|
Grex > Agora56 > #84: Newspaper in Denmark prints cartoon pics of Mohammed | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 432 responses total. |
kingjon
|
|
response 250 of 432:
| 
Feb 15 00:45 UTC 2006 |
Re #247:
a) But George Bush isn't an invisible supernatural being.
b) "Love" isn't precisely the word I was looking for (I'm not sure such a word
exists), but "awe" is an important part of the emotion I was trying to
describe. "Worship" is a good synonym, but it has too many bad connotations
among too many people here.
c) If he chose to make it impossible for you to disbelieve in him (I can choose
to believe that George Bush is a figment of my imagination if I want, after
all) that would most certainly be overriding your free will, and it would
almost certainly be so awe-inspiring to cause something approaching "love".
d) He doesn't *want* you to "feel obligated to love him" -- he wants your
"love" (see pt. b above) freely and honestly given. (How would you like it if
someone said, "I love you, but only because I have to?")
|
richard
|
|
response 251 of 432:
|
Feb 15 00:46 UTC 2006 |
Here in NYC, the entire editorial staff of the New York Press, a free
weekly newspaper that is a centerist alternative to the Village Voice,
resigned over the cartoons. The Press wanted to run the cartoons in
question, to show solidarity with their colleagues at the newspaper in
Denmark, but the ownership of the paper disallowed it, fearing
retribution from some of the city's many muslims, and as a result the
whole staff resigned. Even one of the local tv stations, when the
reported the story on the news, refused to show the cartoons.
|
bru
|
|
response 252 of 432:
|
Feb 15 01:06 UTC 2006 |
I think the search for God is much more basic. i think it starts with the
question...
Why are we here? Where did we come from?
...and gets modified by the ...
Why are their ghosts? Why did that man who should have died live? What is
a miracle?
I question my religion regularly, which is why I no longer go to church
regularly. Why, Because in many cases their belief in God is too narrow.
|
keesan
|
|
response 253 of 432:
|
Feb 15 03:05 UTC 2006 |
Jon believes in God because he believes his parents, who believe in God, and
God does exist, in Jon's head. I don't see any harm in that as long as Jon
is willing to let other people believe differently from him. It is when
people try to force their beliefs on other people that problems start.
|
scholar
|
|
response 254 of 432:
|
Feb 15 03:19 UTC 2006 |
I'm a terrible person.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 255 of 432:
|
Feb 15 03:32 UTC 2006 |
Based on the bigotry and ignorance I've seen him express about the
meaning of faith and religious orientation, I'd bet klingon is quite
willing to force his beliefs on others.
Re: #252: The short answer is "sex." Many times God = sex for
questions/statements wuch as yours. Maybe that's why there's an underlying
sense of repression among so-called "conservative" religious types.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 256 of 432:
|
Feb 15 04:07 UTC 2006 |
> It is when people try to force their beliefs on other people that
> problems start.
Exactly. And that includes atheists saying "believing in god is like
believing in the easter bunny, and you religious people are misguided".
|
mcnally
|
|
response 257 of 432:
|
Feb 15 04:17 UTC 2006 |
re #256: expressing an opinion == "forcing their beliefs on other people."
|
rcurl
|
|
response 258 of 432:
|
Feb 15 06:47 UTC 2006 |
Not?
Nothing I have said forces my beliefs upon anyone, unless you mean by
"force" even expressing anything.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 259 of 432:
|
Feb 15 07:58 UTC 2006 |
I mis-edited. There was meant to be a ? at the end of #257, expressing
incredulity at the equivalence suggested by #256.
|
fudge
|
|
response 260 of 432:
|
Feb 15 10:35 UTC 2006 |
I wish someone had mentioned "observation" in all the talk about questioning,
hypotheses and proof... ;)
|
nharmon
|
|
response 261 of 432:
|
Feb 15 13:05 UTC 2006 |
Ok, so what constitutes "forcing your beliefs on other people"? Pointing
a pistol at you and forcing you to pray? Or can we include humiliating
people who believe something different than you? Because the former
almost never happens, but the latter happens a lot.
|
fudge
|
|
response 262 of 432:
|
Feb 15 13:10 UTC 2006 |
Disclaimer: if an adult of otherwise sound mind believes in fairies I reserve
the unlimited right to either take the piss to the extreme or to look down
on them with contempt. This being my absolute prerogative, I also opt to be
ignore the matter on occasion, such as with nice people I know, who
unfortunately *do* believe in fairies.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 263 of 432:
|
Feb 15 13:25 UTC 2006 |
resp:245 Jon you write that "The Christian church doesn't teach that
logical thought about God is dangerous (unless you mean dangerous in the
same sense that fire, automobiles, and every other part of human
existence is dangerous)."
