All Hell Breaks Loose Over Christian Oscar Nod

smh_23 · January 25, 2014, 8:47pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

We really aren’t that far apart. I just happen to think that the truth always seems to be something you wouldn’t ever guess at (referencing modern physics and the like here). And to me, that makes the Jesus story at least as plausible as what I read about in science text books. I do believe without a doubt that there is a cause though.
[/quote]

You’re right that we’re not far apart. I don’t believe any particular religion to be plausible, at least not nearly as plausible as the possibility–attested how many thousands or millions of times in history?–that whoever developed the mythology simply made it up. However, I often echo your second sentence above by saying that when any of these people, physicists very much included, try to look at the real big question–why and how can there be, rather than be not?–their answers sound like they require a big helping of faith. Hawking on the origin of the universe, for example.

smh_23 · January 25, 2014, 8:55pm

[quote]JEATON wrote:
As a further aside, you made a number of personal attacks. It is clear you hate being shown up.

I’d don’t mean this ugly, but I can tell you are a smart guy, but pretty much a failure at life. And no, I don’t mean “a complete loser,” but you clearly failed to live up to yout potential.

I’ve seen shades of you a hundred times. Sometimes even associates who we hire that chaff under the hard work and drugery of being a baby lawyer.

Indeed, I have a niece who is a MENSA member, like you.

She had a 1500 SAT, but B- student is school. She didn’t get into an Ivy League school – went to Boston College. She was a B- student in college, dropped out, and now a night manager at some hotel.

Dates a fat guy who drifts between assistant rabbi jobs who is also a MENSA member.

Like you, she’s a rabid liberal Democrat.

Like her, instead of looking to yourself and actually working hard, you are hostile to those that succeed, thinking yourself superior to them — and yet they do better at you in life, probably in all respects.

The reason you hate conservatism is it requires, above-all, personal responsibility. To someone like you, who SHOULD have been great, personal responsibility is the last thing you want, because you would have to recognize the reason you are a nobody – despite the great potential of your intellect – are your bad life choices.

Similarly, you like liberalism, because it tears down the successful who work hard. You envy and hate the successful. (Actually, the correct word is “chamad,” and makes its apperance in the 10th commandment.) Because of your “chamad” you enjoy them being victims of theft, and you undoubtedly justify it to yourself.

In short, you are a perfect foot soldier for the Democrats.

Smart, but resentful. Full of hate and envy — of chamad. Fearful of having to be answerable for your actions, and thus a willingly dependent slave of your masters.

It’s a sad way to go through life, and I feel very bad for you.

[/quote]

This excerpt says a hell of a lot more about its author than about its subject. Beans is right about Ad Homs, and this one is a doozy. It’s one thing to attack someone because he’s shown himself to be X, it’s another to write up a wandering list of guesses and assumptions based on posts on the internet that take, what?, a minute or two to pound out and send away.

VTBalla34 · January 25, 2014, 9:45pm

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

This excerpt says a hell of a lot more about its author than about its subject. Beans is right about Ad Homs, and this one is a doozy. It’s one thing to attack someone because he’s shown himself to be X, it’s another to write up a wandering list of guesses and assumptions based on posts on the internet that take, what?, a minute or two to pound out and send away.[/quote]

What does it say about Jerry Eaton’s bookmarking it and digging it up to be used a year later?

Gettnitdone · January 25, 2014, 11:18pm

[quote]JEATON wrote:

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Science is everything man. It’s about seeking knowledge, investigating, experimenting, all that jazz. Religion gets a bad rap because believers believe all they need to know is in the pages of a book. There’s a science to religion - who wrote the book, where did this come from, who was this person, etc. Jesus and God could be a hoax, Allah could be the real deal, Judas could have been the best 100m swimmer in the Ancient world, we just don’t know.

There’s only a problem when religion tries to halt human advancement and expansion of knowledge - that’s where a lot of the vitriol comes from. Normally, “science nerds” don’t care if you believe the world was XXXX years old, just as believers don’t care that this particle could help explain how we got here. [/quote]

I wish I had more time to contribute. Just know that science is not and never has been the absolute that you want it to be. Example:

http://www.nature.com/news/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes-1.14583[/quote]

Exactly! We keep on looking for answers, coming up with new hypotheses and testing them. No one said science was absolute, it’s beautiful because it gives us so many different insights and makes us look forward to the horizon to see what we will learn next.

Even religious institutions are being bit by the science bug. The Vatican has recently welcomed the idea of extra-terrestrials, probably rationalizing that out of this world beings are further proof God created the universe.

