Religious Thread [5] - CLOSED


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Religious Thread [5] - CLOSED

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 16 · Next
Author Message
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2908
Credit: 6,477,555
RAC: 2,031
United States
Message 175371 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 8:08:17 UTC
Last modified: 8 Oct 2005, 8:18:32 UTC

STANDARD DISCLAIMER:
The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of California, the SETI project (including but not limited to the SETI@home and BOINC programmers), its affiliates, or the SETI@home volunteers (including but not limited to forum members contributing processing power towards the SETI@home project).
By posting in this thread you assume full responsibility for the content of your post and absolve the University of California, the SETI project, its affiliates, and the SETI@home volunteers (including but not limited to forum members) from any and all injuries including slander, defamation, libel, obscenity, indecency, and emotional or monetary damage.
There will be no moderator in this thread. There is no official language in this thread. There is no obligation to post in this thread. There is no requirement to read any post in this thread except for posts which contain amendments to this disclaimer.

ADDITIONAL DISCLAIMER:
Religious preaching, proselytizing, or imposition of one poster's will upon another's/s' will not be tolerated. Trolling is disallowed in all forms. Offenses will be penalized as the posters find appropriate.

One final thing: This thread is a continuation of [4] [3] [2] and [1].

Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2908
Credit: 6,477,555
RAC: 2,031
United States
Message 175375 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 8:20:47 UTC

Religious Thread [4] took about 10 months to reach 300 posts.

Everyone is welcome to contribute here in a respectful way.

Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 9659
Credit: 251,998
RAC: 0
Message 175435 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 14:11:23 UTC - in response to Message 175375.

Religious Thread [4] took about 10 months to reach 300 posts.

Everyone is welcome to contribute here in a respectful way.


Yes, it was a pleasure to see one of the threads from when I started to post here keep it up for so long! Brought me back through memory lane several times!

It was in this thread Rocky and I got to know each other! :-)



____________
"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 175460 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 16:13:19 UTC - in response to Message 175435.

Religious Thread [4] took about 10 months to reach 300 posts.

Everyone is welcome to contribute here in a respectful way.


Yes, it was a pleasure to see one of the threads from when I started to post here keep it up for so long! Brought me back through memory lane several times!

It was in this thread Rocky and I got to know each other! :-)



Same here Fuzzy. We agreed to disagree, and I respected his point of view becasue he respected mine. I wish all threads here could have the same discourse.


____________
Account frozen...

Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 175517 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 18:32:06 UTC


____________
Account frozen...

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8613
Credit: 244,003
RAC: 144
Canada
Message 175527 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 19:40:20 UTC - in response to Message 175517.

Can you please not mention Intelligent Design, I don't think I can keep to the rules of the thread on that one. I just get irrationally angry about it.

I'm usually pretty tolerant of people with religion, some of my best acquaintances believe in god. As long as they don't try to convert me, what they get up to in the privacy of their own homes is none of my business.

I've got quite a few of them praying for me because they don't want me to burn in hell.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2908
Credit: 6,477,555
RAC: 2,031
United States
Message 175529 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 19:51:01 UTC - in response to Message 175527.

Can you please not mention Intelligent Design, I don't think I can keep to the rules of the thread on that one. I just get irrationally angry about it.

I'm usually pretty tolerant of people with religion, some of my best acquaintances believe in god. As long as they don't try to convert me, what they get up to in the privacy of their own homes is none of my business.

I've got quite a few of them praying for me because they don't want me to burn in hell.


These people who are praying for you think: 1) that you are going to hell because you believe in science over myth; and 2) that they can change the result of #1 by their personal intercession with God. I think you can safely ignore their concern about you. No scientific theory or religious doctrine that supports their view is of any real consequence.

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8613
Credit: 244,003
RAC: 144
Canada
Message 175537 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 20:11:39 UTC - in response to Message 175529.

These people who are praying for you think: 1) that you are going to hell because you believe in science over myth; and 2) that they can change the result of #1 by their personal intercession with God. I think you can safely ignore their concern about you. No scientific theory or religious doctrine that supports their view is of any real consequence.


Thanks Tom. As I don't believe in hell it doesn't bother me, I'm just rather touched by their concern and feel a bit sorry for them. I wouldn't want to believe in a god that would damn me forever just for not believing in him/her. Seems a bit petulant if you ask me.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2908
Credit: 6,477,555
RAC: 2,031
United States
Message 175542 - Posted: 8 Oct 2005, 20:20:37 UTC - in response to Message 175537.
Last modified: 8 Oct 2005, 20:20:51 UTC

Thanks Tom. As I don't believe in hell it doesn't bother me, I'm just rather touched by their concern and feel a bit sorry for them. I wouldn't want to believe in a god that would damn me forever just for not believing in him/her. Seems a bit petulant if you ask me.


