. :)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 10:41 PM

The thought occurs to me that all it takes is a seed of truth at the core of a comment to turn buffoonery to comedy. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 10:36 PM

Oh and SC...

Historically in the United States, companies and especially corporations, have traditionally urged their employees to vote for a particular candidate, a party, and suggested the vote their employees should make on other election matters.

Your statement made it sound like that never happens lol lol lol...

It happens...it happens a lot. Especially if you work for Walmart (which most Americans probably do judging by the low income levels there).

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 10:14 PM

cheetah,

You don't think church's intentionally influence how people vote? Maybe you need a reality check as well.

We have generations of Americans and religious people across the globe who are aren't equipped to deal with reality.

They are raised since birth with delusion, fairy tales and reliance on a mystical man in the sky. It's Santa Clause for grown ups only the stakes are much, much higher.

They are a politcal force by proxy and we pay them to do it. BTW I haven't seen any for profit,organized groups of janitors making demands about womens reproductive rights or advocating for the denial of civil liberties based on a person's sexual preference around lately. Show me one and I'll concede your point.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 8:20 PM

"The Most Amazing Bible Passages Ever!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=end...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 6:46 PM

"If Jesus Ran For President..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ1L4eeu5...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 6:40 PM

CHRISTIANISTS...LISTEN UP AND LISTEN UP WELL...

"Get Educated About Homosexuality"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=PSQS...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 5:27 PM

Yeah and we all know there are just as many janitors as there are Christians! And of course all janitors worship their employer no matter where the handout came from (from conservative President George Bush and John Q. Taxpayer).

Garbage in/garbage out.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 5:19 PM

"If Jesus was a Conservative"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkKPtUywY...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 5:16 PM

Hey how about idea?.

I call it the "Manna From Heaven" Tax approach.

We tax Church income and property BUT we allow Christianists to make unlimited, individual donations to any 1% millionaire/billionaire of their choice and allow a 100% deduction for the amount of the donation from their personal income liability, and with a corresponding reduction in the Bush Tax breaks to the top 1%. If, for example, a Christianist donates $10 to his or her favorite 1%er, we reduce the 1%er's tax breaks by $10. This way the rich will get their money directly from their supporters rather than from John Q. Taxpayer. Sure the Churches will have do get by on less revenues, but at least the Tea Party Christianists can get all their money directly to the folks they think are job creators -- but are not job creators -- and prove their loyalty and support to the top !%.

Problem solved!

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 4:51 PM

dlkes,

When I say that the church has a vote, what I mean by that is to this very day, women still have to fight for thier own reproductive rights, contraception is still a huge debacle, and right now, in the good ole' USA, the land of the free, home of the brave, flag wavin', red white and blue, gun totin', consitutional democracy, someone with a sexual nature in which the "church" does not agree has to fight every day for simple equality. Not special treatment, but simple equality. It's 2012. We have much more pressing issues to deal with yet we are still mired in these very simple, very personal issues. Why is that?

What is the driving force behind all of that? That's right, it's the church. So don't tell me the church doesn't have a vote. They don't need a vote because they got folks like you.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 4:42 PM

dlkes

The church does get a vote. By proxy, by you

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 4:18 PM

"A Universe From Nothing" - Lawrence Krauss, with intro by Richard Dawkins.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaGktVQd...

For those not familiar with the scientific evidence which confirms that not only does something come from nothing (nothingness is very unstable, btw), but it occurs continuously through our the Universe.

Of course if you don't watch it, you will never hear about the evidence, who discovered it, when it was discovered, how it was discovered, and why it is fact.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 3:49 PM

WTF.

I agree 100% that the Churches should be paying taxes -- especially now with tax revenues falling fast as a result of enormous tax-cuts given to the wealthiest 1% by the Christianist right-wing in Congress.

However, without question, it will take a Constitutional Amendment to do it. That takes a long time for ratification -- if it gets ratified at all. We both know the likelihood of passing such an amendment to the Constitution is nearly impossible given the level of religious delusion in the USA.

I agree with you. I would support such an amendment, but I just think there are far too many deluded, religious wackos out there to ever even hope for such a thing to occur successfully.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 3:26 PM

WTF, What if we looked at it from another view point? Every American has a right to voice their opinion and their conscious. This includes Christians, Agnostics, etc. I pay taxes(Believe me I pay taxes). I get to vote as I choose. Everyone in my congregation is in the same boat. They pay taxes and they vote. The church itself is tax exempt. The church itself does not get to vote. Only the tax paying members do. Respectfully,

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 3:08 PM

dlkcs

I am not the one making the extraordinary claims.

You are the one making the claims.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Prove your claim or sit down.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 3:07 PM

Smokin' I still like your thought process! And thank you for your appreciation, but I appreciate people who give constructive as opposed to destructive criticism when I begin to go overboard. I often need that.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 3:02 PM

OKR, Hope you'll be back soon. I hate to be the only one with our particular brand of humor. :)

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 2:57 PM

News, You have yet to prove anything to me, so does the same go for you? Prove it or sit down? And if that were the case wouldn't everyone here have to sit down becuase no one has proven anything to anyone? Of course it is easier for me to sit and type. ;)

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 2:55 PM

rr3yv0

Nonsense.

Prove it or sit down.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 2:38 PM

Good to see your nastiness back on the blog rr3, I thought that you may have also taken your ball, and ran home. :)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 2:12 PM

rr3yvo,

Naturally you are free to believe as you wish but must we, as taxpayers, contintue to be forced to subsidize your delusion?

Amercian churches rake in billions a year on the gullible and yet they are tax exempt. But that's not enough for them, is it?

People complain about the govt. being in thier business. Well, you might first want to take a look at the church.

The church wants to have a say in or even enact legilsation that will effect the most personal decisions a person can make all while remaining tax exempt. Does no one see whats wrong with this picture?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 12:54 PM

Okr I am surprised that you can still get your arm back far enough to pat yourself on the back.lol

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 12:37 PM

SC and DLKCS I just have to shout an 'AMEN' to you both. Superbly expressed and right on the money. We don't have to face spiritual uncertainty for when we leave this world we have a future.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 12:35 PM

Hey folks I have seen your posts directed my way, and intend to answer soon. Good posts!

I just need to take a break. That stint as Earl, eastwood I,II, and OKR has plumb wore me slick. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 11:32 AM

News, Just as you say I have no proof to prove my points, I can turn the tables back to you with your declaration of Jesus being homosexual. Oh, you have circumstantial evidence, but I have been on a jury before where that was shown not to prove a thing. While I will give you my answers and share my scripture knowledge (you know the Bible that you said you took literally), unlike you I have no need to prove what I know. You see I have had my doubts in the past, done my research both scientific and Biblical, and came to my own conclusions just as you have come to your own. Which is why I intially stated that we would need to agree to disagree because I understand that you are also secure in your conclusions. As we are both secure in our conclusions we have come to through our own research we will not come to an agreement beyond agreeing to disagree. Respectfully,

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 16, 2012, at 8:48 AM

"Pelosi backs marriage equality for official DNC platform"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/15/pe...

This is the kind of fresh, progressive approach we need in America. New ideas that move us closer to being a better, fairer, and just society.

It sure beats the tax-dollar-wasting Republicans who are wasting the People's time and money with frivolous legislation that has already been struck down by the High Court -- numerous times.

CONSERVATIVES, STOP WASTING TAX-PAYERS HARD EARNED DOLLARS TRYING TO LEGISLATE YOUR RELIGION!!!

"Outright abortion ban introduced to Iowa House"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/15/ou...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 5:23 PM

"Drug bust at Christian university nets 17 students"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/15/dr...

17 hard drug dealers at one school...that was mighty Christian of them.

Oh well, I am not surprised when I read this sort of thing about Christianists.

In fact, whenever I am around Christians, I make sure I know where my valuables are at all times.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 4:38 PM

If you have no evidence to support your position, Dlkes, the you have nothing but empty statements.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 2:59 PM

dlkcs

Prove it.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 2:57 PM

Smokin'

I like your thought process. I have to also say that I find myself sometimes guilty of being the one to want to label.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 11:18 AM

WTF, You know how to use it? :)

No, I don't see any absurdity in what I know and believe. Do you see abusrdity in your knowledge and/or beliefs?

-- Posted by dlkcs on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 9:45 AM

dlkes,

Best leave the sarcasm to those of us who know how to use it. (Pun intended).

So, after wrting all that you see no absurdity in anything that you are saying?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 9:31 AM

We keep sticking with the four gospels as the only place where homosexuality might have been spoken against. I wonder why? Jesus is part of the Trinity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. They are part of the same being. Homosexuality is listed as a sin in many places in the Bible which I understand that some people read "literally". Sodom and Gomorrah were even destroyed because of it. So if God said it in even one place in the Bible, it would be considered a sin. Circumstantial evidence keeps being brought up, but I have yet to see anywhere that Jesus actaully said, "Oh, we're removing homosexuality as a sin because I've decided it's the greatest." (Sorry, sarcasm at it's worst.)

As for Jesus breaking the rules of the day. Yes, He did that. In fact, He healed on the Sabbath and was therefore in violation of working on the Sabbath according to the priests. So what shall we list Him as for breaking that rule? (Oops, there's that sarcasm again!)

As for telling me what or who to vote for (politics), that is another forum all together. But my statement will be that I have been given the right by being born in America to freely choose how I vote without being told what I have to do. Just as you being born in America has given you religious freedom.

Jesus did die many years ago. That is, His earthly body died, not God the Son. But He rose on the third day. You will find that in your literal King James Version. By rising from the dead He conquered death and the grave which is why I have the assurance that I WILL be going to heaven and I do have a relationship with God the Ftaher, Son and Holy Ghost! Amen and Amen!

-- Posted by dlkcs on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 8:24 AM

OKR,

You forgot the Christianistas.

Actually Christianist is a term used to describe the militarist, organized terrorist wing of Christianity as well as those Christians who believe in creating a theocracy in the USA and in Europe. I wish I could take credit for coming up with the term...but I can't. It was coined by someone else, long ago.

Here is a list of some of the Christianists past operatives:

"Scott Roeder convicted of murdering abortion doctor George Tiller"

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/29/...

"Norway killer Anders Behring Breivik will undergo new psychiatric exam"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...

Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City Bombing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McV...

Terry Nichols, the Oklahoma City Bombing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Nicho...

Eric Robert Rudolph

"...responsible for a series of bombings across the southern United States between 1996 and 1998, which killed two people and injured at least 150 others in the name of an anti-abortion and anti-gay agenda."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert...

Charles Barbee

Robert Berry

Jay Merrell

October 8, 1996

"...two bank robberies and bombings at the two banks, a Spokane newspaper and a Planned Parenthood office."

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/pu...

Well the list goes on and on.

Now you know who the Christianists are.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 4:46 AM

Good evening my good friend. Agreed. It is likely that we have not had Christianists among us. Such wouldn't bother with any thing this extraneous.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 1:21 AM

Post script: There is one other group that I consider to be either a subcategory of, or in the first category, Christians. Others would not think so because fellowship is absent from their tradition, though they practice each of the other things I mentioned in the Christian category. They are the good folks who just haven't been able to find a Christian congregation with which they feel comfortable. They may also waver toward Deism from time to time, but are really not comfortable without Jesus as their leader. Perhaps they should just be considered solitary Christians. It might not be overcrowding to also place certain devout hermits, and ascetics in this subcategory.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 1:09 AM

I am wondering if Christians are in a different sort of triune as well as the primary triune.

By that I mean a thre way split of Christians that may be apparent to others; Christians, Christianists, and Christianistas.

The first; Christians, are those strong in their faith, devoted to living their lives as closely as possible to the model provided by Jesus, with emphasis on good works, fellowship in Christ, and the well being of those about whom Jesus spoke with greater concern. The Golden Rule is prominent in their thoughts, and actions. They are often first thought of as wonderful people, and then as Christians. They are admired, and respected by others of all faiths, as well as those of no faith.

The second; Christianists, are those who make a point to let all know they are church goers, and enjoy buying new clothes to wear to church. God is a Sunday sort of thing. They seldom miss a Sunday service, but seldom participate in the good works, or outreach projects of their congregation toward the needy, though they may chip in a few bucks extra to defray costs of such projects. They are quick to say God Bless, and just as quick to slip away, hiding to enjoy sinning.

The third; Christianistas, are those who are a bit paranoid about all who are different from them. At the same time they dwell on fear of the wrathful authority of God the Father, more than they contemplate the gentleness of Jesus. Their children are more likely to sleep on their stomachs with the lights on because their buttocks are sore, and they fear the dark. They take every word of the Bible literally, and read it as if the awesome Lord is scowling over their shoulder. They run into the streets screaming of God's threats. They believe the end is near, and are smug in their belief that the Devil will soon have all excepting kindred believers. In the interim they insist that government must be administered upon direct instruction from God to control the harming sins of the unwashed. Many are militant in these endeavors. Their first response when believing, rightfully, or wrongly that another nation is threatening us, is war with the purpose of destroying the offending nation. They have little concern for the poor because it is their shiftless behavior, and sinning that keeps them down. Finally, they believe that material wealth is indicative of the favor of The Father, and that he bestows such riches on the righteous.

So, there you have it, do you think we have had one, or more in each category visit this blog?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 15, 2012, at 12:38 AM

**TYPO ALERT**

Make that "Christianist"

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 9:27 PM

"700 Club personality accused of stealing husband's porn"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/14/70...

Just your typical, everyday Chrisianist doing what she does best.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 9:26 PM

dlkes

Woody told me I should post this for you... posthumously lol.

"Jesus Christ"

Woody Guthrie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDS00Pnhk...

You might as well give it a listen. It sheds a bright light on Christianists.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 6:20 PM

dlkcs

Well your friends may have had a few dates you didn't know about...lol lol lol,

As to agreeing to disagree, well there is nothing to disagree about. We both know the facts:

1.) At no place in the 4 Gospels does Jesus condemn or even mention homosexuality.

2.) Jesus was extremely rare in the sense the despite the laws, customs, requirements, and expectations of his entire family and his entire community, and in complete violation of Jewish traditions (almost to the point of blasphemy), he remained single.

3.) Jesus surrounded himself with men and preferred the company of men in close quarters to that of women.

Those are facts. No need for agreement on these points. They are what they are and according to the Bible, those facts are correct.

As to your "relationship" with Jesus, that is your imaginary friend. You have never met him, you have never hugged him or kissed him, you have never even heard his voice and I do mean physically. You imagine he exists, but you have no evidence he is alive. He died dear. He died 2000 years ago and he is currently serving as dust in the Middle East.

So stop treating our gay citizens as if they were 2nd class citizens and don't deserve to have the same rights as everyone else. Stop expecting us, the American People, to allow straight people special marriage privileges.

Stop doing the wrong thing.

Start doing the right thing.

Please get with the program and stop your immoral discrimination against gay people. We need only one marriage law -- 2 single adults who love each other and want to share their love and their lives together as a married couple. No 2 adults get any special privileges. In compliance with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Ammendment, the law applies equally to everyone. And please keep your religion out of our secular laws.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 5:25 PM

News,

I can't wait until I speak with my friends and tell them about how I have learned that they are closet homosexuals instead of people who dated in high school, college, and beyond until they felt that God was calling them to a life of celibacy. Better yet I'll probably have them read this forum. I'm not saying people can't be closet homosexuals what I'm pointing out here is that you feel you have a better grasp on my friends than I do.

As for Jesus we will agree to disagree. You have your beliefs about Him, and I have my relationship with Him.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 5:05 PM

dlkcs

No what I meant was that before Ted got caught using drugs and having sex with a male prostitute, he seemed every bit the kind of folks you described "people you know" as. And you certainly didn't know Ted was gay and a drug addict...till he got caught.

You think you have straight friends who have forsaken marital relationships in order to devote their lives to Jesus -- despite the fact that most preachers are in fact married with the exception of the Catholic Priests (oh except for South America where Catholic Priests revolted and started openly marrying while Rome conveniently turned its head the other way -- the practice continues to this day in South America).

I think you have no idea if they are straight or not. Your friends may claim to be straight but are in fact avoiding marriage and the opposite sex because they are in fact only interested in partners of their own sex.

You didn't know about Ted before he got busted and you don't really know your friends' real personal preferences either.

Closeted homosexuality -- one of the major characteristics of Homophobia -- occurs a great deal within the Christianist Community and it is just that -- closeted so you won't know.

In the same sense, you have no idea what Jesus' sexual preference was nor do you know what his views on homosexuality were since he never spoke about homosexuality. Clearly, he did not condemn homosexuality any place in the Gospels. And I sure don't remember reading in the Bible anyplace where he says a straight person's love is a good love but a gay person's love is a bad love. The Jesus I read about in my King James Version Bible seemed to feel all love was good love.

Wouldn't the World be a much better place if Christianists would follow his lead?

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 4:30 PM

OKR, It was a favorite of a professor of mine in Bible college believe it or not. What he liked about it was that it challenged people to know what they believed, and why they believed it, to never take things for granted, but to be sure of the whats and whys of your belief. He also liked that it pointed out that while traditions have their place, they don't, if they are not improving your relationship with the Lord, but instead detracting from it.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 4:05 PM

As to the "lots of people you know" -- I bet you don't know them nearly as well as you thought you did.

This is the phrase to which I was referring when I spoke of humans erring. You told me Ted had sinned, so that obviously meant the people I knew had to as well. :)

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 3:57 PM

News, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that he had to say the actual word. Talk about splitting hairs. I'm not interpreting, just reading. If you have children, I wonder if you ever let them get away with something because you did not say that exact thing was wrong.

And my reference to Jesus was Him being about his Father's business AND not having taken any of the fleshly aspects which would have meant He was not without sin and could not have died as the perfect sacriface for all of our sins. If you will remember sacrifaces in the Jewish culture had to be without spot or blemish for them to be acceptable in God's eyes. He did not come to fulfill the customs of the day, He came to be our Savior.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 3:52 PM

Almost a half century ago I read a new book by J. A. T. Robinson, "Honest To God". At the time I had fairly recently thrown off all the trappings of traditional, restrictive, Christianity. A friend, a former teacher of mine when in high school, gave me the book. She was Christian, and concerned that I had left the flock, and was lost. I did read it, and found it interesting. I still occasionally reflect on aspects of its content. It did not bring me back into the fold, but that is not to say that it would not be of benefit to some Christians who are looking for a way to remain in the church, be true to themselves, their diverging beliefs, and not a hypocrite.

I wonder if any others who post here have read it. Attached is a link to Wiki, not the best source, but it will give enough general info for one to see if there is a personal interest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honest_to_G...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 3:35 PM

dlkcs,

Again, I am not interested in your interpretation of the Bible. I can read just fine, and as I said, as a fundamentalist I only read the Bible literally.

If you want to interpret the Bible you are free to do so, but please, just because you want to interpret the Bible does not mean we all see things through your eyes.

That is why I stick with a literal interpretation of the Bible. Its direct and it means what it says. And no where in your quote or anywhere in the 4 Gospels does Jesus ever condemn or speak of homosexuality at all. Neither the word "homosexual" nor a description of the act appear anywhere in your quote. The quote says nothing of homosexuality and never once mentions it.

I would be happy to assist you with a literal interpretation of that quote, but frankly that quote has no relevance to the subject of Jesus and homosexualtiy which is the subject we are discussing now. If it did refer to homosexuality the word homosexuality or a description of the act would appear in the quote -- but they don't appear anywhere in the quote. Show me a quote where Jesus says homosexuality is a sin, is wrong, and that he does not approve of it.

As to humans erring, of course humans make mistakes. Lying to folk sure is a serious thing but I think its more likely intentional than an oversight. Ted knew all along he was gay. Yet everyday, like you, he condemned homosexuality. In fact he got rich condemning homosexuality and all the while he was a homosexual. That is a bit more than a mistake.