Which is too broad- there are too many sects in Chritianity to really
claim that they all believe in the same thing (excepting of course the
belief in God and that Jesus was the Messiah). Saying that Christian
Churchs don't teach logical thought about God being dangerous is simply
untrue. There ARE Christian sects that do claim that very thing. One of
the basic reasons for there being so many sects is that they all think
the others are wrong on a few key parts.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 264 of 432:
|
Feb 15 14:52 UTC 2006 |
Re 262: How tolerant of you.
|
fudge
|
|
response 265 of 432:
|
Feb 15 15:11 UTC 2006 |
I take it you believe in fairies?
PS: who said I have to be tolerant? I am not a christian.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 266 of 432:
|
Feb 15 15:22 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 267 of 432:
|
Feb 15 15:23 UTC 2006 |
Nobody said you have to be tolerant; just don't complain when we don't
tolerate you. :)
|
keesan
|
|
response 268 of 432:
|
Feb 15 17:38 UTC 2006 |
I think teaching religious beliefs in public schools is forcing your beliefs
on other people, unless it is done in a course on comparative religions.
Decorating public places at public expense with religious symbols is also
forcing your beliefs on other people. Lights and 'Happy Holidays' around Jan
1 is not. Much as I dislike listening to Christmas Carols in businesses that
cater to the public, I can only object on esthetic grounds to that. I doubt
anyone really believes in Rudolf the Rednosed Reindeer, and they can choose
to avoid businesses that play the song.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 269 of 432:
|
Feb 15 17:42 UTC 2006 |
Sindi, even Christians get tired of Christmas music. :)
|
happyboy
|
|
response 270 of 432:
|
Feb 15 17:53 UTC 2006 |
they listen to it on their ipods while they
pass legislation
banning hpv vaccines
republican values!
|
kingjon
|
|
response 271 of 432:
|
Feb 15 19:04 UTC 2006 |
Re #253: That may be an accurate *historical* summary. That is, when I was too
young to have any insight on what to believe, I took the testimony of the
resident "experts." You might call it a "working hypothesis." That's not the
*reason* I believe in whom I believe. I believe in God for the same reason I
believe in my parents. For what it's worth, I am entirely willing to let people
believe what they will. (Sometimes sharp contentions get to my temper and it
may not seem that way, but I always regret it afterward.) After all, it doesn't
harm *me* if someone not under my care believes even that east, for example, is
west. I will in some cases try to persuade them otherwise, just as I would try
to persuade someone who was trying to commit a gradual form of suicide to stop.
Re #263: That's what inevitably happens when you get a bunch of people
together. Look at the extreme variance within any semi-major political party.
Re #268: I have said before that the public school system seems to me to be an
indoctrination machine into the "religion" of atheism -- but we've been over
that ground before and I don't want to start that debate again.
Decorating public places with religious symbols is not necessarily forcing your
beliefs on other people; a display could easily include only symbols of
religions that those designing it did not hold to.
For what it's worth, I don't like the commercialization of "Christmas" at all.
In the Christian liturgical calendar, the "Christmas season" begins December 25
and runs until the sixth of January, while the "Christmas" music on the radio
always begins around Thanksgiving and stops abruptly on Christmas Day.
Did you know that "holiday" by etymology means "holy day"?
|
gull
|
|
response 272 of 432:
|
Feb 15 19:10 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:250: Sure, if God made it somehow physically impossible for us
not to believe in Him, say by altering our brain chemistry, that would
be restricting free will. Simply providing clear evidence that he
exists, then allowing us to take it or leave it, would not. All this
sneaking around and refusing to provide any hard evidence doesn't serve
any obvious purpose to me, if He exists.
(This is assuming free will exists at all -- but that's another
discussion. There's some evidence it doesn't even without a
supernatural being involved, and several tenets of Christianity also
call it into question.)
|
tod
|
|
response 273 of 432:
|
Feb 15 19:10 UTC 2006 |
Syria is about 10% Christian. How would you like the idea of living there
with all the religious symbols "decorating" public places?
|
kingjon
|
|
response 274 of 432:
|
Feb 15 19:38 UTC 2006 |
Re #272: The contention of many is that there *is* clear evidence that God
exists. If the evidence is (or if you prefer "were") in fact there and you've
decided to leave it, you'd still be saying "all this sneaking around and
refusing to provide hard evidence ..."
I will admit that *current* free will is not a central doctrine of the Church
as a whole, since it has proven impossible to come to an agreement on it. It is
simply the explanation of how some of the unclear passages fit together that
fits the text best in my view.
|