In article <47e975df$1@news.povray.org>, nam### [at] nospamgmailcom 
says...
> I agree.  Even so, I can't help but fear that most of these 
> non-oppressed, educated people would still be in search of other people
 
> to tell them how they should live their lives -- like indeed is very 
> common to see people in big industrialized cities to search for some 
> help to their personal problems with psychoanalysts (a modern father of
 
> sorts).  The problem with people isn't education or political regimes: 
> it's that they are too damn lazy to try to solve their problems and end
 
> up resorting to others.
> 

Kind of like Protestants.. Start with the premise that you don't need 
the trappings of the church, just a personal relationship with god, then 
proceed to build lots of churches, rewrite bits of the Bible to sound 
better, then become some of the most obnoxious people on the planet 
about being sheppards, by "telling people about Jesus", even when they 
don't want to know. lol

-- 
void main () {

    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

In article <a30ju3p36qteeban2l1htfmffh7fafb443@4ax.com>, 
mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom says...
> >Hence we can all be part of both the clueless majority and enlightened
 
> >minority ;-)
> 
> Why should the majority be clueless and the minority enlightened?
> 
Show me a time in history that this wasn't the case. lol Seriously, 
*everyone* is clueless about some things, a small number though rise 
above the majority, to varied amounts, due to upbringing, or natural 
talent, and often have, in some areas, a far clearer understanding of 
the world than the vast majority. The majority though, tend to look for 
those that confirm their opinion, not those that challenge it (which is 
one of the main traits that distinguish that other minority). This is 
what priesthoods are based on, the careful catering to the 
*expectations* of the parishioner. When churches have, on rare occation, 
gotten uppity and told people they didn't want to hear, the result where 
usually not too good for the church. Though, its a toss up whether this 
has been worse than the cases where they told their followers what they 
wanted to hear, only to have those people later discover it was a lie 
(like a number of fun scandals the US has seen recently, of which the 
Catholics are but one in a broad membership).

-- 
void main () {

    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> Kind of like Protestants.. Start with the premise that you don't need 
> the trappings of the church, just a personal relationship with god, then 
> proceed to build lots of churches, rewrite bits of the Bible to sound 
> better, then become some of the most obnoxious people on the planet 
> about being sheppards, by "telling people about Jesus", even when they 
> don't want to know. lol

  It's good to see that this thread about bashing ID proponents has not
converted into an attack towards christian movements.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:55:49 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> people willing to blame every natural disaster on God's punishment of
> what ever group they hate this week,

The funniest one of this category was a tornado that hit locally here.  
We had a guy (yes, past tense) who did work on our fireplace for us (an 
honest-to-$DEITY chimney sweep, actually).  He came by to do some work 
and got into a discussion with my wife about the reason for the tornado.  
He's a self-proclaimed "born-again" Christian (hands up all those who 
thought I was going to say he was a Mormon - surprise! <g>).

The tornado hit downtown Salt Lake City - it wasn't a huge one, but it 
dropped down *near* a gay bar.  His bias clearly showed when he said "God 
was punishing the gays."

My wife's response was very straightforward.  "My brother's gay.  Your 
God missed if he was trying to punish the gays.  This is the last job you 
will do for us - you're fired."

Ironically, if it was God's "punishment" for something, while missing the 
gay bar, he did actually drive it right through a construction site for 
the new (at the time) LDS general conference center - knocking down a 
couple of cranes in the process, one of which was actually occupied by a 
worker at the time (the worker survived).

The only death was an out-of-towner who was setting up for the annual 
outdoor retailer's conference.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> True but he said that 90% of people are sheep and that in not polite
> if you think that each one is a person.

Sorry.  But I think now sheep are offended. :P

> Why should the majority be clueless and the minority enlightened?

I don't know, but it's not my fault.  I aim high myself and don't look back to
see how others are doing.  And please, I'm not talking about money...

If you think a little about it, only about 10% of everything are really any
worth anything, be it music, art, food or, indeed, people.  I know, pessimist
as I am, I should be an atheist.

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> By the religious authorities, dictators, kings etc :)

and absent-minded parents! :P

> Depends what you mean by out-of-ordinary heroes? A good man or woman
> would do me.

I'd say being a good person this days is already out-of-ordinary.  But I was
thinking more about enlightned people, like many famous scientists, artists,
heroes and religious leaders...

> Not when I was young in dockland Glasgow. I think that is an American
> thing.

Yes, I'd say I've seen too many sitcoms revolving around neurotic americans...
:P

> Let people have something worthwhile to do and the means to do it and
> they would be a lot happier and healthier.

Yes.  But then, suppose in some near future we reach an utopia where death and
disease have been abolished, useful work is done by robots and all we do in our
free time is entertain ourselves with little hobbies, sex and some sort of TV.
I wonder how much pleasure we'd take out of this kind of life rather than our
ancestral struggle to survive.

But then, supposedly heaven/nirvana is like that.  Only no sex, I guess...

> >I don't force God down the throats of anyone, do I?
>
> Small gods refers to the diminishing power of schisms in religion. And
> no I don't think you do, do you?

No.  And God bless you! :)

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> > Kind of like Protestants.. Start with the premise that you don't need
> > the trappings of the church, just a personal relationship with god, then
> > proceed to build lots of churches, rewrite bits of the Bible to sound
> > better, then become some of the most obnoxious people on the planet
> > about being sheppards, by "telling people about Jesus", even when they
> > don't want to know. lol
>
>   It's good to see that this thread about bashing ID proponents has not
> converted into an attack towards christian movements.

He was actually doing ok, pretty factual intersperced with personal opinions,
until that final obnoxious AOLer lol...

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:30:00 -0500, Warp wrote:

>   It's good to see that this thread about bashing ID proponents has not
> converted into an attack towards christian movements.

Well, I have to agree with Patrick's sentiment (though not necessarily 
his presentation) about those who tell non-believers regardless because 
"they know better what's for us than we do".  That's practically a 
dictionary definition of 'hubris'.

But it's also fairly common for the "believers" to presume they're being 
attacked during a discussion about what some non-believers consider the 
idiocy of a religious position, so then we're even, eh?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:58:05 -0500, nemesis wrote:

>  I aim high myself and don't look
> back to see how others are doing.

I'm sure we probably don't need to rehash the "I'll pray for your soul" 
moment from a few months ago, do we? ;-)

(Just tweaking your nose, honestly)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:58:05 -0500, nemesis wrote:
>
> >  I aim high myself and don't look
> > back to see how others are doing.
>
> I'm sure we probably don't need to rehash the "I'll pray for your soul"
> moment from a few months ago, do we? ;-)

ok, so I was half-jokingly trying to get you pissed off.  My bad.  A completely
sane, sterilized and logic discussion on people's beliefs is never entirely
possible because of natural bias.  I apologize.

Post a reply to this message