As to "people you know," none of them grew up in Israel, a a Jew, in the !st Century -- none, zip, zero. None of the "people you know" live in the culture Jesus did -- none, zip, zero. None of the "people you know" were required by law and custom to marry within a reasonable period after reaching the age of 12, as men were in Israel, circa 1st Century -- none, zip , zero. Also, please bear in mind that, then as now, there was and is no prohibition to a Rabbi taking a wife. Certainly having his wife with him while he Preached would not have been anything unusual in Israel then or now. Clearly he did bring his Mom and his female friend, Mary Magdalene with him so apparently bringing his wife with him would have been no problem at all. So I am afraid you comparisons of "people you know" and Jesus are a lot like trying to compare apples and oranges -- not the same thing at all.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 2:26 PM

And I never said everyone was perfect. We are all humans and some do fail. But because some fail, you want to say they all do. That's like saying that because one person on this blog professes to be a Christian, then we must believe that all are.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 2:03 PM

No He did not use the word homosexuality. What he said was that man and woman were created by God, and that a man shall leave his parents and cleave to his wife. He did not say his wife or significant other. I didn't realize I was translating it for anyone. I assumed people reading it could understand what he said on their own. My mistake. It doesn't really lend itself to interpretation. It appears like pretty straight talk to me.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 2:00 PM

dlkcs

In your Bible quote it says nothing regarding homosexuality.

I don't see that word anywhere in there nor does it mention it.

I am not interested in your interpretation of what the quote you posted means. As a fundamentalist, I only believe in a literal translation of the Bible.

Your quote does not mention homosexuality at all.

As to the "lots of people you know" -- I bet you don't know them nearly as well as you thought you did.

"The Preacher and The Prostitute"

"Evangelical Leader Ted Haggard's Confession of 'Sexual Immorality' With a Male Masseur Rocks His 14,000-member Flock-And His Wife, Gayle"

http://www.people.com/people/archive/art...

"Disgraced pastor Haggard facing new sex allegations"

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-27/justi...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 1:34 PM

OKR, I'm sorry to be so good. I'll try harder to be more of a problem child. :) But honestly feel free to "get in my face". I will reply, but I can't say I will be able to get upset. It's just not in my nature, although my staff might say otherwise.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 1:31 PM

Well Nana I hope he comes back, in whatever guise. I can hardly bring myself to pummel rr3 any more. Dogged as he is, which I admire, we have been at it so long it has become a daily deja vu. And Dlkes you are no fun at all, I like you, and what you represent too much to really get in your face. :)

On the other hand I would be ecstatic if say, an intelligent practicing Buddhist, Taoist, or whatever would join the fray, though I doubt there wil be one who ever meander this path. Now there is an incarnation that eastwood might like to try next. Or maybe I need to go walkabout as News did, and reappear as a newbie. News are you SURE that you weren't eastwood? ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 1:21 PM

Thanks for your comment RT. I am glad you enjoy my posts as much as I do yours.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 1:02 PM

I believe he is considering doing just that WTF. We shall see.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 12:34 PM

Did eastwood take his ball and go home?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 11:10 AM

To eastwood

As you consider whether to continue posting on this blog please take my post on Mon. 2-13 @4:46pm into your reflections.

I for one hope that you continue to post. Your comments have caused me to dig deeper to support my beliefs. You have enlivened the discussion on this blog as evidenced by the increase in the number of posts since your arrival here.

As to the upside of the downside of you posting here; You have irritated me at times, which has made me better able to learn to exercise self control. LOL it has not been easy at times. You may not believe it, but more than once, I have ripped off an angry post to you, only to flag it for eradication because I thought it mean spirited. You have frustrated me to no end because of what I believe to be your unbending, unchanging, closed mind. It has made me try harder to write more persuasively, and to think of, and reflect upon religious questions that may cause even you, a moment of self critical examination of your position. Enough of that, this post is not at heart intended as criticism, and I will save that for you should you return.

There are other considerations which I am sure you are weighing, but I will state them anyway. You once stated something to this effect; that you thought the discourse on this blog was more effective than a formal apologia, and that you and your associates had coffee discussions of this blog's content. You will be leaving your brother rr3 alone with the wolves. I am certain that he has enjoyed standing aside, watching you, like himself on steroids, rip into all us heathens. He is stalwart, but how long can he stand alone against we fiends? ;)

Then there is Dlkes, good hearted, well spoken, but appreciative of your support. Now how's that gonna be for a guilt trip to accompany your ruminations.

Any way, I'll be waiting if you decide to bring your junk back in here, and I will give no quarter, for that truly, would be disrespectful to you. Good luck to you, whatever choice you make.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 10:43 AM

Jesus never preached against homosexuals.

Jesus words: Matthew 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh? So they are no longer two, but one flesh." Sounds like He set a pretty clear picture concerning relations being between a male and a female.

Jesus was more concerned with being about His Father's business than satisfying His own fleshly desires. He also had to keep Himself pure to be the ultimate, perfect sacriface for our sins.

I have known several ministers, Christian comedians, etc. who chose to be about their Father's business instead of marrying or even dating. They felt it was God's choice for them, and they were comfortable with it.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 8:30 AM

I have never said anything about putting homosexuals down. I simply said I am uncomfortable with it. Shock, shock. I work with, and have friends who are gay. I have cousins who are gay. I am honest about my feelings on the issue, but I do not treat them any different than I do my friends who choose to drink, sleep around with several women, etc. I let them know my stand, and then choose to see them as people God created, just as He created me. Now how can I put down or mistreat someone that God made. My point once again was about equal tolerance and non tolerance of all 'religions and beliefs.'

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 8:23 AM

News, just looking for a more credible source. You could have spared us all the details though, social status and wealth add no credence to this particular debate...in fact you reminded me of Earl for a minute.

But thank you for your input, I'm happy to know someone here has real life experience.

-- Posted by mtownres on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 7:55 AM

dlkcs

If the Bible is correct Jesus was behaving rather oddly in terms of his being Jewish and living in Israel circa 1st century.

1.) He was still unmarried at the age of 30. Such was unheard of in Israel at that time. It just didn't happen. All Jewish men --even those that were secretly gay (or do you think there were no gay men at all anywhere in Israel back then?) were strongly pressured to marry soon after their 12th birthday. Still being single at 20 years old would have been odd for a man in that culture, but 30 and single was unheard of and strongly discouraged.

Yet despite his own culture and the enormous pressure to conform to the standards of that culture, he remained single.

2.) Jesus surrounded himself with other men -- 12 of them to be exact. And other than his Mother and Mary Madeline, he seems to have not associated very much with women at all. This is a strong indication that he preferred to be with other men almost all the time, and again we know he did surround himself with not just a few but 12 men.

3.) Jesus never once condemned homosexuality. Not one time does he say homosexuality is wrong, or a sin, or forbidden by God. Odd that, how he seemed not to care at all about something that seems to enrage Christianists.

Was Jesus a homosexual?

Who knows?

I doubt we will ever know and even more, I can't see how it would matter.

We certainly have no reason to believe he was opposed to homosexuality since he never makes any specific mention of it.

We also do have some indications that he certainly preferred the fellowship of men only...other than his Mom and a woman who was probably like a sister to him.

Do you know a lot of straight guys who make no effort to even meet women, turn away from women, and seem happiest when surrounded by men? If you do,...well,...maybe you think they are straight but....(lol)

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 3:36 AM

RationalThinker

That is difficult to gage at best. The best answer is the probability that there may be a God is greater than zero.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 2:59 AM

OKR, your post: Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 3:32 PM to EW and "his friend" could not have been more accurate and thoughtful. Fantastic post!!!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 2:29 AM

Dlkes: "The slander issue was against Jesus, not myself."

Kind of hard to slander someone who arguably might never have existed. Besides, to consider it slander to question if someone is homosexual is putting a negative connotation on homosexuals. It would be like me accusing someone of being religious and them feeling slandered. On second thought, I might feel slandered if someone accused me of being religious :-) I see WTF already to this slander point to task.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 2:29 AM

News: "As an agnostic I don't rule out the possibility of the Universe being created by a God. It is still within the realm of possibilities though the probability is rather small. As an agnostic and a skeptic, I an unable to commit to atheism because that would require physical evidence that absolutely rules out any possibility of a God and there is no such evidence. Neither is there any evidence to support the existence of a God. Thus I remain skeptical and agnostic"

News, what percent chance of there being NO God would you put on your belief?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 2:28 AM

One last thing, that is unless some one riles this wicked old man late this evening. ;)

The bottom line is that the acceptance of Jesus Christ is ultimately because of faith. I know of no one that has truly come to Jesus because they logically thought it out, ain't gonna happen. Besides that the way I understand it, Jesus won't take you if you try to join the club that way.

So for Christians to join discussion on this blog they must have a different motivation, or motivations. I think I know what some of those are, but it is getting late. What do you think?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 14, 2012, at 12:00 AM

mtownres

My wife's best friend for over 35 years, Brian, one of my best friends also, and the best man at our wedding is very very openly and proudly gay.

He lives with his partner (husband) of 23 years, Graham, who is also a very close friend of ours.

We have had many discussions regarding gay marriage, gay partnerships, and he has detailed for me the difficulties of life for gay men here in Australia and in the United States (where he lived also for several years). It has been a painful life for him.

My favorite quote of Brian's, in this regard, goes something like this.

"A choice? Oh yeah I chose to be gay...right! I chose to live a life of being ostracized, ridiculed, discriminated against, and beaten. Yeah, I weighed all my options and picked that one."

I think Brian's statement speaks for itself.

Brian and Graham are both outstanding individuals. Both are very well educated and accomplished. Brian is a Head Teacher and supervises Arts, Music, and Drama education at one of Sydneys most prestigious girl's Catholic middle schools. Graham is the head of one of Sydneys largest building contractors. It keeps him pretty busy but that just comes with the position I guess.

They own a home in one of the most expensive and avant guarde suburbs of Sydney where they have shared their lives together, deeply in love with each other, for all these 23 years they have been living together as partners. They have done well in life, and they are happy despite the enormous mountains they have had to scale in their lives.

Interestingly enough, both grew up in working-class homes which were devoutly Christian. Both came way up the ladder the hard way -- they earned their success with hard work and dedication -- they had to work a lot harder than most straight folks to do it, as being openly gay creates barriers in life for many gay folks. But despite the difficulties homophobia has caused them in their lives, they still beat all the odds and reached high levels of success.

They both have made major and lasting contributions to the Sydney area, and they have been very loyal, dependable, and very close friends of ours for many years.

So, is there any special reason you asked?

-- Posted by news across on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 11:53 PM

I agree NanaDot that turning this conversation toward who has the better gay associations, and therefore the pedigree to talk knowingly about gays would be assinine, and counter productive.

I will say no more about that, wish now I hadn't said anything. Discerning people gay, or straight will know where I am coming from regardless. Same with anyone else who posts here.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 11:33 PM

mtownres, yes I have, on many occasions, discussed most social, political, and religious issues with many gay people. Their opinions are as diverse as those of any other group of folk in every way.

In my opinion though they have unique experiences in common because of their minority status, they have many more experiences, such as family, culture, and social class that make them diverse within their diversity.

I further believe that anyone who says gay people think this, or gay people think that, is furthering their isolation and stigmatization, as well as speaking from ignorance. For instance there are huge differences between Andrew Sullivan, and Gore Vidal, both political pundits, one to the left, one to the right. Such great gay writers as Tennessee Williams, Virginia Woolf, Truman Capote and Marcel Proust when compared assures the reader that the real diversity of these brilliant people is in their wonderful words.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 11:19 PM

Have any of you all actually talked with a gay person. Talked as in heart to heart, not a passing "hello" and awkward stare at Patricia's. Seems like these "facts" and "opinion" come from information no further than keyboard's length.

-- Posted by mtownres on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 9:28 PM

dlkes,

sure there are rules. they are what keep me from getting kicked off! :0

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 5:33 PM

One other thing in regard to this blog.

We discuss subjects here that go to the very essence of our individual beliefs. We each are unavoidably passionate about our beliefs, and defend them to our utmost. That is human nature.

None of us should look beyond each statement made by no matter whom, as anything other than that individuals natural response. Though it may appear at times that this statement, or that statement, is an attack on one, or another's beliefs, at heart it is not that. It remains at its core, that person's defense of deeply held beliefs. Each uses every strategy available to defend themselves. Included is the maxim that "a good offense is the best defense".

I for one, am more surprised that it does not become a shouting match, with emotions over ruling intellect being the constant. I further believe that we should all give each other, and give ourselves, a pat on the back for keeping this blog, with its volatile subject, temperate at least most of the time.

Thanks to each of you from me, for your expressions. They stimulate my mind, and give just a bit more meaning to my life as I join in this lively exchange with what are after all, broadly speaking, my brothers, sisters.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 4:46 PM

WTF, There are rules we are supposed to be following? :}

-- Posted by dlkcs on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 4:40 PM

WTF, That's like asking me to think about what if I were gay. I don't need to think about it because it isn't true, not even close. Secondly, as for being an insult: anything can be construed by anyone as an insult if they're looking to be insulted or for anything to validate their point.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 4:39 PM

Yeh Cheetah, LOL. Watcha think?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 3:46 PM

ew I have no way of knowing if your friend arrived at his opinion unassisted by you, or not. For that matter I don't even know if your friend exists, or is the product of a creative imagination. However, taking it just the way you presented it, your friend, like you assumes an awful lot.

No one on this blog has compared gay people to fruit flies, nor mice. You, and he make the blind assumption that someone, or someones here are trying to establish that gays are some sort of a lesser biological deviance. Quite the contrary in fact.

What I, and what I believe others are saying is that gayness is a biological adaptation, established by evolution. We are saying that homosexuality is a NORMAL state of biological being. We are saying that there is a certain minority of our species, as in over 1,500 other species that are homosexual. As we thankfully don't do the type of scientific experimentation necessary to prove that theory on humans, some of it is done on fruit flies, and mice. We are getting closer to proving it all the time. I think that the overwhelming majority of gay folk will cheer wildly when this important ongoing work establishes conclusively to most that the theory is correct.

Of course there will be those that will never believe it, no matter the preponderance of rational evidence. Creationists obviously will be at the head of that pack, as they have demonstrated over, and over that science be damned, if it says it in the Bible it is literally true. Undoubtably there will be a few gay people that hold with the creationists, probably from the same intellectual emotional space as Log Cabin Republicans, they will come from somewhere. After all we are a diverse species. Diversity rules!

By the way ew, I would personally appreciate it if you will give your friend a heads up as to this post. If he is your friend you owe it to him to let him know the reaction to "his" post, right?

Oh yes, one other thing, your "friend's" comments, "It seems that this little hick blog lacks that mutual respect you should all be ashamed" and "you guys need to come up to the city sometime and actually see life, orexperience it sometime instead of being so G--D---intellectual, or pretending to be mate."

What ignorant, assuming balderdash. You have no idea where any of us live. Columbia? Are you kidding me. I assure you that I am quite aware of "the life", and have likely lived in more cosmopolitan settings than you. Actually geographic location is irrelevant. The real backwaters are in the mind, and I hope you may be able to swim out one day.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 3:32 PM

eastwood,

Am I to gather from your posts that merely questioning your religious beliefs is considered by you to be caustic and callous?

This is a religion blog. Nowhere in the rules does it state that comments must in support of religion.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 2:53 PM

dlkes,

That's fine. But let's think for a moment about what if Jesus were gay? Would you stop loving him? Would he no longer be the son of god? To raise the question that Jesus may have been gay is said to be slanderous, could that be considered an insult to homosexuals?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 2:50 PM

WTF, Not complaining, making an observation about tolerance. Basically, was hoping someone would see that tolerance or intolerance occurs with everyone at some level.The slander issue was against Jesus, not myself. Just sayin'

-- Posted by dlkcs on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 2:30 PM

Btw,

You don't have to live in Marshall to post on this blog. Not everyone who posts here lives in this "hick" little town.

"His belief or lifestyle is as valid as anyones"

That is true so long as it doesn't infringe on someone elses. Sometimes it infringes in the form of legislation.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 2:24 PM

I need to post a disclaimer -

Though there is a diversity of personalities here, and though I might find some of the posts here as caustic and callous in the treatment of something as dear as one's religious beliefs, I've never held the whoe of the group with disgust, or hick.

I do consider and listen to John's advice, so I need to recheck my associations, and though we have entirely different domestic situations. I do value his and his friends advice.

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 2:14 PM

Nice try eastwood.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 2:12 PM

Just to let those who blog on the Marshall Democrat know. I drive a route that reguires deliveries to various restaurants and clubs in an around Columbia.

My friend(you call ew) and I had lunch together. I showed him some about using the internet on my phone and he had me pull up your blog. I had to show some of my clients of an "Alternative Lifestyle" the assumptions that some have made in the comparisons of fruit flies and mice.

I understand my friend practices a religion that does not condone my lifestyle or that of my friends, and his religious beliefs have such organizations as Exodus that have "brought my friends out" of their lifestyle.

We accept each others differences, and though we may disagree strongly we've never lowered ourselves to degrading his religious beliefs or my life choice - we just disagree but with mutual respect.

It seems that this little hick blog lacks that mutual respect, you all should be ashamed. His belief or lifestyle is as valid as anyones.

I showed this blog to my friends who have a lap top, they feel disgust with those that equate their choice (s) with mutations or brain damage. You guys need to come to the city sometime and actually see life, or experience it sometime instead of being so G--D--- intellectual, or pretending to be, mate.

I am encouraging e- to stop on this blog, there is just too much bickering and it really is beneath him to be here, he's shown us more acceptance than you have shown to rr3vyo, diks or anyone who expressess a faith, no matter how far out you think its out there.

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 2:02 PM

dkles,

I didn't say you said that. You were complaining about being attacked and slandered,

so I was asking you to consider how a homosexual must feel.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 1:53 PM

ND, You're right about me in that respect. I have stepped in front of one or two thrown punches for which I was called stupid. And I am fairly articulate, especially when provoked on another's behalf.... Sorry, but my approach wasn't about being against homosexuals. It was simply a measure of tolerance for all.

OKR, That's not what my father told me, but...:)

WTF, What did I say that was slanderous or even an attack on the homosexuals?

Smokin', :]

-- Posted by dlkcs on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 1:29 PM

"Not them just making assumptions since we all know what making assumptions does for you....."

Yep, we do. It opens a pathway to becoming a creationist. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 11:32 AM

Under attack.....slander.

Just think how the homosexual must feel.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 10:17 AM

ND, referring to homosexuality comments, and the "love the sinner" "hate the sin" comment that came after my post. And I'm not sure, but I think EW was just attempting to come to my defense after I knowingly opened the can of worms that I knew was lying there. What he doesn't know is I'm so used to those attacks that I don't even pay any attention to them. Same comments, different day. The only comment I do take exception to is when people call Jesus a homosexual. That to me is slander. I would like to see that "proof" that they are so big on asking for. Not them just making assumptions since we all know what making assumptions does for you.....

-- Posted by dlkcs on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 9:35 AM

And my point was just proven. All I had to do was mention one word, sit back and wait, and all the 'tolerant of religion' people have had a good old 'bashing' time. This is my point exactly. None of you know me personally, but you were very quick to cry homophobe and tell me there is no way I can hate the sin, but love the sinner. Interesting, and Christians are the only intolerant group. Tolerant of all religions. Hmmm

Oh and I have worked with many tourettes individuals who do not curse as they cry out or jerk due to no fault of their own. So I do not consider this a fair comparison.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 8:28 AM

I will say ew that your choice to use that as a comparable to homosexuality says a lot more about ignorance, and hatred than it does about homosexuality.Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:33 AM

Ignorance? OKR I believe you recently well demonstrated it. If there is "gene" for homosexual behavior - how would it be passed on?

The very act of homosexuality prevents the reproduction of offspring - therefore the gene wouldn't be passed on.

I haven't atleast suggestted that there is a mutation or genetic defect that is the inherit cause of this - as others have, and if it was a mutation, or defect then genetically it wouldn't be passed on -

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 6:45 AM

News, you didn't recoginize your link to can't touch this? Bahahahahahah!

I really like the way you go about thinking - the differences between the primate genetic composition and human genetic composition of 5% amounts to 150,000,000 DNA base pairs that are different between them primate and human, this is based on the Britten1 study.

A study by Gagneux, P. and Varki, A. 2001. 'Genetic differences between humans and great apes.' Mol Phylogenet Evol 18:2-13 Reveals that there are more than a 5% difference.

However a Study conducted while observing the Marshall Democrat News Blog may reveal that perhaps there are some humans with the brain capacity of the fruitfly, or atleast a sub-species of human, possibly achieveing the intelligence and the realtive genetic makeup of a common laboratory mouse......evolution in progress ....Bahahahahahaha!

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 13, 2012, at 6:39 AM

You bet WTF...we want all the tax breaks the other Churches get lol lol lol...

I found some inspirational videos I thought we all might enjoy. These inspirational videos are packed full of truths.

"Disclaimer for the Bible"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLEsj_f67...

