On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:16:37 EST, "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom>
wrote:

>
>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...

I fear for the society that you live in then. And why should being a
famous scientist make you good? As for artists well history is full of
them being castigated for their views and I won't give my view on most
of the religious leaders around.


>> 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.

Wake me up when it happens 

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

Why no sex? Christianity is not the only religion but it has
sanctified a lot of the old ones.

>> >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! :)

Is that the same God that will condemn me to everlasting Hell because
I don't believe He/She exists?
And BTW I am blessed IMO.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:04:53 -0700, 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

I can't argue with this :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:14:48 -0700, Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet>
wrote:

>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). 

But the knack is not to think or treat them like that or you end up
"knowing what is best" for them. Then becoming one of the oppressors. 

>This is 
>what priesthoods are based on, the careful catering to the 
>*expectations* of the parishioner. 

True IMO

>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).

Well you are on a hiding to nothing if you try to say that you are
infallible. 
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:58:05 EST, "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom>
wrote:

>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

So I eat sheep and don't care :)

>> 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...

Hmm! Reminds me of the prevalent attitude in Jamaica, where I worked a
few years ago.
 
>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.
>
>
I don't know about being a pessimist I just think you are talking out
of a hole in your head. To translate - nonsense. If you think that 90%
of everything is worthless try looking for the good. 
If I had lived in earlier days I would have had to go along with all
this "I believe". Praise the Lord I don't have to "here and now"
(another quote, from A Huxley this time)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:04:09 -0500, nemesis wrote:

> 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.  

It didn't work. ;-)  Seriously, I'm comfortable enough in my own beliefs 
that I don't need them to be validated by others.  I will also admit to 
engaging in a little "let's see if we can wind this guy up" myself. ;-)

> My bad.  A
> completely sane, sterilized and logic discussion on people's beliefs is
> never entirely possible because of natural bias.  

I think it is possible (I've had several discussions that were completely 
sane.  What it takes is for the people involved in the discussion to be 
able to set aside their biases and just listen to the differing 
viewpoints rather than assume that such discussion includes a judgment of 
the other person's beliefs.

The irony to me (because I was raised Lutheran, as I have mentioned 
before) is that many who profess to be Christian are so ready to judge 
those who do not believe, yet Jesus himself said essentially that you 
should leave the judgment to God, and that it isn't man's role to do so.

> I apologize.

No need. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> I fear for the society that you live in then.

It's pretty much the same as yours, as in "western".

> And why should being a
> famous scientist make you good?

Perhaps an unwise choice of words:  "accomplished" might be more well 
suited.  It might do good by making a finding that might lead to 
revolutions like agriculture or domestication of fire have.  Or simply 
better medicine, better tools etc.

> As for artists well history is full of
> them being castigated for their views

Castigated or not, such views sure were eye-openers.

> and I won't give my view on most
> of the religious leaders around.

Most = 90% and I think I've already made my point about the finding of 
true gems among rocks.

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

Hmm, supposedly because sex is a bodily function and when disembodied 
the soul should have no need for it?  OTOH, you don't even need to get 
as far as Hinduism or others far east religions to suggest sex in 
Heaven:  Judaism considers that in the final days the Garden of Eden 
will be restored right here and the dead will resurrect with their own 
bodies restored.  Perhaps that explains why they are careful with their 
possessions.

> Is that the same God that will condemn me to everlasting Hell because
> I don't believe He/She exists?

I don't think anyone was ever punished for not believing God exists. 
Now, worshiping other gods or idols is another story...

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
.....
> Then why are these the only tactics the other side uses every place.
> Yeah, I know, PZ is not exactly nice. Nor was I this time. But he isn't
> the only one talking about the dishonesty, the straw men, the diatribe,
> the misrepresentation and the constant repetition of so called "facts"
> that DI pushes, no matter how many times they have been proven invalid.
> And this movies entire premise, that we should give equal time to faith
> based biology, because atheism leads to holocausts.. What the $#@$#@ is
> that other than vulgar diatribe?
.....
1. Sorry for the late reply... a toothache took me out of action for a day and a
half.

