[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Actually, I took your advice and purchased “The Blind Watchmaker.” I will read this with as much of an open mind as I can and let you know what I think when I am done. [/quote]
Cool. There is a part in it about abiogenesis, but the theory presented is one of the more “out there” one. While not entirely improbable, the one in “The Selfish Gene” (I think) is a lot more compelling. The part about evolution is pretty well presented.
Those were historical examples of “evil” done by men that was justified using Biblical passages.
For an example that applies more directly to you, let’s take your stance on gays. How does it affect you in any way that two men or two woman get married and enjoy the same rights under the law as an heterosexual couple?
Because, basically, that’s what it comes down to: depriving citizens of rights accorded freely to others, based on their sexual orientation. It used to be race or class, nowadays it’s sexual orientation.
You keep repeating that it was classified as a mental illness (which it was, but it isn’t anymore, which is the important part.) You claim it’s not “normal”, which I’ll grant you, if we define “normal” as being the majority position.
While not “normal”, it certainly is “natural” in that no one “chooses” of his own free will to be gay. I have friends who are gay and gay coworkers and none of them got up one morning and decided to be gay. It just is.
Homosexual behavior is also observed among animals, who certainly can’t make moral choices. Basically, homosexuality is in nature. It’s not a favorable trait for the perpetuation of the specie, I’ll grant you that; but neither are blindness, deafness or hemophilia.
You don’t deny people who have other “natural” deviations from the norm the right to marry? So why gays? Just because Leviticus says it’s an “abomination” to God? He created nature and homosexuality.
Another modern example: Birth control and family planning. There’s more damage being done in third world places like Africa and South America; but the Christian majority position (including the Catholic Church) on birth control is completely retarded. I could give long examples of the evils done by the unflinching views of Christians on those questions, but let’s take an example closer to home.
There’s been in the news, these past few years, reports of pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions on religious grounds. What’s up with that? Isn’t that intolerance? Because someone doesn’t share your moral values, you’ll deny him his doctored prescribed drugs? Maybe we won’t sell condoms or lubricants either.
Those, again, are examples of what makes many non-believers angry or at the very least, very annoyed with “moral” Christian. Don’t force your views and morals on others, and we won’t have any problems.
What about the descendants of Canaan? Didn’t God curse Canaan and his descendants to be “servants” forever? That passage was used to justify slavery; and I’ve even seen some “versions” of the Bible who have that event as the birth of the first black man.
There’s also a lot of distinction between believers and infidels (often called “fools” and other pejorative names) who aren’t to be associated with; are to be ignored, spurned, etc. There is marked “us vs. them” mentality that comes out in many passages.
I’m not lumping every Christian together, but there is a “tacit support” or a “silent agreement” with many of the bad things done by the more extreme Christian groups.
It’s similar to Muslims who go nuts over a bunch of cartoons, but somehow don’t denounce very loudly bombings in subways or restaurants. I’d like to see them go nuts over the victims of the London bombings or of 9/11; not over 12 drawings… The Christian equivalent is a lot more subdued, better adapted or “hidden” if you will, but the sentiment is there.
What I’m getting at is that religion should be a private matter. Do it in church, at home, at private gatherings, etc.
Don’t try to force it in public schools. Public schools should be secular in every way. They should teach secular subjects, including science. They can have religious studies, but not intermingled with science. Creation and ID are not scientific theories (can’t be tested, can’t be falsified, etc.)
All scientific theories. Not just some “random ideas” that hide a religious agenda.
You want to compare the Big Bang to the Steady State theory? Or to Hawking’s Pea Instanton? (You’d like that one) Or with M-Theory’s “Landscape?” Fine, do so. Those theories are supported by physical evidence.
For now, the Big Bang is still the one with the most support, but I agree that kids should be made aware that it’s not the last word, or completely in agreement with all observable physical phenomenas.
But the alternative “Let there be light”, 6 days, some dirt and ribs just doesn’t qualify as “scientific.”
Other fun stuff:
[ b ] and [ /b ] to bold.
[ i ] and [ /i ] for italics.
[ u ] and [ /u ] to underline.
[center][ center ] and [ /center ] to center.[/center]
There a few more (diacritics, for when you want to write “déjà vu” correctly, but those cover 99% of the formatting needs.
I think taking it as the Word of God is BS. Taking the Bible as a book written by early Hebrew tribes, containing their history, laws, poetry and what not is reasonable.
There are valid teachings in there. Most of what Jesus preached is quite good and should be applied more by more people in their daily lives. I don’t dispute that.
We could also learn a lot from Gandhi and his non-violent stance; from many Buddhist monks, such as the Dalai Lama, etc.
It’s when people take the whole of the Bible, the good and the bad and add to it the “Word of God” backing that things start to go to Hell in a hand basket.
[quote]Since you are now in my “wheelhouse” let me just point out that Jesus was talking to the Jewish religious leaders of his day who were conducting their worship in order to garner attention and position. I am doing none of these things.
When I say I am praying for you, I really am – not to attract attention, but to let you know that I do really care about people and their eternal destiny. That’s all…[/quote]
Why the need to inform us of the fact then? I’ve read that “I’ll pray for you” line hundreds of times across many different forums and it’s always come across as a need to inform others that you’re a good person who “prays” for his enemies. (Enemy might be strong word, but you get what I mean).
Why not just pray in silence, in your closet as Jesus suggested and keep that fact to yourself? What do you gain by announcing it publicly? There’s got to be something about it that makes you feel good of happy, because countless Christians seem unable to prevent themselves from informing their opponents that they’re praying for them.