"American Jesus"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaNOqDarn...

"Jesus I Will Survive"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJhOOQOhF...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:36 PM

News,

Sounds good, as long as we get a tax exemption.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:17 PM

"Test Your Faith-Vision"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HE79YwIm...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:15 PM

You know eastwood there is another thing that has been rattling around in my tired old head, that I just can't get figured out. I bet you are just the smart feller who can help out this old Okie.

If like you folks say, the earth is not more than a few thousand years old, how come there is all this evidence for an earth, and life on earth, more than one hundred thousand years old, and for the relationships between living things, and how come we were given the intelligence to reach those conclusions?

Some times questions are real hard to figure out, heck I think sometimes it is harder to do it cause I might be worried that I wouldn't like the answer I was afraid I was gonna come up with. However I'm willing to take my chances if that is the correct answer you come up with.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:10 PM

WTF,

Well said mate...dang well said!!

Oh and listen mate, I am interested in this Church of the Fantastic 4 thing. It sounds great to me!

If I have to worship a God or Gods, it or they might as well be cool and have style.

I hope their book will be a bit more consistent than the Christian Bible though, lol lol lol...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 10:27 PM

"Wow, you thought a Christian viewpoint about homsexuality was coarse and barbaric - we nly view it as free will, but you've labeled it as a "mutant" or "brain disorder". Might want to actually read some of the stuff you post - or better yet UNDERSTAND what you post. Right OKR?"

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 8:29 PM

Distortion, misrepresentation, misapprehension, muddled response, ah panic sets in. ROTFLMAO.

You can't answer my question that I have asked you four times can you eastwood? The field is mine eastwood, you are routed.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 10:22 PM

eastwood

Regarding the peer-reviewed science I referred you to, read the rest mate lol.

You have to pull up the pdf to get the full report lol lol lol...

and look eastwood, your video link doesn't work and I am finished discussing this topic with you. You will never accept facts. You will never accept anything that you believe is contrary to your religious beliefs. As long as you think something as important as your and your loved ones' salvation depends upon your belief in a God, Gods, ghosts, or ghoolies, nothing else matters -- not facts, not science, not truth, There is no point in our discussing this subject any further.

So as I said before, keep your religion out of our laws and don't discriminate in hiring, promotions, or in any other way single out folks you and your religion don't like and we will all get along just fine. Cross those lines and you will find yourself in a courtroom trying to protect what little wealth you have, and it won't be a court of opinion -- it will be the real deal with the power to award all that you now own to the person who's civil rights you violate based upon your religious views.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 10:21 PM

What part of this eastwood did YOU not understand?

(for the fourth time)

eastwood before we move to other topics of discussion lets take care of unfinished business. How our future discourse unwinds is to some degree predicated upon that. Below is what I asked, and have yet to get answer:

Why is there agreement among many different dating methods pointing to an old earth and life on earth for a long time? What I mean is; radioactivity, tree rings, ice cores, corals, supernovas - from astronomy, biology, physics, geology, chemistry and archeology? These methods are based on distinct fields of inquiry and are diverse, yet manage to arrive at quite similar dates.

Bear in mind that you can't answer this question by saying there is no proof of uniformity of radioactive decay, because the question is instead why all these different methods give the same answers?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:20 AM

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 10:08 PM

eastwood said:

"I'm given a little lecture about law 101 and I ask about accepting the rules of Evidence as set forth by the Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleaf - and i'm told that he isn't credible enough?"

No, he is not credible enough when it comes to the incredible, supernatural claims being made.

In a court of law dealing with reality I would say that he is more than credible but we are talking about the incredible so all bets are off.

Give me some actual evidence and maybe I'll consder it. You have no evidence, you have a book full of stories that is no different than that of Greek mythology, a children's fairy tale or even a Marvel comic book. I would like to start the "First Church of the Fantastic Four" or perhaps the "Assembly of Superman" church. I wonder if I could get a tax exemption? The only difference is that you have chosen to believe one of them. That doesn't make it true.

then you said:

" I mention the prophecies of the Bible in telling about the birth of Jesus - hundreds of years before the event - and dispite the mathmatical improbability of it being fulfilled - no comment"

I did comment but here it is again.

Now you speak of some prophecy that fortold the birth of Christ hundreds of years later. So what?

All they had to know was say that a baby would be born in the future. That's not much of a stretch now is it?

Your lashing out at us, demanding we give you answers because you cannot provide your own.

You demand we prove you wrong because you know in your heart you can't prove your right. Your lashing out because everything you believe is being questioned and slowly the chinks in your armor are being exposed. Your lashing out at us because perhaps for the first time in your life you have actaully had to think about these claims being made.

I suspect that up until know you have never really had to defend your faith and when you find yourself in that postition you have realized there is nothing there but words on a page

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 9:14 PM

Oh news,

about you and your "Scientific Reasoning" well.............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIHAkqCls... Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:46 PM

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 8:33 PM

Below is a synopsis of the quoted sites courtesy of News.

Wow, you compare a brain of a mouse and a fruitfly to that of a humans - (and both the fruit fly and mice had brain abnormalities) Nice......... well it may be a close correspondance to some human brains I'm thinking of.....

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 8:31 PM

Molecular regulation of sexual preference revealed by genetic studies of 5-HT in the brains of male mice

Yan Liu,Yun'ai Jiang,Yunxia Si,Ji-Young Kim,Zhou-Feng Chen& Yi Rao

Nature 472,95--99(07 April 2011)doi:10.1038/nature09822Received 12 August 2010 Accepted 14 January 2011 Published online 23 March 2011 Corrected online07 April 2011

Although the question of to whom a male directs his mating attempts.............Thirty-five minutes after the injection of the intermediate 5-hydroxytryptophan (5-HTP), which circumvented Tph2 to restore 5-HT to the wild-type level, adult Tph2 knockout mice also preferred females over males. These results indicate that 5-HT and serotonergic neurons in the adult brain regulate mammalian sexual preference

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v47... by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 4:35 PM

News - You've topped yourself! all three of the sites you've mentioned noted that of flies and mice those who demonstrated like preference for sex either was mutated or had chemical imbalances that rendered them that way.

Wow, you thought a Christian viewpoint about homsexuality was coarse and barbaric - we nly view it as free will, but you've labeled it as a "mutant" or "brain disorder". Might want to actually read some of the stuff you post - or better yet UNDERSTAND what you post. Right OKR?

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 8:29 PM

Sexual orientation in Drosophila is altered by the satori mutation in the sex-determination gene fruitless that encodes a zinc finger protein with a BTB domain.

H Ito, K Fujitani, K Usui, K Shimizu-Nishikawa, S Tanaka, and D Yamamoto

Yamamoto Behavior Genes Project, Exploratory Research for Advanced Technology (ERATO), Research Development Corporation of Japan, Tokyo, Japan.

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Abstract...........................

We suggest that fru functions downstream of tra in the sex-determination cascade in some neural cells and that inappropriate sexual development of these cells in the fru mutants results in altered sexual orientation of the fly

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 4:35 PM

THIS MUTATION RESULTED IN THE ALTERED SEXUAL ORIENTATION OF THE FLY. DUH! Mutation!

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 8:21 PM

For Fruit Flies, Gene Shift Tilts Sex Orientation

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL,

International Herald Tribune

Published: June 3, 2005

When the GENETICALLY ALTERED fruit fly was released into the observation chamber, it did what these breeders par excellence tend to do.

.........this case was not a male, but a female that researchers had artificially endowed with a single male-type gene.

GENETICALLY ALTERED -Jeez..........why not just put pants on it and call it a male?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/scienc...

Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 4:35 PM

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 8:12 PM

Oklahoma Reader

Oh yes you are very correct mate.

In addition, a sexual choice gene has been detected in peer-reviewed testing of both fruit flies and mice. Consequently, the evidence we now have leaves no question about it, the gene exists, and that homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is an inherited trait and is natural to the individual.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/scienc...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles...

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v47...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 4:35 PM

And for the rest of us...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kuaJ24O0...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 4:25 PM

Hey e,

I am posting this music video just for you mate.

I hope you enjoy it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIHAkqCls...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:46 PM

Just pointing out News what is pervasive in the animal kingdom, hence likely in the human portion of it, though many cultures, not all, drive it into hiding.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:44 PM

Oklahoma Reader

Yeah, lol, bi-sexuality never involves homosexuality lol lol lol...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:37 PM

However e,

If you want to see what happens when the Christianist model of intelligent design is scrutinized by a court of law, have a watch of this little flash from the past.

"Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial 1 - PBS Nova"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuM1WC52-...

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:36 PM

News I think the case that must be considered is that Jesus was perhaps bisexual, rather than homosexual. ND tipped me to this writer when you were on your mini walkabout. I think you will find the content interesting. http://www.secretsofmarymagdalene.com/SO...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:24 PM

Oh, and e, one more thing.

The level of evidence in a court of law is far less than that required for positive hypothesis, the scientific method, or peer review.

These are 2 completely different arenas.

In civil law the evidence need go only to a level described as a "preponderance of the evidence."

In criminal law the evidence need go only to a level of "reasonable doubt."

But in science the hypothesis must be a positive hypothesis or the hypothesis is discarded as invalid. In science either the hypothesis tested to be 100% correct or it did not. There is no gray area.

Thus, when it comes to science, as Dr. Sagan said,

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

So far the Christianist "model" has zero positive hypothesis, zero scientifically derived evidence, and zero peer-review success.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:19 PM

e,

Oh and no that does not make them or me hypocrites.

I enjoy the social fellowship and being a member of the congregation allows me to assist in humanitarian programs our church is involved in.

I don't know how you think you can find hypocrisy in that mate.

As an agnostic I don't rule out the possibility of the Universe being created by a God. It is still within the realm of possibilities though the probability is rather small. As an agnostic and a skeptic, I an unable to commit to atheism because that would require physical evidence that absolutely rules out any possibility of a God and there is no such evidence. Neither is there any evidence to support the existence of a God. Thus I remain skeptical and agnostic.

But best of all mate, the Anglican Church, unlike the Catholics and the evangelicals, does not ignore or deny that Jesus never once condemned homosexuality. In addition, the Anglican Church fully and publically acknowledges that the evolutionary model is well supported by the evidence and so much so that they recognize the evolutionary model as a fact.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 2:48 PM

eastwood

Yes the Congregation I am a member of in Sydney is fully aware I am an agnostic. I have not now nor have I ever made any secret of that. Fortunately, unlike the American evangelicals, the Anglican Church has a big umbrella and all people are welcome including agnostics like me.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 2:34 PM

A comment posted here earlier today was a long quote of published material (attribution included. Thanks!). I would recommend posting a brief summary with a link in cases like this. Thanks!

http://thebible.net/modules.php?name=Rea...

-- Posted by Eric Crump on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 1:33 PM

;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:58 AM

Ok Reader,

Good point. Organized religion thrives on being exclusionary. They have to have a boogie-man. They have to find a physical manifestation for Satan because not only does it further thier cause it fills the collection plate.

Religion is a business and business is good because it relies on the gullibily of the masses and there will never be a shortage of that. If we could only figure out a way to run our cars on that gullibility we could finally get something positive from it.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:54 AM

eastwood: " Are there people born with the ability to kill?

Yes, but do they act on it. No."

I will say ew that your choice to use that as a comparable to homosexuality says a lot more about ignorance, and hatred than it does about homosexuality.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:33 AM

eastwood before we move to other topics of discussion lets take care of unfinished business. How our future discourse unwinds is to some degree predicated upon that. Below is what I asked, and have yet to get answer:

Why is there agreement among many different dating methods pointing to an old earth and life on earth for a long time? What I mean is; radioactivity, tree rings, ice cores, corals, supernovas - from astronomy, biology, physics, geology, chemistry and archeology? These methods are based on distinct fields of inquiry and are diverse, yet manage to arrive at quite similar dates.

Bear in mind that you can't answer this question by saying there is no proof of uniformity of radioactive decay, because the question is instead why all these different methods give the same answers?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 11:20 AM

eastwood said:

"I'm given a little lecture about law 101 and I ask about accepting the rules of Evidence as set forth by the Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleaf - and i'm told that he isn't credible enough?"

No, he is not credible enough when it comes to the incredible, supernatural claims being made.

In a court of law dealing with reality I would say that he is more than credible but we are talking about the incredible so all bets are off.

Give me some actual evidence and maybe I'll consder it. You have no evidence, you have a book full of stories that is no different than that of Greek mythology, a children's fairy tale or even a Marvel comic book. I would like to start the "First Church of the Fantastic Four" or perhaps the "Assembly of Superman" church. I wonder if I could get a tax exemption? The only difference is that you have chosen to believe one of them. That doesn't make it true.

then you said:

" I mention the prophecies of the Bible in telling about the birth of Jesus - hundreds of years before the event - and dispite the mathmatical improbability of it being fulfilled - no comment"

I did comment but here it is again.

Now you speak of some prophecy that fortold the birth of Christ hundreds of years later. So what?

All they had to know was say that a baby would be born in the future. That's not much of a stretch now is it?

Your lashing out at us, demanding we give you answers because you cannot provide your own.

You demand we prove you wrong because you know in your heart you can't prove your right. Your lashing out because everything you believe is being questioned and slowly the chinks in your armor are being exposed. Your lashing out at us because perhaps for the first time in your life you have actaully had to think about these claims being made.

I suspect that up until know you have never really had to defend your faith and when you find yourself in that postition you have realized there is nothing there but words on a page.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 9:11 AM

OKR -

Are there people born with the ability to kill?

Yes, but do they act on it. No.

We have freewill, and we have choices on if we committ a sin or not. If it's a psychological condition then rest assured that the Bible states over and over that our God is a just and compassionate God.

Problem is - so many people can't admit that perhaps they themselves might of done something wrong.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 6:10 AM

News -

got a question - It's true, churches are filled with hypocrits.

I understand you attend chruch - does this make you a hypocrit? you attend yet you deny

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 6:06 AM

Again -

Facts about the DNA similarities between primates and humans where presented and I brought the name of the studies and 6 intial results and all of the sudden DNA talk stops and the professor isn't going to comment on the studies or the 6 points?

Okay

I'm given a little lecture about law 101 and I ask about accepting the rules of Evidence as set forth by the Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleaf - and i'm told that he isn't credible enough?

Okay

I mention the prophecies of the Bible in telling about the birth of Jesus - hundreds of years before the event - and dispite the mathmatical improbability of it being fulfilled - no comment

I now understand why there are laws protecting atheism.

I want to applaud you for the faith you show.

Posted by eastwood on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 7:23 AM

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 6:00 AM

Yeah I knew that OKR. I was not in any way disagreeing with you mate. We are in full agreement and I think years of conversations can confirm that lol.

I just wanted to point out that a literal interpretation of the Bible would reasonably suggest that the Christianists, if they are interpreting literally and being rational human beings, would note the fact and be interested in the fact that Jesus, who clearly preferred the company of other men since he did surround himself with 12 men, never even one time condemned homosexualtiy. He knew it existed. He knew exactly what it was, but he never mentioned homosexuality at anytime, anywhere in the Gospels -- not even once in all 3 years of his ministry.

Its a fact.

A fact the Christianists seem to refuse to acknowledge.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 3:09 AM

Intriguing solution ND, that one though will never get off the ground even though buying in might secure a ticket on a flight straight to Heaven. That is if there is such a place.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 1:58 AM

Of course I agree with you News. You speak with appropriate outrage, and condemnation to those with closed minds.

I am just taking a different tack, hoping to provide some enlightening information to those willing to open their minds to consider new ideas.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 1:41 AM

"Homosexuality is quite common in the animal kingdom, especially among herding animals. The most well known homosexual animal is the dwarf chimpanzee, one of humanity's closest relatives. The entire species is bisexual. Lions are also homosexual. Homosexual behavior has been observed in 1,500 animal species." http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10...

Also quite common in the animal kingdom is nurturing, heterosexual behavior, and many other things that tend to assure the survival of the group, including homosexuality. While most of us have not thought of homosexual behavior in that light, it is frequently demonstrated in the animal kingdom, as is explained at the link I provided. To all things a purpose under heaven.

All those other characteristics, nurturing, altruism, and so on, we share with the animal kingdom. How could our developed biology from our animal kingdom base exclude homosexuality, but none of the other traits? Just something else to think about.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 1:35 AM

Oklahoma Reader

Actually, I think perhaps its a result of misinterpretation of the Bible. If it was literal they would recognize that Jesus NEVER even once condemned homosexuality...not one time.

In fact, we have very good reasons to believe Jesus himself may well have been gay.

Either way though, we are a secular society and I don't care what excuse a person tries to give to somehow explain his or her racism, sexism, and homophobia, its flat our wrong to discriminate against a person based upon anything other than their character.

Homophobia is classified as a mental illness and an abnormal behavior by the Psychological Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 4, Reformed. Open homosexuality is classified as normal behavior.

We don't need laws that discriminate on folks because they were born homosexual instead of heterosexual.

We do need to insist these mentally ill homophobes at least try to seek help for their homophobia rather than victimizing other American citizens.

Perhaps homophobes would be better off spending more time at their psychiatrist's office and less time in church.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 1:28 AM

If one happened to see a person with Tourette's syndrome who constantly,and compulsively sputtered God d*mn would it be biblically correct to call him a sinner, and add, I hate his behavior, but I don't hate him? How can one hate a behavior, when it is for that individual, the way he unchangeably is, and not have that hate spill over to the person? How could one make a law punishing that person with Tourette's, doing what is different from the majority though it is his nature? That is something to think about for those who believe that homosexuality is wrong, and an affliction, but can not say for sure that such individuals are not born with what they call the "disorder"?

I do gay people a disservice in a sense, by comparing what I believe is their natural biological state to an illness. My point was to suggest that those who do believe that it is illness, exhibit homophobia despite denying that they do. Otherwise they would treat them the same as the Tourette's example.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 12, 2012, at 12:52 AM

Bravo, NanaDot what you said, especially regarding my own experience within this American experiment.

I will have more to say later on this topic, in particular on the natural behavior that is a part of a multitude of species, but is condemned only by our own. Even that condemnation is sporadic, and dependent on time, place, and culture.

This is just another of the major clashes between science, and literal interpretation of the Bible. It seems there is no end to them.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 9:58 PM

Its sad that the religion that is the leading discriminator against gays in the United States is centered around the worship of a man who was an unmarried, itinerant preacher who clearly preferred the company of other men to that of women.

That would explain why he was still single at the age of 30 -- something that almost never occurred in Israel at that time. Men in Jewish society were expected to be married with children long before they turned 30 years of age. Being a single male at the age of 30 was completely unusual in Jewish society in Israel circa First Century.

Anyway, how odd that a religion founded centered around a deity that was himself most likely a gay man would hate other men for doing what their deity himself probably did...judging by the circumstances.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 5:28 PM

This is what happens when Christians try to "love" the sinner, but "hate" the sinner in the Castro District...and all over America.

"Chased out of the Castro District - 11-14-08"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrRxFoBSP...

Stop trying using your religion as an excuse to cover up your homophobia and your sexism.

We the People will not tolerate your sexism.

GET USED TO IT!!

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 3:40 PM

There is no acceptable excuse for sexual discrimination ever.

Using religion as an excuse to discriminate against gay folks is just as wrong as when so many Christians in the South attempted to justify their discrimination (jim crow laws, example) against black folks and other people of color.

Stop the homophobia.

Stop the discrimination against gay folks.

Worship as you wish.

Hold what ever opinion you want.

However when you start crossing lines and discriminating against gays, people of color, Muslims, Jews, seniors, ect, in job hiring, promotions, and in your behavior towards them in any public place, you will find our Constitution and all freedom loving Americans ready to enforce our laws and the rights of our citizens.

Get used to it!

-- Posted by news across on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 3:21 PM

ND, I was not posting at you specifically. In both my posts I was referring to the United States as a unit. We can't say that everyone's religion is tolerated and accepted until everyone learns a way to balance. You would be surprised at the number of people who feel that because I voice my feelings on homosexuality as a sin that I am attacking homosexuals. (I have reiterated many times that I hate the sin, but God has taught me to love the sinner and to mourn the choices they make as He does.) Because of what I say, apparently, in some way, I am condoning what is done to them. I would no more do that, than I would condone what is done to abortion clinics in the name of Christianity.

