Arrest the Pope!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
One of the truly ominous viewpoints presented here (can’t remember who said it) is that our morals and subsequently our laws and its trappings were developed within us as a method to “advance the species”. Wow. Think about the implications of that gem.

Orion knows exactly where I’m coming from. What about the rest of you?[/quote]

But I do not agree with you.

I am just saying that there is very little practical difference between your views and mine and that you at least know where you are coming from whereas they see their unchecked premises as “being rational”.

I like people who at least know that they are religious better because usually they have thousands of years of moral reasoning to fall back on.[/quote]

…seriously? I mean, come one… really?
[/quote]

Ya RLY!

Who do you think actually studied these topics for millenia if not churches?

Religious people have at least some experience with discussing ethics, most people do not an mistake their gut feeling for moral behavior which is a mistake religious people tend to avoid.

[/quote]

…i’m speechless. I’m without speech. There’s no real difference between religious moral behaviour and “gut feeling”. If there’s any discernable reason for studying human moral behaviour it’s finding ways to manipulate and control the masses. Here we have an institution whose leaders buried evidence and encouraged sordid acts by it’s employees whilst claiming to be an authority on said moral behaviour, …and you like them because they have a history to fall back on? Unbelievable…

183

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
One of the truly ominous viewpoints presented here (can’t remember who said it) is that our morals and subsequently our laws and its trappings were developed within us as a method to “advance the species”. Wow. Think about the implications of that gem.

Orion knows exactly where I’m coming from. What about the rest of you?[/quote]

But I do not agree with you.

I am just saying that there is very little practical difference between your views and mine and that you at least know where you are coming from whereas they see their unchecked premises as “being rational”.

I like people who at least know that they are religious better because usually they have thousands of years of moral reasoning to fall back on.[/quote]

…seriously? I mean, come one… really?
[/quote]

Ya RLY!

Who do you think actually studied these topics for millenia if not churches?

Religious people have at least some experience with discussing ethics, most people do not an mistake their gut feeling for moral behavior which is a mistake religious people tend to avoid.

[/quote]

…i’m speechless. I’m without speech. There’s no real difference between religious moral behaviour and “gut feeling”. If there’s any discernable reason for studying human moral behaviour it’s finding ways to manipulate and control the masses. Here we have an institution whose leaders buried evidence and encouraged sordid acts by it’s employees whilst claiming to be an authority on said moral behaviour, …and you like them because they have a history to fall back on? Unbelievable…
[/quote]

Eph, this is an honest question, no condescension or ulterior motives or anything else of the sort. How much ethical philosophy have you actually read?

Because, I mean, we are not just talking about what you appear to be talking about here. Do you really believe, anywhere in the entire history of ethical philosophy as pertains to the doctrine of Moral Law, that anyone, anywhere, ever came up with the idea that child abuse and systematic cover-up of crimes against children would be a solid moral tenet?

184

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
One of the truly ominous viewpoints presented here (can’t remember who said it) is that our morals and subsequently our laws and its trappings were developed within us as a method to “advance the species”. Wow. Think about the implications of that gem.

Orion knows exactly where I’m coming from. What about the rest of you?[/quote]

But I do not agree with you.

I am just saying that there is very little practical difference between your views and mine and that you at least know where you are coming from whereas they see their unchecked premises as “being rational”.

I like people who at least know that they are religious better because usually they have thousands of years of moral reasoning to fall back on.[/quote]

…seriously? I mean, come one… really?
[/quote]

Ya RLY!

Who do you think actually studied these topics for millenia if not churches?

Religious people have at least some experience with discussing ethics, most people do not an mistake their gut feeling for moral behavior which is a mistake religious people tend to avoid.

[/quote]

…i’m speechless. I’m without speech. There’s no real difference between religious moral behaviour and “gut feeling”. If there’s any discernable reason for studying human moral behaviour it’s finding ways to manipulate and control the masses. Here we have an institution whose leaders buried evidence and encouraged sordid acts by it’s employees whilst claiming to be an authority on said moral behaviour, …and you like them because they have a history to fall back on? Unbelievable…
[/quote]

Joe, you do realize your “inane ramblings” are gonna force young Eph to put you on his Ignore list, doncha? The train is a-headed thataway.[/quote]

u mad

186

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Shucks, I’ve never been mad with lil Eph. He’s a slightly different version of you but like you he still hates much about America, Christianity and God. He just doesn’t seem quite as evangelistic as you. He still preaches his faith but doesn’t pound the podium quite as hard.[/quote]

Should probably take America out of that sentence.

188

Back to the topic anyway.

189

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Shucks, I’ve never been mad with lil Eph. He’s a slightly different version of you but like you he still hates much about America, Christianity and God. He just doesn’t seem quite as evangelistic as you. He still preaches his faith but doesn’t pound the podium quite as hard.[/quote]

Should probably take America out of that sentence.[/quote]

Based on what?[/quote]

Based on the fact that I do not hate “much” about America. Your other assertions might be closer to the mark however.

191

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Then again to be fair much of America is based on Christianity and God[/quote]

That’s not how I view it.

192

Hm. Posting pics is more technical than I remember.

193

[quote]Cortes wrote:

Those societies that used the philosophies of Moses, Jesus, Confucius and Muhammad as their foundations tended to do pretty well. I am not in any way arguing that those societies were free from wrongdoing. In fact I already said that once. But their establishing principles clearly served them well. Thousands of years well, in fact.