2. I've never suggested that the pro-ID faction has generally taken the high
road.  I would certainly make similar recommendations with regard to conducting
civil discourse to them if I thought there was any real hope of being listed to.
 If, as you imply, their behavior is objectionable, why emulate it? ... to
"win"? ... win WHAT?  It's the pervasive sense of this or that group of people
being "The Other Side" which is one of the major root causes of reason being
superseded by emotional compulsion in the human decision making process.  If one
is going to promote reason, the first necessary step is to BE reasonable to the
best of one's ability.  Ignorance, fear, bigotry and hatred are the only real
"enemies".  One doesn't cure a disease by despising the sufferer.

Best Regards,
Mike C.

*********************************
Q: Does a cow have Buddha nature?
A: Moo.

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> So I eat sheep and don't care :)

Poor creatures.  The believers eat them because are not of the same 
kind.  The atheists eat them even knowing we are all mammals. :P

Not that I'm vegan...

> I don't know about being a pessimist I just think you are talking out
> of a hole in your head. To translate - nonsense. If you think that 90%
> of everything is worthless try looking for the good. 

I always try to look at things under a positive spin.  From my 
experience, that's where the numbers 10/90 come from.  Look at TV, 
listen some radio, read a few magazines, date a few chicks.  Perhaps I 
just have too high expectations...

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:26:07 -0300, nemesis
<nam### [at] nospamgmailcom> wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>> I fear for the society that you live in then.
>
>It's pretty much the same as yours, as in "western".
>

I fear for mine too as it is drifting more to the west every year. And
what makes you think that all Western societies are the same? I've
just come back from the Netherlands and I would say that it is
different from the British one. People think and behave differently as
they do in the Latin countries in Europe. 

>> And why should being a
>> famous scientist make you good?
>
>Perhaps an unwise choice of words:  "accomplished" might be more well 
>suited.  It might do good by making a finding that might lead to 
>revolutions like agriculture or domestication of fire have.  Or simply 
>better medicine, better tools etc.
>

I wouldn't trust a scientist to chose my wallpaper never mind tell me
what to do :)

>> As for artists well history is full of
>> them being castigated for their views
>
>Castigated or not, such views sure were eye-openers.
>

So! I wouldn't trust an artist to chose my morning paper never mind
tell me what to do :)

>> and I won't give my view on most
>> of the religious leaders around.
>
>Most = 90% and I think I've already made my point about the finding of 
>true gems among rocks.
>
To yourself maybe not to me.


>Hmm, supposedly because sex is a bodily function and when disembodied 
>the soul should have no need for it?  OTOH, you don't even need to get 
>as far as Hinduism or others far east religions to suggest sex in 
>Heaven:  Judaism considers that in the final days the Garden of Eden 
>will be restored right here and the dead will resurrect with their own 
>bodies restored.  Perhaps that explains why they are careful with their 
>possessions.
>

You can't keep your foot out of your mouth, can you?

>> Is that the same God that will condemn me to everlasting Hell because
>> I don't believe He/She exists?
>
>I don't think anyone was ever punished for not believing God exists. 
>Now, worshiping other gods or idols is another story...

Sorry, this is planet Earth we are talking about, are we? 
It must be early in the morning for you so lets forget all about these
posts
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:35:54 -0300, nemesis
<nam### [at] nospamgmailcom> wrote:

>
>> I don't know about being a pessimist I just think you are talking out
>> of a hole in your head. To translate - nonsense. If you think that 90%
>> of everything is worthless try looking for the good. 
>
>I always try to look at things under a positive spin.  From my 
>experience, that's where the numbers 10/90 come from.  Look at TV, 
>listen some radio, read a few magazines, date a few chicks.  Perhaps I 
>just have too high expectations...

You've lost me. :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message