I understand that you don't like certain sects or individuals who operate under the guise of Christianity. I'm not crazy about some of their "beliefs" either. But then again I'm not necessarily crazy about the KKK, League of the South, skin heads, Council of Conservative Citizens, Nation of Islam, German American Nationalists, gangs, drug pushers, etc. That doesn't mean that I'm going to lump everyone together and say that America is bad. There are bad people in America, but there are good things about America itself, you just have to look for them. My meaning is this you can't put your eyes on people. We all fail or fall short at one time or another which distracts from what you should really be seeing. You have to have your eyes on the Savior, to hear His message. Okay, I'm getting off my soap box now. I just thought I would clarify my meaning.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 12:44 PM

Why is there agreement among many different dating methods pointing to an old earth and life on earth for a long time? What I mean is; radioactivity, tree rings, ice cores, corals, supernovas - from astronomy, biology, physics, geology, chemistry and archeology? These methods are based on distinct fields of inquiry and are diverse, yet manage to arrive at quite similar dates.

Bear in mind that you can't answer this question by saying there is no proof of uniformity of radioactive decay, because the question is instead why all these different methods give the same answers?

Still waiting ew.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 11:11 AM

Eastwood,

You beat up others for not providing answers when you yourself have yet to answer anything.

We're waiting.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 9:52 AM

Nana - How many non-Christians would jump on the band wagon? or howl?

http://chronicle.augusta.com/opinion/let... see how many 'money-christians' howl at this one...Posted by NanaDot on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 9:19 AM

Seems like you've already got some skepticism.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 9:26 AM

Nana - that was so you could tell where your quote ended. I don't have to yell.

but where's your answers?

-- Posted by eastwood on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 9:22 AM

eastwood said:

Okay

I'm given a little lecture about law 101 and I ask about accepting the rules of Evidence as set forth by the Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleaf - and i'm told that he isn't credible enough?

There are distinct differences between accepting the rules of evidence in a court of law based on our natural world. You are demanding we apply these same principals to a "supernatural world" and take these events at face value, with no real evidence and call them fact. It just doesn't work that way.

eastwood said:

Okay

I mention the prophecies of the Bible in telling about the birth of Jesus - hundreds of years before the event - and dispite the mathmatical improbability of it being fulfilled - no comment.

Hey,

I could go out to the hospital today or a hundred years from now, find a pregnant woman and convince her and everyone else that her child will be the "son of god". This doesn't mean the child is really the son of god, it just means people are gullible and they believed my "prophecy". They were particularly gullible several thousand years ago. I guess some things never change.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 7:50 AM

okay so I understand -

Facts about the DNA similarities between primates and humans where presented and I brought the name of the studies and 6 intial results and all of the sudden DNA talk stops and the professor isn't going to comment on the studies or the 6 points?

Okay

I'm given a little lecture about law 101 and I ask about accepting the rules of Evidence as set forth by the Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleaf - and i'm told that he isn't credible enough?

Okay

I mention the prophecies of the Bible in telling about the birth of Jesus - hundreds of years before the event - and dispite the mathmatical improbability of it being fulfilled - no comment

I now understand why there are laws protecting atheism.

I want to applaud you for the faith you show.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 7:23 AM

Nana -easy tiger your'll blow a blood vessel.

I don't have a problem with anyone else's beliefs UNTIL they start telling me that if I don't believe as they do, NANA PLEASE PRODUCE THAT LITTLE BIT OF EVIDENCE - PLEASE

I don't care if you are uncomfortable around people who do things differently than you - that is acculturation... I do mind if 'discomfort' becomes 'denial of human rights' on the basis of your discomfort. PLEASE PRODUCE YOUR DENIAL OF YOUR RIGHTS

I don't 'hate Christianity' - I just don't like some of the narrow, intolerant, hypocritical, mean-spirited, exclusivist excuses that some sects have become... those are NOT the entirety of Christian belief, and to me, are in fact, anti-Christian. THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO GOD, AND THAT IS THROUGH HIS SON - JESUS CHRIST

Posted by NanaDot on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 5:48 PM

-- Posted by eastwood on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 7:13 AM

What the f.....

You can't accept Dr. Greenleaf because he is a Christain? Give me a break. The rules of evidence are observed in every country and are the standard for establishing "evidence". He, and the rest of the world understand that certain events are not repeatable - or atleast in our grasp to repeat.

Did you ever know your child did something, when they said they didn't? Did you have to see them do it - or by the way they said no, behaved, and other evidence you could derive they did it?

Was Watergate staged?

Science has also had theories that you cling to - such as "The Theory of Evolution" there's no substaintiated material - it's a theory but some place a basis on interpreted infomation that is not reproduceable - Birth of the Universe - spontaneous generation, evolution,....?

RT- How do you know an inch is an inch? it is has a set standard, something we can measure against and it's universal. The forms of dating you mentiond are prety good theories - the tree rings are probably the most exact - unless you know the year it was harvested you don't really know when it began - do you?

What do we actually know about radioctivity, ice cores,- We really don't have a set point to begin measuring from - no one is around to say okay today -4000 B.C is the time we start measuring the radioactive isotopes being emmitted from this creature, it's an estimate.

Of course there are arguments about realtive postion within the soil, soil strata etc.... which then we could go into "Dispensationalism".

Biblical hermeneutics is the practice or study of scriptural intrepretation. This is where you intrepret scripture in light of the surrounding scripture - it's an interesting topic.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 7:09 AM

eastwood, though you haven't fully answered some of my questions I have another one for you, that is if you believe as do many creationists, that the earth is somewhere short of twenty, or thirty thousand years old.

Why is there agreement among many different dating methods pointing to an old earth and life on earth for a long time? What I mean is; radioactivity, tree rings, ice cores, corals, supernovas - from astronomy, biology, physics, geology, chemistry and archeology? These methods are based on distinct fields of inquiry and are diverse, yet manage to arrive at quite similar dates.

Bear in mind that you can't answer this question by saying there is no proof of uniformity of radioactive decay, because the question is instead why all these different methods give the same answers?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 11, 2012, at 1:01 AM

RationalThinker

I have seen worse.

In fact, I have been banned from some particularly nasty conservative blog sites. I wear that as a red badge of courage lol.

Actually, this is the most civil religious/political forums I have ever seen, and I have been blogging along time and at many blog sites.

But anyway, I guess one person's hell is another person's heaven lol.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 8:58 PM

OKR, excellent article mate. I really enjoyed that article.

Oh by the way, I have always been partial to the demigod Pazuzu. You may recall him as the demon who was possessing the main character in the movie "The Exorcist". Well really, its probably more fair to say Pazuzu was the main character. Anyway, he is a particularly harsh fellow, but you just gotta love his sense of humor.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 8:52 PM

"Memorial Service" -H. L. Mencken

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/me...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 8:24 PM

I have come to the conclusion that the religulous and the rationals have one thing definitely in common... we must all be somewhat masochistic, at least on this blog?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 8:23 PM

ew so which of those do you take literally?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 6:54 PM

Eastwood,

I'll answer your questions if you'll answer mine.

"I ask again as to proof - Is Dr. Greenleaf enough of a Law Professor, and his rules of evidence going to be rigid enough that you can accept the evidence based on jurisprudence?"

Well, give us something that could be considered tangible forensic evidence and we'll see. Stories and fables don't count.

"It would be rather idiotic to expect to have the Son of God come back for repeated crucifixions to test a hypothesis now - wouldn't it?"

No. why would it?. I thought "coming back" was his big schtick.

Your'e asked since the "event" can not be duplicated again, do yo accpet Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleafs ideas of evidence based on jurisprudence? and following that as the "Proof" you need.

No. Like it or not we are bound by reality, physics and the laws of nature. He was a lawyer and atheist who converted to Christianity. Good for him, good for you but that doesn't make him inafallable or any less human. Just because he decided to convert doesn't make these claims anymore factual. He may even win in a court of law but that would only mean that he convinced 12 people agree with him. Even Marshall has 19 different categories of chruches. It would be no problem for him to find a sympathetic jury but even after all that he has no actual proof. Neither do you. Now, will you answer my questions?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 6:06 PM

eastwood

Get your facts straight. There was no door to door nonsense as you described.

The Conservative government of John Howard (the equal of the Republican Party in Australia) did make gun licensing more difficult. You certainly can own and use a gun in Australia and we have a huge gun and hunting industry. What changed were the licensing requirements. To own a gun here you have to have (1) a good reason such as being a hunter, a farmer, a member of a shooters club, a police officer, a security guard, ect. and (2) follow all gun regulations and hunting regulations and (3) carry the gun license at all times when in possession of the weapon. However if you just want a pistol to put under your pillow, you likely won't get licensing approval.

"Handgun ownership facts in Australia"

http://www.ssaa.org.au/research/2007/200...

As to your nonsense about the Prime Minister telling the First Australians to leave if they don't like it, that is entirely and factually incorrect. Prime Minister Rudd in fact appologized to all the First Australians for all the horrible things the Aussies and the English did to them in 2007 on behalf of all Australians. In addition, our version of the Democrats, the Australian Labour Party, has passed in Parliament numerous laws establishing land reform, billions of dollars in cash settlements, established the First Australians as a protected class, and the process continues to this day.

"Apology to Australia's Indigenous Peoples"

http://www.aph.gov.au/house/rudd_speech....

As to Australia's founding, yes just like the American Colonies, the British used Australia as a penal colony. They began using it the year they signed the treaty with the United States establishing the United States as a sovereign nation which is the place they were sending those prisoners until the American Colonies were no longer English Colonies.

As to the guilt of the prisoners they sent to the American Colonies and later to Australia, most were Irish political prisoners who were convicted quickly in mass-production method by kangaroo courts designed to (1) get rid of Irish political "trouble makers" who were demanding a free Ireland and (2) to establish a system of quick and continuing white slavery.

You really should dig a little deeper in your research mate.

Anyway, like I said before, Australia is no Saint, but at least here we are free relative to you folks back there in the USA.

As I stated before, our Head of State cannot order the execution of any citizen, while there in the USA the President can and has ordered the murder of American citizens -- twice now.

As I stated before, our citizens have the right to a trial, unlike the United States where the Head of State can order a citizen to be held indefinitely with no access to an attorney, no hearing to ask a judge why they are being held, and without any communication with their family.

Without habeas corpus rights you have no freedom.

Without habeas corpus rights you have no other rights.

We have them.

You don't.

We have freedom because we respect the civil rights of human beings in our Nation. You don't.

Yeah, again leaving the Fascist States of America was definitely the best thing for me. I prefer to live in a free country.

And since I live in a free and sovereign nation where I am a citizen and can live in that freedom for the rest of my life, I really don't care all that much how many draconian, fascist laws you pass in the USA. After all, you are the one who has to live under such laws...not me.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 5:41 PM

OKR-

Also wasn't the passage emphasis on the animals and not the micro-organisms?

so I could be wrong but that would be moot right? because it really isn't open to interpretation as it isn't specifically mentioned in the Bible.

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 5:34 PM

OKR

You asked: So which of the above do you take literally. By the way, by your use of the word "many", I take that to mean that you agree that at least some of the forms of life would not survive. What of them?Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 4:18 PM

Thank you for not making an assumption on my part - My writing was unclear as I was rushed but better put might of read -

"many of the bacterium, fungus, protist and viruses will survive in the water, on the boat, in the air, or in the ice, in or on people and animals. (reference to many meaning - numerical numbers of these individual organisms, the species would remain intact)

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 5:24 PM

What the f....

Again avoidance of simple questions.

I ask again as to proof - Is Dr. Greenleaf enough of a Law Professor, and his rules of evidence going to be rigid enough that you can accept the evidence based on jurisprudence?

It would be rather idiotic to expect to have the Son of God come back for repeated crucifixions to test a hypothesis now - wouldn't it? Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 3:20 PM

Your'e asked since the "event" can not be duplicated again, do yo accpet Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleafs ideas of evidence based on jurisprudence? and following that as the "Proof" you need.

I have asserted that faith is not required to believe the Bible - but faith is that with the acceptance of Jesus Christ as your Savior your sins are forgiven.

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 5:10 PM

eastwood,

Again, your are shifting the burden of proof.

I am not claiming that supernatural activities are factual events. You are. This means the burden of proof falls on you.

If you had acutal proof then you wouldn't need faith now would you? I mean, that is this definition of faith is it not?

If you had as much proof as you had faith not only would we not be having this discussion, we wouldn't have need for this this page nor would we have need for hundreds of different churches, synagogues, mosques etc.

If you had proof there would'nt be any need for different religions, different interpretations of holy books or any need to argue about it. There would be one world church but alas, there is not. There is no proof, only faith.

You are free to believe anything you want. I could care less. The question is can you do it without demanding all others follow suit?

Can you do it without demanding that our government not only acquiesce, but also must grant you a tax exemption in the process?

If you could do it without all that then you would never hear another peep out of me but I don't think you can, do you?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 4:19 PM

ew: "many of the bacterium, fungus, protist and viruses will survive in the water, on the boat, in or on people and animals. What would be the hard part about that-I'd think having the animals coming to the ark or it would of been tough building on a boat for over 100yrs"

So which of the above do you take literally. By the way, by your use of the word "many", I take that to mean that you agree that at least some of the forms of life would not survive. What of them?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 4:18 PM

OKR, sorry was writing that as I was getting ready to leave. I meant that I wouldn't take raining cats and dogs literally. Sorry my ignorance and lack of paying attention

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 3:43 PM

OKR -

You ask some legitimate questions - as to literal interpretation lets not leave anything for granted- things are said literally and figuratively - ie. Its raining cats and dogs - meaning it's raining really hard.

Would I take that figuratively - probably not, unless a plane is dropping them from the sky. Therefore we must interpret that in light of the conversation or dialogue taking place, in the proper context.

OKR - your'e really much to educated in the Bible to expect me to think that I am bound by the dietary laws of Leviticus. Remember the New Testament where in Mathew 15:11 it is said-,Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. - your'e probably aware of the New Covenant,

many of the bacterium, fungus, protist and viruses will survive in the water, on the boat, in or on people and animals. What would be the hard part about that-I'd think having the animals coming to the ark or it would of been tough building on a boat for over 100yrs.

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 3:33 PM

what the f.....

Go for the heart of Christianity - destroy the crucifixition, and resurrection of Jesus.

Since you want to give a lesson in Law 101, would you take the rules of evidence as established by Harvard Law Professor Dr. Greenleaf?

Your'e probably aware that Dr. Greenleaf, was a Professor of Law at Harvard University, and was one of the greatest legal minds that ever lived. He wrote the famous legal volume entitled, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence.

Harvard even named a building after him - that's how much they think of his work in jurisprudence -would you take his methods of evidence?

Seeing how a laboratory is designed to replicate events over and over in a repeated fashion as to ascertain whether a hypothesis is proved or null.

Is Dr. Greenleaf enough of a Law Professor, and his rules of evidence going to be rigid enough that you can accept the evidence based on jurisprudence?

It would be rather idiotic to expect to have the Son of God come back for repeated crucifixions to test a hypothesis now - wouldn't it?

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 3:20 PM

OKR, Ussher Lightfoot: It took me a minute on this one to even think of what you were speaking. Personally, no I don't necessarily believe it. God's time and my time are not the same. The Bible tells me this, so why would anyone else be able to know God's exact dates. Genesis tells the story of God's creation without giving exact amounts of time when each occurred. Oh, it does say seven days, but are God's seven days and mine the same? Not according to the Bible. Don't get me wrong. I still believe that God did the creating!

-- Posted by dlkcs on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 2:43 PM

OKR, As far as Noah goes, I'm not sure anything that is listed is part of the animal kingdom. And God told Noah to take 2 of every type of animal, so I don't think he was responsible. :) Seriously, I believe Noah stepped out in faith. God told him what to do, and Noah set out to follow God's commands. When you step out in faith, God more than meets you half way.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 2:28 PM

OKR, I love Alice and all the mathmatical references and concepts involved in it. Are we saying that Math is impossible? :) I hope not. But I love the inferences about boredom and learning to daydream, and broaden our horizons that come with the story.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 2:19 PM

ND, As a Christian, I have been ridiculed, had my sanity questioned, and called a fool. And some these even occurred in this forum. :) I accept that as a part of the stand I take for Jesus. But I have also been told that I promote hate crimes because I don't accept homosexuality(please note I said homosexuality, not homsexuals), and their open displays of affection make me uncomfortable. With this in mind, it is sometimes hard to believe in the "religious tolerance" that keeps being spouted. Christianity can be scoffed at, but not other beliefs?

-- Posted by dlkcs on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 2:02 PM

So Dlkes are you telling me that you get to choose which parts of the Bible you choose to accept literally? Where do you find such dispensation in the Bible?

Actually I was not addressing you with my questions, for I did not assume, nor have I reason to believe that you take every word literally.

While you are at it though, go ahead, and take a stab at my other questions as well. It will be interesting to see the differences between various Christians' view points, after all there are many.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 1:31 PM

You do understand that we are not Jews? We are Gentiles whom God was gracious enough to include in the invitation for salvation. You can find this in Acts 10. The Jewish diet is not the same as the Gentile diet, obviously. No where in the Bible do I find where God says, "Accept Jesus as your Saviour and change your religion to become a Jew." No. instead we become Christians. While we accept the Old Testament books as true, we also understand that we are not Jews.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 1:19 PM

eastwood, and rr3 given that you both believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible please answer the following questions.

Do you follow the dietary laws as stated in Leviticus, or do you like your pop corn shrimp, and pork chops?

How did Noah ensure that he had on board specimens of each "kind" of bacterium, fungus, protist, and virus?

Do you believe that the Usher-Lightfoot calendar is accurate?

No hand on Bible necessary as you give this testimony, I accept as a given that you have it there at least figuratively at all times.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 12:30 PM

' "I can't believe that!" said Alice.

"Can't you?" the Queen said in a pitying tone. "Try again: draw a long breath, and shut your eyes."

Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said: "one can't believe impossible things."

"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." '-Lewis Carroll

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 12:18 PM

No doubt Jesus was cruxified as were thousands of others in his day. As for the resurrection where is the evidence?

You offer up many examples of the supernatural and demand others offer evidence to disprove it. This is classic mis-direction straight out of a "how to handle an atheist" christian text book.

You know you can't prove your point, you know you have no evidence. The only thing you can do is attempt to shift the burden of proof.

It's Courtroom 101.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 11:44 AM

News,

What have you uncovered about the 6 facts concerning the comparisons of Human/primate DNA I posted? or did you even read it?

Go for the heart of Christianity - destroy the crucifixition, and resurrection of Jesus.

Again, these are simple questions - simple to avoid, simple to stay in the shadows -

What does YOUR SCIENTIFIC REASONING SAY ABOUT:

Spontaneous generation?

Order from disorder?

Is there absolute truth?

Do the Laws of Jurisprudence require verifiable scientific findings?

News, can you offer any verifiable scientific evidence to support your views?

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 11:27 AM

Commarades of the New Amerika:

Our Constitution is a 'living' document in that it is amendable, is subject to review, precedent and changing times. Unfortunately, the uber-conservatives want to destroy this document in favor of a document that is 'weapon of the State' against its own people. Posted by NanaDot on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 10:14 AM

Might want to look at the anti-terrorism bills - this is the logic they use -'living' document in that it is amendable, is subject to review, precedent and changing times.

It should only be changed with the approval of the people - not the special interests, or an anti-American President.

And who bestowed these certain inalleniable rights? A Creator.

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 11:15 AM

We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. We guarantee the freedom to worship as one chooses. We make room for as wide a variety of beliefs and creeds as the spiritual needs of man deem necessary. We sponsor an attitude on the part of government that shows no partiality to any one group and that lets each flourish according to the zeal of its adherents and the appeal of its dogma. When the state encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it follows the best of our traditions. For it then respects the religious nature of our people and accommodates the public service to their spiritual needs. To hold that it may not would be to find in the Constitution a requirement that the government show a callous indifference to religious groups.

(Justice Douglas in Zorach v Clauson)

-- Posted by dlkcs on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 8:51 AM

Interesting News -

What the Australians did to the aborigines is much akin to what happened to the Native Americans.

A non-tyrannical govt? Really, didn't they not long ago go door to door removing guns from personal residents?

I know Iknow, yes the USA took some Nazi's after WWII, for information concerning Nazi's, etc - but wasn't Australia a "haven safe from extradiction" for the same Nazi's?

I remember seeing a video clip about, wasn't it the prime minister or "whatever" telling Muslims if they didn't like it there, they would be forced to leave? At least here we may squabble, but they're not threatened with being put out.