JEATON · January 25, 2014, 11:40pm

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:

[quote]JEATON wrote:

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Science is everything man. It’s about seeking knowledge, investigating, experimenting, all that jazz. Religion gets a bad rap because believers believe all they need to know is in the pages of a book. There’s a science to religion - who wrote the book, where did this come from, who was this person, etc. Jesus and God could be a hoax, Allah could be the real deal, Judas could have been the best 100m swimmer in the Ancient world, we just don’t know.

There’s only a problem when religion tries to halt human advancement and expansion of knowledge - that’s where a lot of the vitriol comes from. Normally, “science nerds” don’t care if you believe the world was XXXX years old, just as believers don’t care that this particle could help explain how we got here. [/quote]

I wish I had more time to contribute. Just know that science is not and never has been the absolute that you want it to be. Example:

http://www.nature.com/news/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes-1.14583[/quote]

Exactly! We keep on looking for answers, coming up with new hypotheses and testing them. No one said science was absolute, it’s beautiful because it gives us so many different insights and makes us look forward to the horizon to see what we will learn next.

Even religious institutions are being bit by the science bug. The Vatican has recently welcomed the idea of extra-terrestrials, probably rationalizing that out of this world beings are further proof God created the universe.

[/quote]

The real intent of my writing is not to say, you must think in this way. The real intent is: here are some of the many important facets of this extraordinary Kosmos; have you thought about including them in your own worldview? My work is an attempt to make room in the Kosmos for all of the dimensions, levels, domains, waves, memes, modes, individuals, cultures, and so on ad infinitum. I have one major rule: Everybody is right. More specifically, everybody â?? including me â?? has some important pieces of truth, and all of those pieces need to be honored, cherished, and included in a more gracious, spacious, and compassionate embrace. To Freudians I say, Have you looked at Buddhism? To Buddhists I say, Have you studied Freud? To liberals I say, Have you thought about how important some conservative ideas are? To conservatives I say, Can you perhaps include a more liberal perspective? And so on, and so on, and so on… At no point I have ever said: Freud is wrong, Buddha is wrong, liberals are wrong, conservatives are wrong. I have only suggested that they are true but partial. My critical writings have never attacked the central beliefs of any discipline, only the claims that the particular discipline has the only truth â?? and on those grounds I have often been harsh. But every approach, I honestly believe, is essentially true but partial, true but partial, true but partial.
And on my own tombstone, I dearly hope that someday they will write: He was true but partial… Introduction, Collected Works of Ken Wilber, vol. VIII (2000)

Gettnitdone · January 26, 2014, 12:19am

[quote]JEATON wrote:

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:

[quote]JEATON wrote:

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Science is everything man. It’s about seeking knowledge, investigating, experimenting, all that jazz. Religion gets a bad rap because believers believe all they need to know is in the pages of a book. There’s a science to religion - who wrote the book, where did this come from, who was this person, etc. Jesus and God could be a hoax, Allah could be the real deal, Judas could have been the best 100m swimmer in the Ancient world, we just don’t know.

There’s only a problem when religion tries to halt human advancement and expansion of knowledge - that’s where a lot of the vitriol comes from. Normally, “science nerds” don’t care if you believe the world was XXXX years old, just as believers don’t care that this particle could help explain how we got here. [/quote]

I wish I had more time to contribute. Just know that science is not and never has been the absolute that you want it to be. Example:

http://www.nature.com/news/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes-1.14583[/quote]

Exactly! We keep on looking for answers, coming up with new hypotheses and testing them. No one said science was absolute, it’s beautiful because it gives us so many different insights and makes us look forward to the horizon to see what we will learn next.

Even religious institutions are being bit by the science bug. The Vatican has recently welcomed the idea of extra-terrestrials, probably rationalizing that out of this world beings are further proof God created the universe.

[/quote]

The real intent of my writing is not to say, you must think in this way. The real intent is: here are some of the many important facets of this extraordinary Kosmos; have you thought about including them in your own worldview? My work is an attempt to make room in the Kosmos for all of the dimensions, levels, domains, waves, memes, modes, individuals, cultures, and so on ad infinitum. I have one major rule: Everybody is right. More specifically, everybody Ã¢?? including me Ã¢?? has some important pieces of truth, and all of those pieces need to be honored, cherished, and included in a more gracious, spacious, and compassionate embrace. To Freudians I say, Have you looked at Buddhism? To Buddhists I say, Have you studied Freud? To liberals I say, Have you thought about how important some conservative ideas are? To conservatives I say, Can you perhaps include a more liberal perspective? And so on, and so on, and so on… At no point I have ever said: Freud is wrong, Buddha is wrong, liberals are wrong, conservatives are wrong. I have only suggested that they are true but partial. My critical writings have never attacked the central beliefs of any discipline, only the claims that the particular discipline has the only truth Ã¢?? and on those grounds I have often been harsh. But every approach, I honestly believe, is essentially true but partial, true but partial, true but partial.
And on my own tombstone, I dearly hope that someday they will write: He was true but partial… Introduction, Collected Works of Ken Wilber, vol. VIII (2000)
[/quote]