[/quote]

Confucius’ moral system was based upon empathy and understanding others, rather than divinely ordained rules.

How does he fit with your outlined theory of exactly divinely ordained rules?

I’m confused. Aside from not answering any of the questions posited about your own beliefs, you are now inserting contradictory examples to prove your case.

Also, I saw nothing wrong with Goose’s posts, even if he did apparently. Nobody was bashing your religion, anymore than you are of others lack thereof.

He posed some simple summaries of the discussion, and you promptly ignored him. I hope this won’t result in kind, but I don’t see how stifling earnest participation is helping us reach a goal of mutual understanding.

That’s all I’m after, is to understand where you and by association, other Christians, are coming from.

The only thing I’ve been told my whole life is Faith is the answer to my questions. Seemingly simple questions about glaring incongruities in the Bible are met with contempt. Obviously I have not spent my life dedicated to finding better people to explain it to me, but I have kept an open mind throughout. It doesn’t seem that this is reciprocated too often, at least in my experience. I am not trying to make any sweeping generalities, but merely sharing my background.

In the general feeling of this whole thread, I heard one of the funniest quotes today:

I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you.

194

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
One of the truly ominous viewpoints presented here (can’t remember who said it) is that our morals and subsequently our laws and its trappings were developed within us as a method to “advance the species”. Wow. Think about the implications of that gem.

Orion knows exactly where I’m coming from. What about the rest of you?[/quote]

But I do not agree with you.

I am just saying that there is very little practical difference between your views and mine and that you at least know where you are coming from whereas they see their unchecked premises as “being rational”.

I like people who at least know that they are religious better because usually they have thousands of years of moral reasoning to fall back on.[/quote]

…seriously? I mean, come one… really?
[/quote]

Ya RLY!

Who do you think actually studied these topics for millenia if not churches?

Religious people have at least some experience with discussing ethics, most people do not an mistake their gut feeling for moral behavior which is a mistake religious people tend to avoid.

[/quote]

…i’m speechless. I’m without speech. There’s no real difference between religious moral behaviour and “gut feeling”. If there’s any discernable reason for studying human moral behaviour it’s finding ways to manipulate and control the masses. Here we have an institution whose leaders buried evidence and encouraged sordid acts by it’s employees whilst claiming to be an authority on said moral behaviour, …and you like them because they have a history to fall back on? Unbelievable…
[/quote]

Yeah well yes, religious teachings are an attempt to indoctrinate the masses- I just doubt that that is necessarily always a bad thing.

The Catholic church for example has hundreds of years of experience under her belt when it comes to pondering moral questions whereas you basically start from scratch.

That is not even a contest and a little child fucking wont change that. Also, I would like to know where their moral teachings encourage child abuse- The very fact that they are accused of hypocrisy shows that they do not live according to their teachings-

195

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:
If it causes unnecessary harm to other beings, it’s wrong.
[/quote]

But why is causing unnecessary harm to other beings wrong? Other than your “feeling” it is so?[/quote]

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I, and others, despise pedophilia because our morality tells us it’s wrong. We KNOW it’s wrong. We can FEEL that it’s wrong.
[/quote]

Sooo… since you’ve been tag-teaming me this whole time, I’m putting you both on the same side of this thing, that being the side of Christianity.

And what I can gather is if you are a Christian, you can feel that something’s wrong, and believe it to be wrong without any sort of rational explanation.

But if you say there is no God, then you’re retarded for having the exact same belief about an act being wrong, even given some pretty basic consideration for your fellow man (brother keeper? anyone?) as a logical basis for your belief.

Don’t tell me I can’t quote the Bible because I don’t believe in God. That’s like saying since I can’t solve physics problems, I must not believe in the moon landing.

The Bible doesn’t have a copyright on compassion. But apparently that teaching has been lost somewhere long before this thread when conversing with atheists. Since we’re so fucking retarded we can’t even see that God is the only solution, why even try to explain it?

Forgive me if I’m slightly annoyed by the general tone of contempt for my intelligence, I’m not trying to call anyone stupid for not proving any of the points brought up against their case.

How long did you really thing you could push this without actually voicing your solution to these obviously elementary problems?

It’s easy to sit back, quoting your opponent and asking questions. Doesn’t really require any thought or knowledge of the subject at all.

Cortes, you at least said that you believe a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father that can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master so that he can remove an evil force in your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

Push, we just have to infer that you agree, since you have offered no such wisdom.

Oh, one last thing, how do you believe in something that doesn’t exist, by Aquinas’ definition?

He is not made of form or matter, therefore he is nonexistent.

Does make it easy to prove he exists, though, if you believe in circular reasoning.

Since he doesn’t exist, I can’t prove he exists. Case closed, God exists.

198

1- The context of you believing what you say? That’s it’s wrong?

So you think it’s ok to fuck kids? Tight.

2- Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm… okay.

3- God’s outside his own rules? Does that mean he can rape children too? And by extension, the Pope and members of the church can too?

3.5- Where’s God standing?

It’s all becoming clear.

199

Oversimplification of the arguments against your case make things real simple don’t they.

So does quoting wantonly. Fun being on this side of it, I can see why you hang out here.