Also wasn't Australia founded as an English colony? One where a vast majority were found guilty in a court of law? Perhaps it explains some of the deviance found there - yeah, I think I'd take their right to arms also.

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 6:42 AM

"Evolution Shmevolution!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvrm9E4fU...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 3:58 AM

"The Atheist Delusion"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkhQLt1vb...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 3:53 AM

"People Are Not Animals! (and evolution never happened)"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swlsqkAyx...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 3:37 AM

In all seriousness OKR,

I am impressed by this find. It adds greatly to our knowledge base. As far as I know, this is the first time Neanderthal-made art has been found. Its a huge advance.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 1:28 AM

...but but but OKR, the Earth is only 6000 to 10,000 years...lol...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 1:06 AM

Oldest paintings ever have been found, at least 42,000 years old. They were not painted by homo sapiens. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/08... What do you make of that? I think it fascinating. I would like to read other's opinions on them, but only the opinions of those who believe people walked the earth at that time in the earth's history.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 10, 2012, at 12:40 AM

Thank you ND.

Hey, by any chance do you have a big "S" on your shirt? 'cause I could've swore you were Superwoman.

eastwood,

in case you have not figured it out, I did leave America and yeah it sucked in America and it still does. Now I live in a free country where democracy and liberty really do mean something and after tasting freedom, there is no going back to American fascism.

Australia isn't perfect and they sure have their dark history, but their chief of state can't order the execution of any of its citizens -- as the President of the US can -- and nobody can be denied their habeas corpus rights -- like they do in America -- and best of all, Australia does not torture prisoners.

There are a few other things I like about my new country too including the fact that we have the best economy in the World -- lots of jobs here -- its booming and has been for many years now -- and socialized medicine which we absolutely love 'round these parts.

So yeah I did leave America and yeah it was definitely the right decision for me.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 11:49 PM

eastwood

Nobody is suggesting prohibiting you from your religious beliefs. You worship as you wish.

However, when you want us taxpayers to pay for it you have crossed a line you should not cross. When you elect politicians that make any rule, custom, law, or cannon of your religion our Nation's laws, you have crossed a line you should not cross.

Keep your private religious beliefs on the private dole and out of our law books and we will all get along just fine.

Its that simple mate.

Ours is a secular government and by golly it will stay that way as long as red-blooded, patriots have anything to say about it.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 11:09 PM

eastwood

I posted tons of stuff. Lots and lots of websites and videos with full citations of the peer-reviewed evidence that supported all of my statements.

I do not intend to re-post them. I recommend you scroll down and take a look.

As far as your questions go, I will answer one and let that suffice.

I like the Declaration of Independence just fine. After all, I did have an ancestor in the Continental army.

Thank you for asking mate.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 11:04 PM

Sorry, i'm the one on the wrong Blog, But it's still relevant,just my mistake! Again sorry!

-- Posted by Jo on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 10:56 PM

I thought this was for Political remarks,something that's important to each and everyone of us! I for one want these thieves in politic to refrain from riding the shoulders of some imaginary person,in their mind! I respect what ever you want to believe, but keep it to your self on this blog,they have a blog for you People!Please live in the real world. That the only way our Country will survive!Politics has NO place in Religion they are all,what you would call evil! And why is that?

-- Posted by Jo on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 10:53 PM

I'd like to read everyone's take on the recent issue of the government warning the Catholic church that when they provide healthcare for their employees, as with everyone else, they must provide free birth control for those who want to use it?

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 9:48 PM

When you don't log in for a few days, the posts are hard to wade through. Concerning the posts about Jesus rising from the grave and other miraculous events surrounding him: First, even though I was exposed (pressured by adults) as a young child by many adults in my bible studies and Sunday sermons as well as Sunday school, I just came to the realization that I did not believe these stories by my early teens. I was continually told that I had to just accept these things for truth and that it was up to me to remove the doubt. It was a matter of just accepting these teachings as truth. No matter how hard I tried to convince myself, I just could not do it. Just "let go" and accept the lord as my savior; that is all there is to it. Again, it didn't work. For me, it is a form of child abuse to tell children they will burn in hell for eternity if they do not accept belief in something they cannot bring themselves to believe in. With that background, I hope rr3 and eastwood can understand why in my opinion you were both totally brainwashed as children, and somehow were never able to differentiate the difference in the real world and a make believe supernatural world. It is not unlike children in abused families have a tendency to abuse their children and they cycle is difficult to break. I am sincerely not trying to say that to be mean, but only to make you realize where I am coming from. And, as I have stated many times, although I regard your beliefs as adult fantasy, it only really concerns me when you want to bring that fantasy into public education or our government institutions. And therein lies the problem.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 9:44 PM

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

You were saying?

Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:37 PM

As in typical fashion you only presented a half truth (falsehood)

Try reading a little history on the 'seperation of Church and State' it was not to free the gov't of religion, but to free religion from the gov't. This is evidenced by the letter Jefferson drafted, better known as the : Letter to the Danbury Baptists

Also the entire Amendment I is;

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 9:41 PM

What the f....

There are others who do read the blog - and after having coffee with a few, they do evaluate the postings - thank you for providing such interesting dialogue that those of Faith have a place to witness, and those seeking find answers.

Many of the arguments here have done more to further the Faith, than any book on apolgetics could. Thank you.

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 9:25 PM

What the f....

Try a little Americn history......though the Constitution is a legal document, what do you think the Declaration of Independance was? Do you even know how it came about?

Colonists came together, talked, argued, prayed and composed that letter to the King. They signed their names to it, made a covenant.

I didn't ask what it was, I asked what you think of it - have you ever read it?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness................

Ever think of the ramifications of this Declaration?

Abraham Lincoln did: The passage came to represent a moral standard to which the United States should strive. Abraham Lincoln, argued that the Declaration is a statement of principles through which the United States Constitution should be interpreted.

...as long as none of their religious rules, customs, laws, cannons, or any other part of their religious beliefs becomes the law in my government - my secular government.Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 4:38 PM

What an unfortunate statement - well you can decide on the intelligence of such - but what do you think - We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator......- it is self evident that God bestowed these rights - from the start Christian Religion played a part in the formation of this country.

For those who can't accept that, perhaps there are better places for them to live.

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 9:18 PM

We don't claim to have all the answers nor do we have any desire to run your life based on our own hysteria and superstition.

You seem like an incredibly intelligent person.

Use it.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 9:09 PM

news

your'e being asked-(of course you could shy away from the questions) - and thus this would enable you to maintain the image of superiority by never revealing intellect but always asking questions,

What do you think of:

The Declaration of Independence?

Spontaneous generation?

Order from disorder?

Is there absolute truth?

Do you have any verifiable scientific evidence to support your views?

Is there anyone who can come out of the shadows to offer 'insight into these things?' or just shoot from the hip with mundane one liners?

Those who haven't been on a 'walk-a-bout' have read my answers,,,,now you have a chance to give me a reality check

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:58 PM

Finally Eastwood,

Can you verify even one of the supernatural events as described in the bible? Even one?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:47 PM

Eastwood,

Have you inquired yet about having the tax exempt status of your church removed in order to be set "free".

Please give a status report.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:40 PM

Eastwood,

The Declaration if Independence is not a legal document and simply described the intent of the colonies in the separation from the tyrannical actions imposed by King George III .

The consititution is the legal document that defines the governance of our country. It was not ratified until 1789, 13 years after the DOI was drawn up at and stated quite simply:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

You were saying?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:37 PM

news -

As for the scientific verifiable evidence - well your'e trying to compare apples to oranges. It is somewhat outdated as was your DNA citing, next you'll quote the scientific data of ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny'

When you want to spout about scientific data then be scientific about it - list your study, identify the dependant variable and the independant variable, and for Science state would you include the standard deviation of the study, and the process used to determine the independant variable as well as quantity of the sample?

Should you have any to dispute about the above findings please post a mature answer, as well as authorities cited.

Tommorrow I'll see about presenting the comparitive studies on the Bible.

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:32 PM

So news, you mention -

...as long as none of their religious rules, customs, laws, cannons, or any other part of their religious beliefs becomes the law in my government -- my secular government.Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 4:38 PM

What do yo think of the Declaration of Independence?

As for your random but not very researched quip about monkey and human DNA, please consideer the following;

1.Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes while chimpanzees have 24. Evolutionary scientists believe that one of the human chromosomes has been formed through the fusion of two small chromosomes in the chimp instead of an intrinsic difference resulting from a separate creation.

2.At the end of each chromosome is a string of repeating DNA sequences called a telomere. Chimpanzees and other apes have about 23 kilobases (a kilobase is 1,000 base pairs of DNA) of repeats. Humans are unique among primates with much shorter telomeres only 10 kilobases long.

3.While 18 pairs of chromosomes are 'virtually identical', chromosomes 4, 9 and 12 show evidence of being 'remodeled.'4 In other words, the genes and markers on these chromosomes are not in the same order in the human and chimpanzee. Instead of 'being remodeled' as the evolutionists suggest, these could, logically, also be intrinsic differences because of a separate creation.

4.The Y chromosome in particular is of a different size and has many markers that do not line up between the human and chimpanzee.

5.Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed 'large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.' They found a number of regions that 'might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage.'

6These types of differences are not generally included in calculations of percent DNA similarity.

The above 6 points are findings based on; Gagneux, P. and Varki, A. 2001. 'Genetic differences between humans and great apes.' Mol Phylogenet Evol 18:2-13

News consider ; If 5% of the DNA is different, this amounts to 150,000,000 DNA base pairs that are different between them primate and human, this is based on the Britten1 study.

Scientifically, here are two different studies offering a comparitive analysis - related to your blog from yesterday, sorry it took me some time to gather some points together, i'll try to get an answer together quicker - work sometimes poses a problem with that area.

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:12 PM

Oh and I might add that I fully support all faiths...as long as none of their religious rules, customs, laws, cannons, or any other part of their religious beliefs becomes the law in my government -- my secular government.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 4:38 PM

Oh yeah, it does not matter what religion you have faith in.

Any will do because in the end its the truth that matters, and so far all of the measurable, describable, repeatable, verifiable, evidence points only to natural causes -- and no other cause -- of everything including the Universe. That is a fact.

So in the end you won't know the difference.

As for me, I think I will keep my tithe money in my bank account, and I will keep my time for things that actually make a difference in my life.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 4:33 PM

"Intelligent Design vs. Alien Intervention"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp86gsHsc...

Its important to know the difference between alchemy and chemistry. They are not the same. Religion has zero (0) peer-reviewed, testable, measurable, describable, repeatable, verifiable evidence to support any of its extraordinary claims...not even one single piece.

Thus far, all the peer-reviewed evidence support natural models.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 2:51 PM

Science is also in the business of creating new questions, not claiming to have all the answers.

Science sees no shame in saying "I don't know, let's try to find out!"

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 2:31 PM

eastwood

Science is not in the disproving business mate.

Science is a methodology for seeking truth and basis that search in the results of measurable, describable, repeatable, verifiable testing of hypothesis.

There are 4 possibilities in each test -- hypothesis, null hypothesis, false positive, and false negative.

In science the only thing that matters is the methodology. The results are the results, no matter how a person might feel about the results. Fact is fact.

Proofs are Proofs.

Science feels no emotion nor does it view anything subjectively.

Science is only interested in proofs and truth and those can only be achieved through accurate, measurable, describable, testable, repeatable, verifiable models and additional lines of fully peer reviewed evidence. So in any test, experiment, or observation either the method is being rigorously applied or it is not. Science is in the proving business -- not the disproving business.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 2:08 PM

Yup Dlkes I think everybody here is secure in their beliefs. There is not a chance in hell that there is going to be a conversion in any direction. Probably the only good coming from this stuff is that it gives idle minds a chance to get some exercise, and I think that may be good. :)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 1:58 PM

Faith is what you have when don't have the facts.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 1:26 PM

What I have learned from these posts:

Some people just thrive from disagreeing with one another.

No one is actually listening to the other, so nothing is being proven except how stubborn everyone is.

How glad I am to be secure enough in my faith to not be shaken by all this arguing. :)

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 1:21 PM

eastwood,

What about fact over fiction? So how is that asking to have your church's tax exempt status removed workin' out for ya? Have you talked about it with anyone at your church? Bring it up in your next confession and let us know how it goes.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 12:29 PM

Dogged dogmatism: Chasing one's tail, and scratching non-existent fleas to the point that it makes the entire pack howl, and run away.

Source--OKR Dish-inary

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 11:33 AM

what the f....

What of the 7 ?

What about spontaneous generation?

What about order from disorder?

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 11:06 AM

Eastwood,

We can't "disprove" fairies, elves, trolls or uicorns either. Now what?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 8:05 AM

News -

As for Moses and the great Exodus. Proof will come, Just because I don't have it now dosen't mean it doesn't exist.

Can you disprove it?

As for your little video links - get over it - we can video link subjects too death. Try some reasoning.

You've never asked or even commented about the proofs of the resurrection - historical events may very leave behind some evidence - rather physical, or scientific, or whatever but you have the old matra - verifiable proof.

Eyewitness accounts don't matter? It's usually enough in law.

As for eye witness accounts - odd isn't it, that the Pharisee, Saduccess, or even the Romans never discredited the miracles - these are the people in direct opposition to Jesus - and the miracles where performed on people that the community knew had afflictions! In fact they claimed that the miracles where performed by the power of Satan.

Psychology, is a science. It deals with tangibles, and it has outcomes. How would so many be who spent so much time with Him, for the period of three years be so dooped? Even the Roman soldier who had his ear reattached knew surely it was the Son of God.

news - put away the wine bottle, and attack the 7 proofs I presented - Tonight perhaps we'll discuss the 'DNA evidence" that you'd like to go over -

As for the location of Heaven or Hell, News, you surely aren't so obtuse as to think that they need exist in the physical, or atleast in physical in terms as you want to subscribe to - a dog hears sounds we don't - because yo don't hear it does it cease to exist? A hawk swoops down and snatches a mouse from a field - you didn't see the mouse- but did it fail to exist becuase you didn't see it? you don't see electricity surging through wires - does it exist - yes we see it's effects.

I'm sure that someone could be dooped if they didn't know the afflicted, hadn't lived in the area, or hadn't spent time with the Healer - but they all did.

It isn't like doing a computer dating service, and then tricking the other person into thinking that your'e someone your'e not. After time they will see you for what you are, and voice an opinion of good or bad, they'll relay your faults to the world.

This didn't happen with his disciples, apostles or even with the Romans, Pharisees or Saducces. Rather in the Bible or books of historical antiquity.

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 6:53 AM

"BELOVED,

DO NOT BELIEVE EVERY SPIRIT, BUT TEST THE SPIRITS, WHETHER THEY ARE OF GOD; BECAUSE MANY FALSE PROPHETS HAVE GONE OUT INTO THE WORLD. BY THIS YOU KNOW THE SPIRIT OF GOD: EVERY SPIRIT THAT CONFESSES THAT JESUS CHRIST HAS COME IN THE FLESH IS OF GOD, AND EVERY SPIRIT THAT DOES NOT CONFESS THAT JESUS CHRIST HAS COME IN THE FLESH IS NOT OF GOD. AND THIS IS THE SPIRIT OF THE ANTICHRIST, WHICH YOU HAVE HEARD WAS COMING, AND IS NOW ALREADY IN THE WORLD." ( 1 JOHN 4:1-3 )

If you choose to have faith in science then you will believe science. News you fail to understand the nature of God. You want to believe that everything fits in you physical law box without knowing everything. To assume that, you would have to know everything. Do you? What about political influence to get science to conform for political gain. And news I am married too but if we didn't have God in our marriage we may not have made it 21 years and counting.

"ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD, AND IS PROFITABLE FOR DOCTRINE, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS, THAT THE MAN OF GOD MAY BE COMPLETE, THOROUGHLY EQUIPPED FOR EVERY GOOD WORK." ( 2 TIMOTHY 3:16-17 )

"IF YOU ABIDE IN MY WORD, YOU ARE MY DISCIPLES INDEED. AND YOU SHALL KNOW THE TRUTH, AND THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE." ( JOHN 8:31-32 )

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 6:21 AM

rr3yv0

Oh I don't have to wait to be judged RR...I am married...I get judged all the time lol.

So let me get this straight. My utter destruction will occur after I am dead?

Well that sounds fair enough. If I am dead, I won't know anything about it.

And about Jesus, as I understood his followers and employees correctly, the last time they saw him he was rising -- apparently not real quickly -- into the sky. You realize that folks back then thought that heaven was in the clouds right? Anyway, so the last time they saw him, so they claim, he was rising into a cloud.

You know that heaven is not in the clouds and no where on Earth right?

And let's see, if my math is correct the fastest he could have been travelling is just under the speed of light. So presuming he was travelling that fast that means he would have traveled a mere 2000 light years. That isn't very far given that the distance from us to the end of the visable Universe is 14 billion years.

Now I think we could establish pretty quickly that since everything in the Universe is subject to the laws of the Universe, Heaven must be located somewhere outside the Universe. That means Jesus will be travelling for a minimum of 14 billion years before he can even turn around to come back -- another 14 billion light years return trip.

So thus far we can be very certain Jesus won't be back for 28 billion years at a minimum. Ok, well this is where it gets tricky. Our Sun has only 5 billion years before it implodes...and wipes us out in the process. So I think you can see the problem. Jesus appears to be a terrible mathematician. Surely, if he was God as you claim, he knew that what he was proposing was a physical impossibility.

Here, you do the math and see what you get. Here is the formula:

E=mc where E=Energy, M = Mass, and C=the speed of light.

Maybe Einstein got it all wrong.

Check it out and see what you come up with.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, Feb 9, 2012, at 12:01 AM

Amen WTF.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:46 PM

"A guy told me the other day about this thing he saw." Good satire News, ROTFLMAO.

I'm glad you are back to pass the baton to. All this running in circles, always on the same tiny track, has made me dizzy, and as my old buddies at Stamper's used to say, "Plum wore slick". ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:44 PM

rr3yvo,

How can we deny evidence that has yet to be presented? How can we deny truth that has yet to be spoken?

Your story was an interesting excercise in juxtapostion. It's funny because you speak of "false prophets" and the only people here who seem to speak as "prophets" are those of faith.

Glass houses my friend, glass houses.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:42 PM

Well news you know you are pretty funny but to God 1,000 years is like a day and we are 2,000+ years after Jesus and he promises to come back. When he does the destruction will be swift. Our life is but a vapor 70, 80+ years if we're lucky. That is the part you just can't seem to understand news and you can tell me how dumb I am to believe what I believe but that's ok. We will all be judged some day it will be swift and it will be final. We will not have a second chance.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:31 PM

Earl in my time I have been accused of being off the wall more than once. I own up that there is a little piece of my sense of humor that could provoke such comment.

Having said that thank you for the chuckles I get from your comments with some regularity. You are insane Dude!

Don't stay any where long enough to pick up fleas when you've got the scratch to avoid 'em. Bon voyage world traveler.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:30 PM

2 Peter 2:1

Translated:

But a lot of folks said Peter and his pals were completely wrong and Peter called them "false Prophets." He warned the people to beware of "Teachers" and anyone who disagrees with Peter's mythology.

That is why we need to shut our ears and turn off our brains when ever these people who disagree with Peter and his pals try to explain how the facts are direct opposition to what Peter and his pals claim.

Oh and RR, "swift destruction?" Please note that both me and Dr. Dawkins are in good health for our age groups. So far many of us rationalists -- maybe all of us -- have beaten that swift destruction thing lol lol lol lol..

What a load of bunk.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 10:50 PM

A guy told me the other day about this thing he saw.

He said a fellow named Jeebus Johnson brought some poor dead fellow back to life -- days after he died.

My buddy told me he saw the whole thing. He said that dead body stunk to high Heaven and that the body was all bloated and decomposing. He said it was a real mess. My buddy used to know the dead guy pretty good, some fellow named Lasser something or another. Anyway, my buddy said he himself saw this lasser fellow die. He even saw him take his last breath.

My friend said that right in front of everyone, Jeebus went into the room where the body was laying on a bed, closed the door, mumbled a few things and, badda boom, badda bing, Lasser was no longer bloated and was standing there looking as healthy as ever. Then after that, according to my pal who was there, one of Jeebus' helpers passed a basket around and asked for donations. My pal said so many folks were so amazed that they had to pass the collection basket around several times so everyone had a chance to donate. He said Jeebus ended up with a big bag of money but he said that Jeebus and his followers only spend the money wisely on Godly things.