Very cool abstract. I definitely agree, which makes me go back to my original post that basically espoused a parallel observation to this. A lot of “non-believer” respect people who have their own unshakable religious beliefs, and vice versa. Most of the vitriol against religion comes from the limitations religious institutions put on science, and by science I mean the continued advancement of knowledge and US (because that’s what the concept of science is - it’s not an opposing “belief” - that would be religion A vs. religion B).

pittbulll · January 26, 2014, 5:36am

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
my morality is all about supporting life .
[/quote]

This is an outright lie. Your posts in any of the abortion threads tend to prove that. [/quote]

this is where we disagree, I think life is more valuable after it is born rather than when the sperm meets the egg
[/quote]

Then you don’t “support life” you selectively support what you feel is worth your support. As in, you support it when you feel it is worth supporting, not because of some determining factor.

[/quote]

yes I feel my sperm has value , albeit not the same value not the same value I place on my children

pittbulll · January 28, 2014, 9:32am

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
]

Call me what ever you like , I could give a FUCKK:) my morality is all about forcing other people to supporting life as I see fit. Unborn and Ancient
[/quote]

Fixed that for you.
[/quote]

this is where we disagree , I think it is you and your ilk that are doing the forcing . I want people to have the right to abort a fertilized egg. You want to force every one to share your view that a fertilized egg is a human or chicken or any other complete animal

DoubleDuce · January 28, 2014, 1:39pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
]

Call me what ever you like , I could give a FUCKK:) my morality is all about forcing other people to supporting life as I see fit. Unborn and Ancient
[/quote]

Fixed that for you.
[/quote]

this is where we disagree , I think it is you and your ilk that are doing the forcing . I want people to have the right to abort a fertilized egg. You want to force every one to share your view that a fertilized egg is a human or chicken or any other complete animal
[/quote]

We were talking about you using weapons to force some people to pay for other people’s healthcare. And for the record, it’s science that says a fertilized egg is a living human.

And yes, I will do all the forcing I have to in defense of the innocent. I’m sure if I tried to kill my one month old, you’d use force to stop me. Because you FEEL a baby is as important as an adult. You act like a baby that can’t feed to cloth or do even hold up it’s own head is worth as much as a fully conscious adult with developed relationships. You’ll force your view on the value of one life over my right to decide.

So, Let’s say your wife is pregnant. Lets say it’s 14 days along (starting to develop eyes and shit). I punch your wife in the stomach and she’s okay, but your 14 day old son dies. You think I should just get an assault charge?

Because if you did that to me, and ever got out of jail, I’d slit your throat in the night for murdering my son.

pittbulll · January 28, 2014, 5:44pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

We were talking about you using weapons to force some people to pay for other people’s healthcare. [/quote]

WTF did I say where it could be stretched into this ? please cut and paste

If you mean I expect the wealthy to pay the same rate I pay , yes I do but not at the point of a gun

DoubleDuce · January 28, 2014, 6:13pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

We were talking about you using weapons to force some people to pay for other people’s healthcare. [/quote]

WTF did I say where it could be stretched into this ? please cut and paste

If you mean I expect the wealthy to pay the same rate I pay , yes I do but not at the point of a gun
[/quote]

I don’t think you know how a government works. You might want to look into that. and on average, the wealthy not only pay far more than you they pay on a much higher rate.

Bauber · January 28, 2014, 10:02pm

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I have covered this before but I grew up in a religion that I went to church 6 days a week and twice on Sunday . The Jesus I grew up with healed the sick fed the hungry , Today’s Christians are against health care are against feeding the (LAZY) poor albeit via the Republican party .

IMO Christ would never align with the Republican party . This is why the So Called Christians are not liked [/quote]

Supporting the governments theft of money from one person to give to another is not the path to Heaven. Jesus’ instructions were on a personal level. I believe most liberals support government charity solely because they are not charitable themselves.
[/quote]

Of course they are charitable. Charitable with everyone’s money but their own.

pittbulll · January 28, 2014, 11:02pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

We were talking about you using weapons to force some people to pay for other people’s healthcare. [/quote]

WTF did I say where it could be stretched into this ? please cut and paste

If you mean I expect the wealthy to pay the same rate I pay , yes I do but not at the point of a gun
[/quote]

I don’t think you know how a government works. You might want to look into that. and on average, the wealthy not only pay far more than you they pay on a much higher rate.[/quote]

If I can write off my truck , my office , my travel , my hobbies , my nights out, my clothes and my dressage horse I will gladly pay the same rate as any one you know

Bauber · January 28, 2014, 11:48pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