I told my friend that it sounded like some kinda trick -- you know, like illusionists do, but my buddy said that they asked Jeebus if it was just a trick and he told them that he would never trick anyone, that through Jeebus God worked his magic and brought Lasser back to life good as new. He told them they can believe him because he is also a preacher and doing God's bidding. Well, I guess if my friend says its true then it must have been true. I have never known my buddy to lie, and apparently this Jeebus fellow is doing God's bidding because my pal said Jeebus was.

No need for science on this one I guess. My friend's word is all I need. He would never mislead anyone.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 10:41 PM

2 Peter 2:1

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

That's why we need to wear the whole armor of God because of the deceit of the devil. Just as God uses the common man for his work Satan uses common man to help in his deceit. Look at the one's that deny God, deny evidence, deny truth just to believe a lie. We believe good to be bad and the bad to be good. Liberal politicians tell us that, Keynesian economist tell us that, atheist tell us that, etc. Truth is a lie and the lie is gospel is exactly what Satan wants us to believe. I can only stand on the truth of God's word anything else can stray from the truth, and everything has to be weighed against the truth. God reveals the truth to believers. We often wonder why unbelievers never come under attack is because they are doing exactly as Satan wants they deny God and are comfortable in their sins.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 10:18 PM

"Science Is Wrong ... Only God Knows The Truth"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjJa57htq...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 10:14 PM

Eastwood,

Let's cut to the chase and make this as simple as possible for everyone's benefit.

Can you offer any verifaible evidence other than words on a page the would provide absolute proof that would undeniably confirm any supernatural act as described in the Bible or any other religious doctrine?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 9:44 PM

"Godless Scientists Are Ignorant!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM1pHYiIO...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 8:25 PM

All the evidence is encapsulated in the sites I cited.

They provide excellent descriptions of the evidence and all relevant info. However, I will be happy to provide you with many links to the evidence citations. The rest is up to you. And remember, if you lack the prerequisites to understand the evidence or methods used, local accredited universities and colleges typically offer coursework that can help you with understanding the method, the process, and the evidence. However, the links I am providing are minimally sufficient to address your expression of interest in the evidence and the links are some of the sources of the information I posted.

Also, regarding our 2nd pair of Chromosomes -- it isn't just similar to the fused 14th and 15th Chromosomal pairs of the Chimpanzee. It is the exact fused Chimapnzee 14th and 15th Chromosomal pairs -- 100% the same...not a bit different other than the fusion.

Anyway, here are some links you can find all this and more in.

http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-WAHpC0A...

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/215/45...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjgHd6HKt...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRBlEV8QR...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJayMGhZx...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIftg3cM4...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4kiOnUW5...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzkLYZCzH...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2i906HqGT...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weX4wjLmj...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kd751kV03...

http://listverse.com/2009/01/05/top-10-s...

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v43...

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v40...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11237...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81J7p-HmZ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV6A8oGtP...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnAROk72s...

This list is of course only a small bit of the scientific information out there on the net. I will be happy to post more for you when you have completed this list. I am always happy to help get the facts out where we can all see them mate.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 7:36 PM

news

can you supply what the studies where that verify the research?

Your'e quick to always quote someone else, but have you tried any original thinking or just the regurgitation of already biased websites?

so you don't think that the scenerio about the two men and the land could be verified?

Do eyewitness accounts accou for anything?

As for the DNA, comeon, that's been played out along time ago - we'll just take ape and mankind for example.

Let's say with the DNA strand and the acid combinations used to help leave our carbonaneous mark on the planet. If man and ape had a variance of only 3% that would translate into chemical differences of over 3,000,000. Basically the difference between the Pyramids,planes, computers, and the monkey still scratching his hiney -

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 6:35 PM

eastwood

Archeologist require testable, measurable, repeatable, verifiable physical evidence to confirm documentation. That does not change.

Archeologists dig deep to examine artifacts that, combined with other evidence and lines of evidence, can either confirm existing documentation.

For example, this story regarding Moses. The physical Genetic Mapping evidence rules out the Moses story. This is because genetic mapping has demonstrated that the ancient Hebrews did not mass-migrate but rather they trickled in to Palestine over a very long period of time in small numbers.

So much for the mass-migration of Hebrew tribes described in the Old Testament.

We also know that our Species originated in Africa and we know exactly how we migrated across the World and when we did it. And mate...genes don't lie.

And hey, here is a nifty one for ya..you, me, and every human that has ever lived have the exact, fused 14th and 15th chromosome pairs of the Chimpanzee which make up our 2nd pair of chromosomes -- proving with physical evidence and beyond any doubt that we are share a common ancestor with Chimpanzees -- and this includes Jesus...unless of course he was not human. However, he would have a tough time proving that since we know at least who the Bible claims his Mother was and she was definitely human. But I don't think the Bible claims Jesus was not human. It does claim in the New Testament that he was the Son of God, but that cannot be since that would mean that God has 23 gene pairs (46 genes) and that would make him a human, not a God.

We evolved from a common ancestor with all apes. All human beings (homo sapien, sapien) are all related. Our species originated in Africa and spread out across the World from Africa. So says the factual, tested, repeated, measured, described, observed, verified evidence.

You will find the factual evidence at these links as well as at links not posted below. And remember. Universities and colleges offer a whole slew of science courses in every branch of science if a person really wants to understand the true nature of our species.

"Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey" (Part 1 of 13)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV6A8oGtP...

"MAP OF MIGRATIONS OF MTDNA MARKERS- HUMAN MIGGRATIONS MAP"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnAROk72s...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 6:21 PM

Eastwood,

Ok, and this proves what? You are confusing facts with faith. It was a problem then and it's a problem now.

Just because you believe in something doesn't make anymore true than if I was raised to believe in any number of fairies, trolls, goblins or elves. If I were absolutely convinced they existed you might consider me a bit tetched, would you not? How is this different?

Why should what you say be taken anymore seriously that what is written in a Grimms fairy tale? Give me something to work with and maybe I'll get on board, until then.............

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 5:56 PM

Let's also not forget that alot of these "words of god" were altered, modified or completely omitted in order to satisfy the whims of either current ruling clerics or kings of the time.Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 4:03 PM

but duh, the Roman historian was not Christian, neither was the Roman Govt? and Josephius was a Jew by birth, Roman by citizenship.

A Jew denies the Diety of Jesus, as did Romans at that time.

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 5:19 PM

News,

verifiable scientific proof? well historical facts don't lend themselves to this type of scrutiny, but.........we can speak of objective evidence, I mean historically verifiable evidence.

You mentioned.............Does the archeological evidence support the Notion that WW2 occured? Absolutely. Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:36 PM

If I understand, the historical accounts of where shelling took place, bombs went off, old war bunkers, concentration camps etc. These archeological locations, can be used to verify eyewitness accounts of events - these eyewitness accounts can come from both the Allied and Axis powers.

We have a stoned rolled away, burial clothes laid aside, an empty tomb, eye witness accounts, accounts from the "Romans", and secular historians that do not recall any groups denying the resurrection - even though many were still alive at the time.

Maybe a more modern version could be : If we both knew a man (1), who through a legal tactic - say adverse possession- tried to muscle a neighbor (2) into buying back his own piece of property. Instead the man (1) round up buying the property from the rightful owner (2) and perhaps "misquoted" the price of the land he bought, so say his (1) lenders/parents payed more than was asked - therefore enabling the first man (1) to enjoy a trip to strange and exotic places?

Could we really scientifically verify this took place? no, but historically, the surrounding neighbors,two lawyers, the parents and the recorder of deeds could very well verify the various actions to help us know the events in question. Does that make better sense?

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 5:16 PM

Excellent Point What the f......!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 4:56 PM

eastwood,

I would love to see churches give up thier tax exempt status but it ain't gonna happen. It's a business. Go to your next church officers meeting and suggest that, I would love to hear their answer.

If churches and religion in general would go about thier business and leave people alone this would all be a non issue.

I firmly believe that christians in this country would love to have a political, christian theocracy and are working towards that end. If that is the case, be careful what you wish for.

Our little hamlet of 13,000 has somehwere in the neighborhood of 19 different categories of christian churches. 19 categories with mulitple churches within those categories. You guys can't even agree on how to practice your own faith so how in the world would you govern a country?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 4:15 PM

eastwood,

I've seen "magicians" make an elephant disappear and bring it back again. It was fascinating!.....but it also wasn't real.

Unfortunatley and again your list of proof is nothing more than words on a page.

When I type the words "I am the New Messiah"

I know you won't believe but does that make them any more or less true than any of the ancient text that we may reference? Let's also not forget that alot of these "words of god" were altered, modified or completely omitted in order to satisfy the whims of either current ruling clerics or kings of the time.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 4:03 PM

eastwood,

If you want to see how science approaches ancient and/or old documents and the scientific methodology that provides reliable, factual answers to questions regarding ancient and/or old documents then you may want to watch this interesting documentary. It is a good example of the scientific approach.

"Devil's Bible" - National Geographic Channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZYJD1L_R...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:51 PM

A special thank you to the nay sayers out there.

If Christians would only defend their faith, as passionately as athiests, or skeptics try to grasp to their faith in non-faith, what a refreshing world it would be!

Perhaps Churches and Christians would really be having an impact on the society around us!

Let's encourage our church leaders to give up the tax-exempt status, as I believe the great poster what the f,,,, suggested and then be really free to impact the community!

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:47 PM

thank you news,

I've used archeology as a basis for ascertaining the historical accuracy of the Bible, your peers deny it viability.

What do you think of phrophesy?

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:40 PM

News,

I see the broken record is still skipping.

FACT #1: BROKEN ROMAN SEAL

FACT #2: EMPTY TOMB

FACT #3: LARGE STONE MOVED

FACT #4: ROMAN GUARD GOES AWOL

FACT #5: GRAVECLOTHES TELL A TALE

FACT #6: JESUS' APPEARANCES CONFIRMED

FACT #7: OVER 500 WITNESSES

A New Testament writer by the name of Paul has written that: the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned. Dr. Edwin M. Yamauchi, associate professor of history at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, emphasizes: "What gives a special authority to the list (of witnesses) as historical evidence is the reference to most of the five hundred brethren being still alive.

For the New Testament of Acts, the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Any attempt to reject its basic historicity, even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted. A. N. Sherwin-White Classical Roman Historian

Of course, 500 eye witnesses who could of refuted the story didn't, the Roman who weren't particullary fond of Christians could of denied it, but didn't.

Gee 500 witnesses would be enough to convict someone in court.

Better yet, prove the resurrection is a farce.

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:37 PM

Oh and eastwood,

Archeology does not rely on documents, ancient texts, ect., as its source upon which to draw factually based conclusions. They require the physical evidence -- all of it -- to support the documents or the documents have little Archeological relevance, if any at all.

Does the archeological evidence support the Notion that WW2 occured? Absolutely.

As to questions regarding Shakespeare's work, yes there are long standing disputes regarding the authenticity of his authorship (1). I hope someday we have enough physical evidence to finally settle the questions regarding the true authorship of the plays we credit to Shakespeare.

(1) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:36 PM

eastwood

Well I don't doubt Jesus lived.

I have no doubt he was Crucified.

As to rising on the 3rd day...well, lol, just because Josephus may (or may not) have "heard" (hearsay) that Jesus rose on the 3rd day does not mean it actually happened.

We need a lot more than hearsay evidence. We can't draw a single conclusion from hearsay evidence.

Hey here is an idea.

Show us just 1 piece of testable, measurable, repeatable, verifiable evidence that leads to one and only one conclusion that Jesus was a God and had magical Sky-daddy powers.

Now that would really be something.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:21 PM

I wonder embellishment of the life of Jesus? What do some of the secualr historians of the time have to record?

Flavius Josephus, wrote Jewish Antiquities.

So how about this quote?

About this time arose Jesus, a wise man, who did good deeds and whose virtues were recognized. And many Jews and people of other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. However, those who became his disciples preached his doctrine. They related that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Perhaps he was the Messiah in connection with whom the prophets foretold wonders. [Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, XVIII 3.2]

Do we question the historicity of the Talmud?

" Although not explicitly referred to by name, later Rabbis identify the person as Jesus,also these writings were preserved through the centuries by Jews, so Christians cannot be accused of tampering with the text.

The Talmud makes note of Jesus' miracles. His crucifixion is dated as "on the eve of the Feast of the Passover" in agreement with the Gospel (Luke 22:1ff; John 19:31ff). Similar again to the Gospel (Matt. 27:51), the Talmud records the earthquake and the tearing in two of the Temple curtain during the time of Jesus' death. Josephus in his book, The Jewish War, also confirmed these events.

It would seem that secular - non-Christian historians would not include such examples or recordings of Jesus, or the miracles if they didn't find a basis to relate them.

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 3:01 PM

We have film footage of WWI.

Please direct us to the footage of the parting seas, walking dead, talking snakes, adam and eve, etc.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 2:02 PM

Sorry ew I am not biting today, and likely will only rarely do so in the future.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 12:40 PM

Question - if you hear of an event from several different witnesses, and essentially all the stories jive - then should one put the pieces together and accept it as true? Especially if the stories come from different people at various times?

We accept that Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliet, etc......yet we don't have the original manuscripts - did he write them?

Has history really happened? who's around to tell us that WWI actually did take place like it's recorded - sadly there seems to be no more survivors.

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 12:39 PM

OKR -

When exactly did I mention Japan first - didn't you in response to the whole moral issue, and you used Japan as a society to study that didn't utilize the Bible?

I've been through the post, and don't see any that predate in date or time, perhaps smoking Cheetah can help jump start the flux capacitor and enlighten me.

I went through your step program and somewhere I must be missing it.

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 12:11 PM

What the f,.........

thanks, from the arguments you present, it iss actually increasing my faith.

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 12:02 PM

Smoking cheetah -

easy tiger - you could be Kathy (interestingly enough I never mentioned a Fairchild) you could be an Anita, or you could even be a Herkimer -_ see how neatly it works when we assume? much like assuming I may answer or phone, or have written the articles, or such?

sorry don't know a tigerblood - never gave reference to that person either, don't remember ever claiming you where that person either.

chettah, as for the condition of the school or IEP I gave my first hand knowledge, as the the AE I let you know what my kids and the newspaper wrote about, as to the moral condition of the school I said it reflects much of that of Marshall.

All else you've drawn your inferences from.

Might see about some happy pills or sugar - it usually cuts the bitterness.

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:28 AM

And thank you Eric for not deleting my post. I knew that it was far too long for this format, but I knew no other way to clarify all I was attempting to say. I strive for conciseness, but obviously failed in this instance. Your decision was generous.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:21 AM

Thanks Cheetah. May patience, and peace be with both of us. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:06 AM

EW firstly thank you for taking the time to read the longest post I have ever put on this blog. You said "As to the critical analysis of who mentioned Japan first - well okay. I again ask 'in your estimation was Jesus who he said he was, or did he lie'?"

I think the better question is did those who chronicled Jesus' life, and acts get it right, or not? It is a patchy story with huge gaps told to us by humans like ourselves, working from oral tradition. My answer to that question is that at the least, whether man, myth, or God, the Jesus story portrays a beautiful ideal, a role model for us all, that no human can fully live up to. My own take is that he was man, overlayed by myth, but that understanding does not take away from the supreme beauty of the message.

I think that your question the way you frame it is too much a strict either, or that excludes too many other possibilities. I can't conclusively answer whether, or not Jesus was who he said he was because I don't know what Jesus in the first person said he was, so I am in no position to say he was a liar.

Whether a developed concept, or God, it is all good.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 11:00 AM

WTF, Sorry, You lose. I believe my own hype. :}

-- Posted by dlkcs on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 8:25 AM

...because if the religious aren't kept in check they may actually begin to believe thier own hype.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 7:51 AM

Wow OKR

I read through it, it still seems you mentioned it first -you seem very passionate about it, so if it makes you feel better......uh yah, okay I mentioned Japan first?

So why would such an intelligent person who doesn't need the Bible, who doesn't subscribe to any particualr religious faith - feel so compelled to hang around the religious site?

As to the critical analysis of who mentioned Japan first - well okay. I again ask 'in your estimation was Jesus who he said he was, or did he lie'?

-- Posted by eastwood on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 6:38 AM

One of OKR's comments this morning was long for this kind of forum, so I put it in a separate file:

http://www.marshallnews.com/files/okr-lo...

-- Posted by Eric Crump on Wed, Feb 8, 2012, at 6:21 AM

Well Oklahoma -

Once again your time space continume totally has me lost - but more power to you! I can't figure your time tables, or even find another posting - so please enlighten me.

Smoking Chettah -

May I borrow a phrase = what the hell are you talking about?

I used sarcasm to illustrate the point that I asked about your comments regarding "some kids" and your response was to call the school or "read the articles". So in English, the only way calling the school or reading an article would answer the question posed to you would be if you happened to answer the phone at the school or wrote the article. Posted by Smokin' Cheetah on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 5:15 PM

Kathy - are you sure you and Oklahoma don't collaborate? I try to be sharp but again your time / space thing is really loosing me.

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 7:49 PM

Nope Dlkes it was EW who mentioned first about Japan, "As for the orient being so much more advanced - well might want to read up on how the Chinese were treated at the hands of the Japanese, or the high suicide rate, etc...Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 12:19 PM

Go back ew, and read the entire "Japanese" exchange involving you, Dlkes, and me a couple of times. I'll give you a hint, my above comment was a reply to a Dlkes comment. hint 2: When you get the context you will see your misunderstanding.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 5:47 PM

ew regarding your long post with snippets of other posts, I am going to have to steal a line from WTF, usually addressed to rr3, what the hell are you talking about?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 5:33 PM

eastwood said:

"this is very convenient as those who oppose scripture get to make up the rules as they go along"

The scriptures themselves are a direct result of people making up rules as they went along so I believe that makes it a moot point.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 4:13 PM

OKR-

Pick that "sticky subject" you refer to and lets get after it.

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 3:42 PM

OKR -

It may seem like this link and some of the readers have a commonality here:

http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2009... by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 2:19 PM

when pressed for their reasoning - claim I'm being judged or your'e damning me

claim that someone is trying to interject their personal feelings into the subject and disregard what scripture has to say about it - this is very convenient as those who oppose scripture get to make up the rules as they go along

when all else fails squeal - they're trying to force their religion on me - which isn't the case, but because I've decided on a lifestyle doesn't it make sense to quote from the hardcopy of the manual?

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 3:40 PM

OKR, ..........If that were the case the Japanese would be mired in a general dissolution of family, and morality. Instead their society sans Bible, puts ours to shame when comparing social behavior.............Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 4:31 PM

As for the orient being so much more advanced - well might want to read up on how the Chinese were treated at the hands of the Japanese, or the high suicide rate, etc........Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 9:05 PM

Nope Dlkes it was EW who mentioned first about Japan, "As for the orient being so much more advanced - well might want to read up on how the Chinese were treated at the hands of the Japanese, or the high suicide rate, etc...Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 12:19 PM

check the time....................geez don't you get tired of your endless enuendos? You posted about Japan a good 4 hours before I posted anything.....and suicide is a social behavior.

Is your philosophy = If you can't dazzle with brilliance, then baffle with bulls--t, right?

As for changing the subject - well what where your thoughts about Jesus - was he telling the truth about his Diety or lying .

You did say this about him- ........And "yes' this liberal does believe that the overall image of Jesus's actions represent positive moral and ethical values as opposed to many "right wing" "bible quoting" conservatives.......... Posted by RationalThinker on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 8:32 PM

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 3:31 PM

You are chock full of rhetorical tricks ew. Here is back at you if you care to read it. You might learn something new. LOL

You are disarming in your use of subtle change of topic when you get in a sticky position. Again, that dog don't hunt.

http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2009...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 2:19 PM

Nope Dlkes it was EW who mentioned first about Japan, "As for the orient being so much more advanced - well might want to read up on how the Chinese were treated at the hands of the Japanese, or the high suicide rate, etc........"

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 12:19 PM

EW, I thought the scripture would be understood. The only statement Jesus made about taxes was when others were trying to trap Him. My translation of His statement give to the government what is theirs, but be sure you also give your tenth to God.

As for healthcare, I felt the scripture was telling us that it was our responsibility to care for others, not the government's to tell us how to do it. I followed with Matthew 10:8 which to me shows that Jesus was more concerned with the healing end of things, not regulations.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 12:08 PM

equal taxation for everybody. Period.

I does'nt have to be this hard but there are too many people making money on the chaos. Maybe it's time for a flat tax as there would be no arguement.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 12:03 PM

OKR, I'm sorry, but I'm the one who posted concerning Japan's suicide rate, not EW. I didn't say they had the highest rate, just that they had twice what the United States has. Here is one source, but if you go on the internet you will find more. I had to do a paper on this for college, and I was shocked that their rate was higher than ours.

http://chartsbin.com/view/prm

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 11:56 AM

What the f.....

I agree with the equal taxes, but how about those on welfare, unemployment etc.....a person I know who isn't working just got back over $6,000 in tax return - they don't pay near that.

My wife and I work, I pay over 10,000 a year in taxes, together we may get 1,500, what gives?

It's time to have a flat tax, and to think - didn't national taxes start sometimes around the 1830's?

As for giving up tax exempt status for churches - well right now if churches endorse a specific candidate, etc. they loose their exempt status - remember when some churches that gave up their exempt status around the last election time?

I'm for giving up the exempt status if - Churches are allowed to actively enter into politics, endorse political candidates, and take issues directly to the people to organize "grass root" support, maybe even have churches who endorse "their" candidates for offices......hummmmmm maybe your'e onto something what the f........

Maybe it reflects how weak an anemic how many Churches are - by being prostituted into staying out of society.

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 11:48 AM

No one is asking the rich to pay more. We are asking them to pay the same rate as others do.

This lower rate on capital gains tax rate BS is just another example of where the rich have bought laws to benefit ONLY them.

I got an idea, if we outlaw abortion, will the churches give up thier tax exempt status?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 11:28 AM

Wikipedia -

Japan has one of the world's highest suicide rates, and the Japanese government reported the rate for 2006 as being the ninth highest in the world.[5] 71% of suicides in Japan were male,[2] and it's the leading cause of death in men aged 20-44.

I'm smelling fish, or perhaps crow?

but to be fair Aneki reports the following:

Country Annual suicide rate per 100,000

1. Lithuania

42.0

2. Russia

37.4

3. Belarus

35.0

4. Latvia

34.3

5. Estonia

33.2

6. Hungary

32.1

7. Slovenia

30.9

8. Ukraine

29.4

9. Kazakhstan

28.7

10. Finland

24.3

*

OKR - your'e still a great little rock thrower, but do try to portray things accurately.

But there's no red herring here with a statement of: As for the orient being so much more advanced - ..............or the high suicide rate,etc........Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 9:05 PM

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 11:16 AM

Okay lets render to Ceasar what is Ceasars - but where does it say to tax the "rich" more?

As for Obama's health care plan? I doubt that paying for abortions would be one of the ideas. Contraceptives? well perhaps we might want to look up the gov'ts definition of RU480 and perhaps it's unintentional use - but either way it is used to expell an egg that has become fertilized.

To sell all that one has and give to the poor is a noble cause - but in the story of Mark chptr 10, was the emphasis on selling the goods, or the willingness to leave behind material possessions and follow Jesus when asked? Much like in Mark 14: 7, Deuteronomy 15:11 - though this doesn't mean not to help the poor or needy, but in the context of Mark 14;7 isn't the emphasis being placed on grasping Jesus, and forsaking our worldly want?

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 11:07 AM

No quip just facts EW. Hungary (75%), and Lithuania (85%) Christian both have higher suicide rates than Japan.

Back to a quip; your red herring about Japan's suicide rate, smelled fishy, and didn't hold water.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 10:38 AM

I am against abortion, but I agree with RT concerning education and birth control. Birth control pills, condoms, etc. do not kill. They prevent becoming pregnant. Good quality sex education started at an appropriate age, instead of waiting until most teens and pre-teens have become sexually active has been shown to not only deter teen pregnancy, but, in many cases, teen sex also. I would love for parents to be the ones to do the educating, but unfortunately, most don't. I do however feel that parents should be involved in the sex education classes taught in a school system. It should be a collaborative effort.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 9:33 AM

As for Jesus' thoughts on government healthcare, this what I found: Mark 10:19-22 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.

Jesus was more about dealing with the health issues as they arose Matthew 10:8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 9:20 AM

I actually feel sorry for the Japanese; so much pressure has been put on them by their culture to be "perfect" that the suicide rate is double that of the United States. This includes students whose grades are not acceptable and men who do not have a job and no way to support their family. Suicide is the acceptable form of dealing with one's problems in Japan. It is the only way to keep one's honor when wrong doing by the individual is discovered. A missionary, I was honored to meet, shared that if a train is late in Japan, it is usually because someone has jumped in front of it. On the outside their culture appears perfect, but as happens in most cases, when put under the microscope, it has it's problems and short comings also.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 9:08 AM

There is only one time I know of that Jesus was asked about taxes and this was his response:Matthew 22:16-21 They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?" But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose image is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "So give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

-- Posted by dlkcs on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 8:53 AM

Yep,

Just look at the GOP.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 8:17 AM

Perhaps America, is in decline because of a lack of morals. The abandonment of it's Christian roots.

Any other country also has it's problems, but watch how quickly ours is sliding. Get ready, when it hits bottom we'll see the difference between morals and ethics.

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 7:00 AM

From the short time I've posted here, it seems that many are really good with the little short one-liners or witty psuedo-intelligent quips, and making assertions and never a real statement.

Might I ask, where's the beef? Say something specific and then lets have the intelligence to actually discuss it to the conclusion.

I've heard about how scientifically innaccurate the Bible is - so where is it?

I've heard that prophecy is self-fulfilling - yet there has been no comment on the mathmatical improbablity of those prophecies.

Names mentioned of scientists that are Christian -only retort was that they must of been afraid f persecution - but many where listed after threat of that.

No answers about spontaneous life.

People mentioned that they like Chritians, who don't believe that there is only one way to Heaven - yet by definition a Christian believes that Jesus Christ is the only way to Heaven..duh?

Gee, if your'e on a religious blog - by some stretch of the imagination do you think that maybe people will quote from their book of belief?

I mean as a wild guess - or has someone else here published a religious book that we can stand in awe of and listen to those things you've fulfilled, prophecies fullfilled, stories of your triumphs and downfalls,miracles you've preformed?

-- Posted by eastwood on Tue, Feb 7, 2012, at 6:58 AM

EW it occurs to me that even the most savory fish may have a bone, thus it is not to be swallowed whole. I did not proclaim Japan a Utopia. The topic was disintegration of our society, and from that you strayed when listing Japanese faults that have nothing to do with the status of their current social order, nor the point of discussion. It is a neat trick, but it doesn't work here. What you really indicated by your response was that you have no real bone of contention, though I am sure you did not swallow what I offered whole. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 11:45 PM

Oh goody! More scripture! I just love scripture 'cause scripture is proof!

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 9:54 PM

RT -

Can I inquire about what leads you to believe that Jesus would be in favor of health care and the rich paying more taxes?

I'm wondering how can you extrapolate the political views of Jesus, but deny his own claims to be Diety?

John 10:31-33 [31] Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, [32] but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?" [33] "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

Jesus made the claim to be Diety. He either was or wasn't.

Was he crazy, a liar or telling the truth?

Frequently Jesus quoted the Old Testament - he believed in its accuracy, it was mentioned in a posting that "ancient man" didn't know much about fetal developement how about the instances -

I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb. Jeremiah 1:5 This was written some years before the birth of Jesus, infact hundreds of years before....... sounds like they might of known more than we give them credit for, then again there is the little story of King David and Bersheba, John the Baptist, Sarah being told of the birth of her son...............They knew about conception, pregnancy........

It seems that modern man might not know as much as he thinks as some text books actually still teach "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" theory of human embryonic develpement. Come on, lets not think too highly of ourselves.

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 9:29 PM

As for the orient being so much more advanced - well might want to read up on how the Chinese were treated at the hands of the Japanese, or the high suicide rate, etc........

People are much like septic tanks - there's sinkers and then there's floaters. We're all still in the same tank.

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 9:05 PM

smoking cheetah -

To bait a hook perhaps, but to try to place it in ones mouth?

You're far to wise and crafty to resort to such a sorry innuendo, I think more highly of you than that.

As for others well...................

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 9:03 PM

Rr3: "Is it ok to quote the bible in the name of tax increases but not use the bible to defend the unborn? Do all liberals believe this?"

I doubt Obama is a true believer in Christianity. He might be a deist, but that's at most per much of what I've read and seen. I believe he quotes the bible to point out the dichotomy between Jesus's overall image as a caring "love thy neighbor (and enemies)" type of person, yet many bible quotes are found and interpreted to justify actions opposite of that image. On the other hand, it is quite obvious that in the tribal times of the writings of the bible, man had virtually no knowledge of fetal development. Most women probably didn't show pregnancy, or even knew they were pregnant until sometime around the first tri-semester. Your interpretation of when a fetus becomes a real human being (and your belief in the beginning of a soul) is just that, your interpretation. And "yes' this liberal does believe that the overall image of Jesus's actions represent positive moral and ethical values as opposed to many "right wing" "bible quoting" conservatives. Even though I do not believe Jesus was the son of God, I do believe that his actions presented in the bible warrant believing he would have been for health care for all, and in general would have been for the rich paying a much larger share to help fund programs that provide a social network for the needy.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 8:32 PM

I agree of course EW that the family is, and should be the fount of establishing good moral character. I will never believe that the Bible must be the only text to assist a family in establishing it. If that were the case the Japanese would be mired in a general dissolution of family, and morality. Instead their society sans Bible, puts ours to shame when comparing social behavior. How do you explain that?

Further, I believe that bad parents make a new batch of bad parents. You can see that in the microcosm that is Marshall in the pages of this news paper. I see the names of grand children, of those who were my peers that got in trouble, also getting into trouble. There must be something that intervenes to break the chain of the sins of the fathers visited forward.

Unfortunately in our society any intervention, this side of punishment for what our society labels criminal behavior, is dumped upon the school system. Of course resources for the school system to meet this challenge are few, and far between. Then we in the community get angry when the schools fail.

I believe that the schools, and the populis would be better served if we some how could bring better parenting skills to the fore, in the homes, before the kids walk through the school house door weighted down with baggage that keeps them from reaching for the treasures available there. Of course that would cost a lot of money for a generation, maybe two, and we have more important things to spend our money on than the next generation to shape our society. What a world.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 4:31 PM

I have one child left in the Marshall School District. I have 3 who have already graduated. Overall my experiences have been good, but I am a very involved parent. I like being part of what my children are doing so I attend activities, volunteer to help, and do homework right alongside my kids. I know teachers, coaches, sponsors etc. very well. While I will not say that I have never had a negative experience, the positives outweigh the negatives.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 4:14 PM

Smoking Chettah -

You'd really need to talk to the school about whatever alternative education is, or read the past newpaper stories.

Oklahoma Reader - See my point exactly - how could a school teach morality when even people here can't come to a conclusion?

Perhaps better to consider ethics, but even that is iffy,

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 3:22 PM

EW maybe I am overly sensitive to the tenor of your post "To some humans are only higher evolved animals = so why not act like one? to others humans are made in the image of God - (we should behave in that fashion,", but there seems to be an insinuation that the only way you can raise good kids is if you implant Christianity into their very being. If that is what you meant I personally find it insulting. I also believe it to be untrue.

I raised a son, largely by myself, who is as fine a human being as I know. He has met crisis within his own family with courage, commitment, and consistent love, crisis that would, and does crumble most (90%), families, whether Christian, or not. Not once did we go to church, nor did I present Christianity to him as a necessity. I did by deed, and word impress on him love of family, the universal Golden Rule, and the importance of understanding human nature. Both he, and his wife have become Deists through their own powers of reasoning, and have eschewed emotional blind leaps of faith.

He is an outstanding father, my grandson's friends prefer to hang out at my son's home PARENTS PRESENT. My grandson, raised by my son, and his wife, is the kind of kid many grand parents would love having. He shows every sign that barring catastrophy, he will be as good a citizen, and parent as his Dad. God, church, and Christianity have not played a large part in any of what I have related.

So, you have your personal experience, I have mine. Yours is fine for you, mine for me. Please have the humility to believe that your way, chosen with your finite mind, is not the way for all others who also choose with a finite mind, what is best for them.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 2:19 PM

He does that all by himself.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 1:32 PM

rr3yvo,

Manufacturing more reasons to hate Obama are you?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 1:24 PM

Smoking Cheetah -

Marshall Public School System - they have what is called an Alternative Education Program. There was alot about it, last year in the paper.

They supposedly take kids who aren't Special Education and help them get their bearing right so they can finish H.S.

The program is practically dead it has only one full time teacher a part time para and another teacher for only three hours a day. the kids say it's become a dumping ground for the "other kids" not those who wanna learn but those who have other activities- but it did start out as a good thing.

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 12:28 PM

Placated hardly! Besides taking scripture out of context he mocked God and the bible. Should be fine for you though.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 12:17 PM

Smokin Cheetah -

It all begins with the parents. If they keep tabs on their kids and who they have as friends - or don't have it makes a big difference.

Ever wonder why so many kids are waundering around during the summer - staying at a friends house - but do they ever call the house or are they just so lazy they call the kids cell phone. do they check on where or what the kids are spending their work money on?

We as a community expect the school to teach the kids "morals", yet what happened to the parents doing it? fine example when kids are sitting at the dinner table smoking a joint with their folks, or theres a "new" uncle or aunt spending the night over the weekend, or Friday we'll drink till Sunday afternoon.

Home bears the responsibility for teaching morals or the lack of it - teachers can only model morals - or explain where they recieve/d their basis for their morals.

Teachers like anyone else sometimes get burned out on trying to teach kids right and wrong - shoot, look at this forum the adults here can't even be in agreement.

To some humans are only higher evolved animals = so why not act like one? to others humans are made in the image of God - (we should behave in that fashion, have a higher moral conscience) uh oh, brainwashing, which God, yada, yada,yada... Some believe that you can't seperate your morals from work/business others say you can't let your morals be public. So lets teach ethics..

Why expect strangers to teach our children their morals - I not sure I want strangers shaping our family morals.

Okay and now for those who want to cast a stone, nail to a cross, or light the roads to Marshall - what were we doing Wednesday night? or Sunday Morning?

Did we go to worship? Did we invite anyone?

-- Posted by eastwood on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 12:13 PM

SC the tuition is paid by the school district we live in. We pay school taxes regardless whether we have a child in school or not so that is a non-issue. Evidently I haven't had the same experience with the schools that you have. So far it has been positive. My child did have an appendicitus attack before sports practice one day and had to be taken by ambulance to the hospital. My wife got to the hospital first and when I got there both of her coaches, the pricipal and the activities director were there to see how she was doing. As for caring about the students at least my experience is positive.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 12:13 PM

rr3yvo,

Our leaders only quote the bible to placate people like you anyway.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 11:13 AM

The Perversion of the Words of Our Lord Jesus Christ by the Sinner Barack H. Obama

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/02/05...

Is it ok to quote the bible in the name of tax increases but not use the bible to defend the unborn? Do all liberals believe this? Evidently because none have the courage to call him on it.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, Feb 6, 2012, at 6:21 AM

SC I don't live in the Marshall school district. I did go to high school here and looking back at what it was like then I wouldn't want my children going to school here. But I now have a child going to Marshall because there is more sports and academic choices for them. I was hesitant but so far I see it is a lot different then when I went. So far I have been impressed but I guess you could consider me a newbie because I haven't experienced the whole picture yet. Also not living in the immediate community I may not have the same experience with the system.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 11:24 PM

I suppose I could have just said money talks in every aspect of life. It is just the way things are. Still it grates on me that some of those who were born on third base go through life thinking they hit a home run. I make it a point to ridicule their lack of humility, and intrinsic stupidity.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 10:38 PM

Another point of view WTF regarding your statement " "What if our military only protected those who could afford it?" is that situation in one sense, is already in place.

Poor youngsters, who can not find good jobs, in some cases, and places, any jobs, have no viable alternative to enlisting in the military resulting in their injury, or death in ill conceived foreign wars. Those youngsters who can afford other alternatives are not by necessity forced into the military.

It is a case wherein the poor are not protected by the military, instead are put in harms way by the military to allegedly protect their peers who can afford to avoid harms way.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 10:18 PM

WTF you said "What if our military only protected those who could afford it?"

I guess we would get used to it just as we have gotten used to our justice system fully protecting only those who can afford it. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 9:45 PM

What the f---

Just think, 56,000,000 more possible tax payers may very well have protected our Social Security.

Smoking Cheetah -

IEP's are pretty much for anyone regardless of socio-economic status that has a "learning impairment". The ability of how far the IEP goes is dependant on advocacy for the child, and of course the severity of the impairment as well as type of impairment.

Behavior may change depending on the educational environment, teacher, difficulty of subject, home support, severity of disability and if there are any factors affecting the emotional well being of the child such as marital status of parents, economics and chemical issues such as alcohol/drugs.

IEP's are an excellent safeguard for students with disabilities, but as with anything you only have the rights you know about and exercise. Safeguards can sometimes be misunderstood as entitlements and then it cn actually harm the student - remember the rest of the world doesn't operate around an IEP.

Interestingly, did you know here in Missouri there are a number of IEP students who stay in H.S. after graduation because the law allows it till 21? Down syndrome especially.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 9:40 PM

Eastwood,

Always money for bullets, never money for bedpans.

What's wrong with this picture?

What if our military only protected those who could afford it?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 8:23 PM

rr3yv0 -

I haven't had the opportunity to read ahead, or not all, but it's scary......evaluating health treatment or not treatment based on age, income, or ability to contribute to society? Geez

Noone seems to wanna talk about how the gov't already controls over 63% of all health care in this country now -

but now we live in a country where the freedom to suceed/fail has been taken for the feeling of security.

Either way, Congress knows enough to establish a seperate health bill for themselves and still tax burden those who opt out of the gov't gestapo mandated health coverage.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 7:53 PM

Smokin Cheetah-

An IEP is both a blessing and a curse. It is supposed to "level" the playing field for a SPED kid. While the other kids are doing 20 math problems an IEP might specify that the child only needs to do 5 or whatever number.

SPED does meet specific needs - but frankly, why would a beginning math class where you do only 1/3 the work count the same as an advance Algebra class?

Weighting classes provides students with real world situations - frankly I think a student who has a C+ in Calc is doing more,learning more than a student in applied math getting a math credit.

Mixing students so the Special Education student (depending on the learning disablility) doesn't get left behind does just that - they don't get left behind everyone just stops. There is more funding for schools in regards to SPED programs than for Gifted or Enrichment programs, and SPED teachers outnumber the more advanced placement teachers.

I do have compassion on those of special needs. I have a family member that is SPED, he functions on the high end of the chart for Aspberger Syndrome. He is very fortunate to (at this point in his life) beable to read several grade levels beyond his year, do math several grade levels beyond his years.

Much work has been done at home, school and his neighborhood to get/keep him on track. It is expected that he behave as any other child, without tantrums, without being selfish, and showing respect for others - if you're familiar with Aspbergers this isn't usual. The family approach has been, the world won't treat you as if you have an IEP, so get used to it. Basically, a little Forest Gump philosophy - when life is hard you gotta work harder.

IEP's when used to facilitate learning are great, but too readily it becomes an entitlement, or atleast that's my experience.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 6:20 PM

eastwood,

Ok, you first.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 4:12 PM

Ex-Muslim Boy Clings to Faith Despite Beatings

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2012/Fe...

You won'd get this from our lame stream media.

"His father, Hakeem, was once an Islamic scholar who had studied the Koran in Iran and Syria. When his questions about Islam went unanswered, Hakeem searched elsewhere for the truth. He discovered it in the Bible and in church."

This is coming to America folks, they will use our religious freedoms against us. I mean we can't even say a prayer in school but we have to bow to their religious demands. The only religion being persecuted is Christianity.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 3:51 PM

Eastwood you may have a point. You know Pelosi told us we needed to pass the bill so we would know what was in it. What we have found in Obamacare has not been good so far. Have you been reading ahead?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 3:41 PM

Hey here's a thought about improving economic stability, providing for the welfare of the world, and perpetuate the human species.

Well I take it most of us posting are probably th age of 50+, you know the time when we start having health issues? Well how about mandatory termination from the human factor? It would cut health insurance, nursing homes, free up real estate, open jobs, etc.....