We were talking about you using weapons to force some people to pay for other people’s healthcare. [/quote]

WTF did I say where it could be stretched into this ? please cut and paste

If you mean I expect the wealthy to pay the same rate I pay , yes I do but not at the point of a gun
[/quote]

I don’t think you know how a government works. You might want to look into that. and on average, the wealthy not only pay far more than you they pay on a much higher rate.[/quote]

If I can write off my truck , my office , my travel , my hobbies , my nights out, my clothes and my dressage horse I will gladly pay the same rate as any one you know
[/quote]

Then explain why the top 10% pay nearly all of the taxes.

pittbulll · January 29, 2014, 1:35am

[quote]Bauber wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

We were talking about you using weapons to force some people to pay for other people’s healthcare. [/quote]

WTF did I say where it could be stretched into this ? please cut and paste

If you mean I expect the wealthy to pay the same rate I pay , yes I do but not at the point of a gun
[/quote]

I don’t think you know how a government works. You might want to look into that. and on average, the wealthy not only pay far more than you they pay on a much higher rate.[/quote]

If I can write off my truck , my office , my travel , my hobbies , my nights out, my clothes and my dressage horse I will gladly pay the same rate as any one you know
[/quote]

Then explain why the top 10% pay nearly all of the taxes.[/quote]

I know they did not get it by lopsided policy , they fucking earned it

pittbulll · January 29, 2014, 1:43am

The way I see taxation today is , they are taking from the middle class and giving it to the poor (IN ASSISTANCE which I don’t mind so much ) and to the wealthy in forms of tax breaks and write offs . This is part of the lopsided policy I am speaking

countingbeans · January 29, 2014, 1:59am

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

If I can write off my truck , my office , my travel ,[/quote]

You can, as soon as you start your own business.

No one on Earth gets to deduct hobby losses. You can only take expenses to the extent of income, otherwise break even.

You too can commit fraud anytime you’d like.

See the first post.

[quote]and my dressage horse
[/quote]

Tired “I hate Mitt Romeny” talking point. He didn’t write of his horse. You don’t even understand the situation you are trying to use to your advantage. They were business losses, the horses are a business, they compete. And losses means he spent more on the business than he made in income.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
and to the wealthy in forms of tax breaks and write offs . [/quote]

This is so utterly fucking wrong it is laughable. I’ve explained this, and pointed it out to you too many times.

So at this point, prove this bullshit, or stop spreading it. You can’t back any of this up except to whine on about taxation, which you don’t understand. You come across as a jealous moocher when you say stuff like this. Which is really annoying because I know you aren’t like that.

UtahLama · January 29, 2014, 2:12am

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

If I can write off my truck , my office , my travel ,[/quote]

You can, as soon as you start your own business.

No one on Earth gets to deduct hobby losses. You can only take expenses to the extent of income, otherwise break even.

You too can commit fraud anytime you’d like.

See the first post.

[quote]and my dressage horse
[/quote]

Tired “I hate Mitt Romeny” talking point. He didn’t write of his horse. You don’t even understand the situation you are trying to use to your advantage. They were business losses, the horses are a business, they compete. And losses means he spent more on the business than he made in income.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
and to the wealthy in forms of tax breaks and write offs . [/quote]

This is so utterly fucking wrong it is laughable. I’ve explained this, and pointed it out to you too many times.

So at this point, prove this bullshit, or stop spreading it. You can’t back any of this up except to whine on about taxation, which you don’t understand. You come across as a jealous moocher when you say stuff like this. Which is really annoying because I know you aren’t like that. [/quote]

LOL…never argue with a CPA on tax write offs.

Bauber · January 29, 2014, 7:52am

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Bauber wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

We were talking about you using weapons to force some people to pay for other people’s healthcare. [/quote]

WTF did I say where it could be stretched into this ? please cut and paste

If you mean I expect the wealthy to pay the same rate I pay , yes I do but not at the point of a gun
[/quote]

I don’t think you know how a government works. You might want to look into that. and on average, the wealthy not only pay far more than you they pay on a much higher rate.[/quote]

If I can write off my truck , my office , my travel , my hobbies , my nights out, my clothes and my dressage horse I will gladly pay the same rate as any one you know
[/quote]

Then explain why the top 10% pay nearly all of the taxes.[/quote]

I know they did not get it by lopsided policy , they fucking earned it
[/quote]

You still didn’t explain why. The top 10% pay the a disproportionate amount of the total tax %. It may be lopsided, but they are also paying the majority of taxes.

You could take every single dollar of those 10% and redistribute it to the bottom 50% and those 10% would have the money back within 5-10 years.

But since you know so much about these mystical write offs, I want you to do my taxes.

pittbulll · January 29, 2014, 9:25am