In subscribing to the survival of the fittess and perpetuating the evolution of the human race - lets not allow the human factor to become infiltrated by those of lesser genetic material. Why allow the less than average to reproduce? Lets keep the human gene pool strong!

Those on disablility, prolonged unemployment, having children out of wedlock - shoot, they aren't contributing to society as a whole, but are rather taking from it - lets eliminate them from the human factor.

Prolonged illness, cancer teatment, etc...... too costly, too much pain and we really don't want money going to someone who may suffer a decrease in the quality of life do we?

It's seems to be too much to ask a female to carry a child for 9 months and then give it up for adoption, or keep it , if life is defined by convenience - why not end those of inconvenience?

Inmates with critical helath issues, or mandated 20+ to life - termination from the human factor, many inmates come from families of continued criminal enterprise.

Look, Darwin would of supported it, evolution supports it, common sense supports - If people are only evolved animals, no souls etc......what would be the loose?

It is projected that after this Presidential election that the country will be 60% of the population on gov't programs and 40% paying for the programs. Let's eliminate the waste from the human factor.

Strange isn't it- Christianity emphasized working for what you got, people providing Nongovernmental charity, family taking care of family,,,,,, but then perhaps "Big Brother" has a better idea.

Perhaps the better idea would be - let those in gov't have a different proposed health plan, let them indulge in insider trader (already being done), be above the law (check out the Kennedy's)stress ethics but don't give any basis for morals (outlaw those inconvenient truths) = Oh wait, they're already moving that direction.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 3:35 PM

Unfortunately, the prevailing economic thought of the day still is to "grow" into prosperity. Also, one of the biggest challenges we face as a species will be to attain zero population growth, and even reduce our numbers (planned of course). And the Catholic church ironically stands in the way of that effort. The answer to zero growth is not abstinence but education AND free and easy access to birth control.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 10:00 AM

Smoking chettah-

You asked about the Mashall Public School System, and impressions about it.

From my interactions with it - it reflects much of the Marshall community.

Expect only what is required of an individual - come on - a 60% is considered passing? that's only a little more than half.

Special Education Students are graded the same as regular class students, but because of IEP'S they don't do the same work. Soon an IEP student who functins at perhaps 70% capacity or a regular student could very well be a validictorian. Classes aren't weighted as to credits.

Students leave campus during lunch - some coming back stoned - or not coming back. Some coming to school in the morning stoned - Grandma check your pills.

Teachers who demand more students in the way of academics or discipline catch non-support from parents - remember if you do more than required you're open to criticism-because how do you justify more - when a kid don't want to do it and has trouble? many parents feel it's asking too much for many parents to get involved.

It's amazing to see the differences between Fayette and Marshall - especially the town square - the areas around the college. Different expectations = different sorts of people.

Look, really read the paper, this little paper has ALOT of what is going on - we read to little and think not enough. Alfred Pleas's? People getting caught for dope, etc......and really no time, accomplice's to murder still walking our streets and the family that not once, or twice perjured themselves on state T.V. not charged, some juveniles blowing up mailboxes and throwing one of the bombs under a car, according the the State Highway Patrol under the sexual offender category (not counting guys who whizzed in the alley,etc) we have over 50 predators living in the city alone!

Cheetah, I believe that most of Marshall has given up, the fiasco of the Eastwood bridges, Mayor going to what the City Manager or some such office, a school board running unopposed,,,,,,,,,,

Cheetah, I'm seeing pretty much what most of the country is seeing - elected officials appointing "cronies" in various offices so sooner or later financial gains/material gaines or feathering nests happen and citizens are withdrawing.

-- Posted by eastwood on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 9:12 AM

Missed it by thaaaaaat much!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 8:22 AM

Rr3: "Ignorance RT, really! Yeh it really shows!"

Glad to see you actually understood what I was saying.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 8:09 AM

David Korten... awesome presentation/sermon. Not sure it was a sermon, but whatever you call it, it was fantastic. If you close your eyes, his voice reminds me of David Letterman. Watching the church audience reaction was interesting as well. This gives me hope that there is a common ground that we (all religious and non-believers) can agree and come together on. Again, thanks Nana!!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 8:00 AM

Ignorance RT, really! Yeh it really shows!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 7:54 AM

Irrelevant extrapolation, really! Then please explain the difference between abortion and murder. I mean you all keep bringing it up. What is the difference? You cry about wars and people dying but you sleep at night knowing that the unborn are dying and you are all for it.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 7:50 AM

Nana, only up to minute 10 and he has my full attention. A consumption society cannot last indefinately, and I have always felt just like he is laying it on the line. Only and hour to go, but hard to stop watching. Thanks!

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sun, Feb 5, 2012, at 7:18 AM

Before any of you (religolites) ever try and label atheism a religion, please wathc this 6 minute clip of a humorous Bill Maher clip on the subject. It is humorous and hopefully might even provoke some thought:

http://youtu.be/f8U_JveHS8E

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 3:59 PM

Rr3: "Islamic parents found guilty of murdering daughters... Wouldn't this be pro-choice?"

This shows the massive amount of ignorance on both the Islam and the Christianity side.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 3:43 PM

RT re: Correctomundo . As well said as it can be said.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 1:26 PM

No rr3. That is just irrelevant extrapolation by you.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 1:09 PM

Islamic parents found guilty of murdering daughters

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default....

Wouldn't this be pro-choice? I guess if they had killed them before they were born then this wouldn't be a problem now would it?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 10:44 AM

Earl, you are correct and we certainly do get tired of arguing the points. But the pro-life (against the will of the mother) group won't give up either. I will not give up speaking out against this group whose only solution is to make it impossible for a woman to have safe abortion, yet want to defund agencies that try to make that decision a thoughtful one, as well as those agencies trying to do the right things to reduce the problem. They are against birth control and premarital sex (almost as fruitless as being against breathing). Its going to happen, so let's be pragmatic about it instead of irrational.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 9:53 AM

Rr3: "But aren't you saying as pro-choice that you think abortion should be a choice and you will do nothing about it."

Pro choice means I am glad to provide tax money to dispense free birth control and free health services for prenatal care and counseling as well. The "choice" is not mine, nor do I want to make that choice, nor should it be mine legally. Those who think the problem can ever be reduced by using penalty are living in an irrational world (kind of fits well with those believing that sky daddy is watching). Good education and free birth control is the only way to substantially reduce unwanted pregnancies.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 9:45 AM

But aren't you saying as pro-choice that you think abortion should be a choice and you will do nothing about it. How do you differentiate? Is calling it pro-abortion immoral for some reason? Also the last time I checked it still required a man to complete the pregnancy so why do you not have the courage to hold the man responsible and the woman. Abortion is not responsibility for your actions it is freedom from your actions. What do you do with that?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 5:50 AM

WTF: "I know a lot of people who are pro-choice. I don't know anyone who is pro-abortion."

Correctomundo! Even though the start of cell splitting starts when the sperm penetrates the egg, it is a long way from forming anything like a human. That is why the real issue is somewhere around the first tri-semester. Do any of you xtians believe there is a soul created/attached to that egg the moment the sperm penetrates the egg? What about the egg all by itself without the sperm? And then what about the millions of sperm every male makes daily. I'll assume you must at least draw the line where sperm penetrates the egg? There are millions of sperm/egg penetrations every day, and most do not attach themselves to the uterus, and for those that do, a small portion stay attached for just a short length of time. Are you counting those millions in the Roe v Wade count? The history of abortion is that millions of women over the globe have sought back room illegal (and unsafe) clinics as well as self inflicted wounds to try and abort pregnancies. We cannot go back to those times, and xtians do not have a right to force women to carry a pregnancy to full term if they do not want. I have come to the conclusion a long time ago that it is up to the woman to do what she wants with her body. I'd like to see all woman who are pregnant have the best chance possible to be at peace and joy with the love that can be brought on by that special bond. But, many women find themselves in extremely harsh conditions and financial and mental stress during pregnancy. And some of you want to try and tell her she has no choice and she has to go thru with that pregnancy. Oh yes, she made the choices that resulted in the pregnancy. No she didn't, and it is never that simple. And not only do you think she should be forced to go thru with an unwanted pregnancy, you want to stop funding clinics that provide valuable pre-natal healthcare and many states are enacting laws to prevent easy access to birth control, all in the name of religion because of the belief of a soul that is created exactly when the egg is penetrated. Men have absolutely no right to tell a woman what she can do with her body or any pregnancy choices. When you finally accept that, then perhaps just maybe you will decide to help her out in every other way possible by funding Planned Parenthood and free birth control.

-- Posted by RationalThinker on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 5:34 AM

Thanks once again ND. A predicament, not a problem, but of course.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 1:06 AM

The thought occurs to me when thinking of all the new posters that you may find more imaginary friends here than you would in a children's day care facility, or a nursing home. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 11:30 PM

"And He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt" Luke 18:9

Drop the rocks rr3 you are not to throw the first one. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 11:22 PM

So true!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 8:36 PM

Exodus 21:22--23

22 "If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide.

23 "But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life,

If a person injures a pregnant woman and her child dies would that be murder or at least man slaughter?

We can have a doctor achieve the same result and call it abortion and make it legal. What do you do with that?

You want to be pro-choice but justify it by saying you are against abortion. The blood of each child is on those that think legally making that choice is ok. God will be the ultimate judge though.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 8:13 PM

What is the difference between abortion and murder?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 7:50 PM

Just as I figured.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 6:10 PM

To God there are no strangers in far away lands. Everyone is precious to Him. The imperfections we see in this world come about because men are imperfect and don't treat others, or this Earth, in the manner that God intended. I am pro-life, no matter a person's age, but I am also a realist and understand that many of the travesties that are brought up in this forum are caused by humans. So until we find a way to stop being humans, and imperfect ones at that, I don't see the wars or killing stopping any time soon.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 5:23 PM

EW,

Why are we only concerned about the lives of the fetus? That is the original question. Isn't all life sacred or only the unborn? Everyone else is on thier own right? As a species we kill each other everyday, in alarming numbers for reasons that range from the absurd to the sublime but the only distinction you would have us make is whether a woman should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term no matter what the potential outcome. Why is it you get to have it both ways but nobody else can? If you you get to make a distinction then so do I.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 4:44 PM

Yes, and the gov't could have made the choice to kill your mother and potentially you in the process.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 4:39 PM

What the f,,,,

I'm glad my parents didn't have the choice.

I'm glad the government said - I had a right to live, that my folks had the right to put me up for adoption or keep me.

That's pro-choice. Everyone won.

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 4:24 PM

EW,

I said nothing about disarming the public. I'm talking about how we can't seem to get anything done politically because every oppositional arguement can usually be parsed down to our cultural feelings about god, guns, gays, abortion and money.

I know alot of people who are pro-choice. I don't know anyone who is pro-abortion. There is a distinction. This decision is a between the parents and thier doctor. We cannot make that decision for them especially when we don't know all the facts.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 4:12 PM

rr3yvo,

I would expect you to make a distinction about which lives count and which lives don't. As a "christian" how do you do that? Wait, don't answer that, I think I already know.

It's a shame those 56,000,000 children aren't here. I'm sure that a large number of them would be poor and you could advocate that they don't enjoy the same level of healthcare as those with means. Just think, 56,000,000 less people for you to judge. Onward christion soldier, go forth and witness

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 4:02 PM

What the f,,,,

I agree with much of what you said., my view on abortion is, that though the zygote, embryo or fetus is considered an undeveloped human it should still be considered to have "Huamn Hood", Meaning that it is going through developement, and as such is human. Much like a toddler is developing into a child or and an dolescent is developing into an adult.

I agree we have had many "police actions" that aren't in the interest of national security. It is hard to fight a war where the enemy dresses like a civilian, during the day and then choose to become a martyr.

War also becomes increasingly complex when it might be needed and we have the political trash we have that also sees it as a time to profit from it, - which fuels nay sayers into aserting it is only for business.

Then we need to consider the culture of the people - some people have war, get over it and can later become allies (U.S.- England-Japan, etc....) and then we have cultures which seem to be generational wars, passed from father to son.

Guns don't really present anymore of a problem than pencils do. Blaming a gun for violence is like blaming a pencil for a misspelled word. Really it is in the hands of the owner. In states where concealed carry is allowed many of the violent crime statistics have gone down by double digits - this may explain why women and the elderly are a rapidly growing group in CCW.

Looking at the great state of California, or Illinois it is somewhat alarming how such "advanced states" harbor some of the most violent crimes in America.

From another standpoint - hasn't history demonstrated that when you disarm the public you have "subjects"? I know I can't beat a tank, or down an F-18 but I can take a stand - is a stand always taken because you will win - or for the simple love of what is right - and/or to rally more people? The Declaration of Independence is a document I model my attitude after.

As for industry showing vilence to our children - turn off the T.V. - stop buying products that endorse that type of show - Hollywood will follow the dollar. And monitor what type of video games and music videos we watch/buy.

You mention that: We live in a culture were a breast is deemed obscene - this I will only make a brief comment on, as I have been a fan of these since I was a toddler. Our society has deemed that breast(s) are titillating - look at the plunging neck lines, the measure of sex appeal by bust size - how many young ladies draw attention to themselves by placing the "goods" in the window. We perpetuate it ourselves.

I do remember a time though when in church a lady would just throw a little blanket over her shoulder and the baby would be fed, and they still do it in our church - but with some modesty. Perhaps the obscenity isn't in the act -but the presentation? Like comparing a Michelangelo to a Pent House - same equipment but different presentation?

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 3:54 PM

56,000,000 just wondering how that compares to the number that have died at the hands of our leaders that have unleashed our military might on people who have done nothing to us and how many have died of the poor and less fortunate that are left to suffer? Besides being poor what are they suffering from when most have a TV and a cell phone. Just wondering how that compares to reality?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 3:46 PM

eastwood,

While I understand your stance on abortion, I don't necessarily agree but The real problem I have is that the fetus seems to be the only life we hold sacred in this country. Why is that?

We've had leaders that have unleashed our military might on people who have done nothing to us, the poor and less fortunate are left to suffer and die because we can't be bothered with being our brothers keeper. Not to mention our absolute fetish with guns. We live in a culture were a breast is deemed obscene but we show thousands of acts of violence to our children without batting eye and if some folks had thier way we could get bullets out of vending machines.

So, while I understand your moral stance on abortion why do we always stop there?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 12:53 PM

Nana -

Easy tiger, not looking for a date or anything else.

I've tracked all manner of creature before, and trying to find tracks in a womans heart, well it's harder than stone.(paraphase) - Griz Hunter on Jeremiah Johnson

It is either ludicrous to call themselves 'Christians' or the religion itself has become, once again, the tool of EMPIRE and tyranny, and an excuse for genocide - only this time, it's total religious 'cleansing' - and THAT is UN-American in the extreme.Posted by NanaDot on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 4:30 AM

Whew, glad you got that off your chest, come on you gotta share your feelings and stop holding back!

No one has ever told you that you where going to Hell, that's not for me to say, but I have given reference to what the Bible says, that is my obligation a a Christian.

As for the above you posted, right on! Monte Python said it best - You never expect the Spanish Inquistion! When since the Salem Witch Hunt, have you witnessed the mad pack of blood thirsty foaming at the mouth Christians maurading though the land?

As for genocide - haven't heard of Christian banning together to do this.......but it is disheartening to think how little Christians have done to stop it.

Not trying to start a fight, but we're up to over 56,000,000 humans aborted since Roe vs Wade.

As for former embryo,zygote,fetus and baby - I have a problem with that.

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 11:59 AM

Hey, got back on, I'm really not News. I do know who he is though, and yes he did live near Montague Hill (does a hill really have a specific starting point) If your'e at the bottom your still on the hill right, or if your'e on the top?

He lived more specifically on Ladder Avenue - He is unique.

You'd know me as soon as you were to see me, I live on Eastwood and I'm probably the only guy over 40 who is still in shape (round is a shape isn't it?)

-- Posted by eastwood on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 11:45 AM

rryvo,

Sure, just take a look at all of your comments.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 8:22 AM

Those that believe that we came from nothing and will go back to nothing when we die--Can anyone show me nothing and what it looks like?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, Feb 3, 2012, at 6:28 AM

OKR, My husband just corrected me. As he pointed out Eastwood and Montague are pretty much the same since Eastwood technically comes out across the viaduct again. So I stand corrected. But I still think you made some interesting points in regards to certain individuals. :}

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 2:12 PM

Dlkes, yes but your sick too.

rr3, I'm glad you enjoyed EW's sense of humor, hey I enjoy yours too.

EW, maybe we are even, you didn't get mine, I didn't get yours. If so you keep trying, and I will too. There is far too little humor in this world, and on these blogs. We all gotta get it where we can.

Oh yea Dlkes, I knew where Montague Hill is. It was a stretch I know, but Eastwood heads you in the direction of Montague Hill. It still wasn't as big a stretch as the rest of my post. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 1:46 PM

And, OKR, I always enjoy your humor!

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 1:23 PM

I live on Montague Hill and that is not Eastwood. Montague Hill is outside Marshall city limits. I'm not saying News Across and Eastwood are not the same person. Just clarifying road locations.

-- Posted by dlkcs on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 1:20 PM

I thought Eastwood's post was funny. At least that's what I got out of it. Maybe you're right some people don't get it.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 1:17 PM

Eastwood, are you sure you aren't News Across?

(humor)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 11:16 AM

Lighten up eastwood, all in jest. I guess it should have been apparent to me from some of the entries on this blog that some people just don't get it.

NOTE: This post is meant to be humor.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 11:13 AM

OKR -

Man, there are some people who are so good at accusations - bet they are the first to pick up a rock also.

I can tell you about the guy on Montague Hill, he was a neighbor - an interesting fella - would of fit right in with many of you. A real "financial whirlwind".

Tell you what, come on , I'll tell you mine if you tell me yours, we'll make it all public - you send yours to Eric, I'll send mine to Eric and he can publish the greatest discovery since the "Brontosaurus", oops I mean Java man,,oops,,Orce man,,oops,,I mean Piltdown man,,oops,,,,I mean,,,,,,,,,,,,

Come on Nanadot, Rational Thinker, Oklahoma Reader, News, What the f,,,, send Eric your phone number and name - to make sure it's all legit and then publish it - but you gotta go first............

-- Posted by eastwood on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 6:45 AM

2 Corinthians 5:17 (NASB95)

Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, Feb 2, 2012, at 6:38 AM

News Across' last post was January 18th, eastwood's first post January 18th. News Across has said many times that he lived at Montague Hill, which is out Eastwood Street. Hmmm?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 11:13 PM

Wow wtf you actually come up with a funny I'm so proud of you.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 9:44 PM

There is a thought in my mind that keeps recurring, much as a gnat circles its exterior, and perhaps more aggravating. I can not rid myself of it by swatting it, as I could a persistent gnat, I will have to get rid of it the only way I know, which is to expel it to this blog, and be done with it.

Has anyone other than me noted that News Across' announced trek into the wilderness coincides with eastwood's appearance on this blog?

I am wondering if he may have become bored with repeating himself over, and over in response to the rote redundancies of the far right posters. To alleviate that has he in fact, layered his nom de plume with another, and taken con, rather than pro just for the hell of it. For that matter Ole Earl popped up around the same time. Could it be that he has also assumed that role, maybe for comic relief?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 7:43 PM

rr3: "I knew we shouldn't have let those Neanderthals in the neighborhood." Funny rr3, but it was the Neanderthals that likely said that about our GGGGGGetc. Grand Pappys. They maybe were nearly the original indigenous people, and you know what we do to indigenous people. :)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 4:56 PM

Rr3yvo,

You shouldn't speak ill of your family.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 4:02 PM

I knew we shouldn't have let those Neanderthals in the neighborhood.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 3:11 PM

Possibilities rather than absolute conclusions are the nature of ongoing investigation of new scientific evidence. Recent discoveries about Neanderthals are a case on point. There are absolutes, including that humankind is not 6,000 years old, nor 15,000 for that matter.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/201...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 1:05 PM

Also there are the Denisovans to consider. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-enviro...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 12:31 PM

More on Neanderthals. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/0... This is fascinating stuff concerning the origin of man,and questions raised regarding that. It is also interesting in that it evidences genetic differences today between sub-Saharan Africans, and the rest of the modern human population.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 10:48 AM

Here is some recent information regarding Neanderthals that should be considered when bringing them into the discussion on this blog. It is difficult to make the case that they are not a separate entity from homo sapiens.

http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM


Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account on this site, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.

Related subjects