Just to make my position clear, "intellegent design" a.k.a. creationism, is not God, nor does belief in the one equal belief in the other. There are views of the universe that respect both science and God, and the vast majority of believers in God find no conflict in their belief in science. Just a parting thought--what business does religion have meddling in science anyway, since the "business" of religion is spiritual while science deals with the physical?

Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 175677 - Posted: 9 Oct 2005, 3:44:58 UTC - in response to Message 175542.
Last modified: 9 Oct 2005, 3:48:12 UTC

Thanks Tom. As I don't believe in hell it doesn't bother me, I'm just rather touched by their concern and feel a bit sorry for them. I wouldn't want to believe in a god that would damn me forever just for not believing in him/her. Seems a bit petulant if you ask me.


Just to make my position clear, "intellegent design" a.k.a. creationism, is not God, nor does belief in the one equal belief in the other. There are views of the universe that respect both science and God, and the vast majority of believers in God find no conflict in their belief in science. Just a parting thought--what business does religion have meddling in science anyway, since the "business" of religion is spiritual while science deals with the physical?


You forgot that the Earth is flat and the sun is the center of the universe. Times change, people don't; there's just alot more of them now.
Condoms anyone?


____________
Account frozen...

Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 9659
Credit: 251,998
RAC: 0
Message 176447 - Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 22:12:43 UTC
Last modified: 10 Oct 2005, 22:13:00 UTC

Hey, this is the Religious Thread[5] thread! It says so in the title!


____________

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2908
Credit: 6,477,555
RAC: 2,031
United States
Message 176464 - Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 22:58:12 UTC - in response to Message 176447.

Hey, this is the Religious Thread[5] thread! It says so in the title!



Thanks for pointing that out Fuzzy. I think some folks don't understand the concept of a thread being "closed". Perhaps their personal religious views don't allow them to relate to those with slower connections, and who take so long to load large threads. (I'm trying to keep my post connected to the "religious" theme of the thread.)

Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 9659
Credit: 251,998
RAC: 0
Message 176465 - Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 23:01:15 UTC - in response to Message 176464.


Thanks for pointing that out Fuzzy.


You're wellcome! :-)



____________
"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 176544 - Posted: 11 Oct 2005, 2:32:39 UTC

My apolopgies to Tom Koenig for messing the end of his last thread, but the topic there took on a life of its' own. Since he was the originater of the thread I consider it his perogetive. Sorry.

____________
Account frozen...

Profile Octagon
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 13 Jun 05
Posts: 1418
Credit: 2,442,531
RAC: 445
United States
Message 176787 - Posted: 11 Oct 2005, 20:29:05 UTC - in response to Message 175542.

Just to make my position clear, "intellegent design" a.k.a. creationism, is not God, nor does belief in the one equal belief in the other. There are views of the universe that respect both science and God, and the vast majority of believers in God find no conflict in their belief in science. Just a parting thought--what business does religion have meddling in science anyway, since the "business" of religion is spiritual while science deals with the physical?

Teaching evolution as fact is endorsing a religion. Atheism is a belief that there is no intelligent force behind the Universe... the ultimate power is a set of impersonal, immutable laws of physics, and some even claim that these laws are unknowable (in their "real" form) by humanity.

Put slightly differently, the athiest view of god is an invulnerable system of order imposed upon the Universe. To adherants of this religion, it is offensive to refer to god in personifying terms... not entirely unlike the Hebrew description of the ineffable name of God.

The United States Supreme Court accorded atheism the protections of a religion in 1961. A recent decision by the 7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals re-affirmed this definition in a decision earlier this year (an atheist prisoner was granted the right to start a reading group under the 'religious study group' privelages accorded to Wisconsin prisoners).

I'm not sure how one teaches a very detailed theory of evolution next to a sketchy theory of intelligent design and call it balance, but the explicit exclusion of any other theory except evolution is endorsing atheism... and government endorsing a specific religion is supposed to be prohibited in the United States.
____________
No animals were harmed in the making of the above post... much.

Jim Forayter
Send message
Joined: 30 Jun 99
Posts: 42
Credit: 267,182
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 176795 - Posted: 11 Oct 2005, 20:46:06 UTC - in response to Message 175517.



I like the cartoon! I have passed it one to several people who should like it. I have also passed it on to some who may not like it. The responce should be interesting.

Jim
____________

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8613
Credit: 244,003
RAC: 144
Canada
Message 176799 - Posted: 11 Oct 2005, 21:04:27 UTC - in response to Message 176787.

Teaching evolution as fact is endorsing a religion. Atheism is a belief that there is no intelligent force behind the Universe... the ultimate power is a set of impersonal, immutable laws of physics, and some even claim that these laws are unknowable (in their "real" form) by humanity.

Put slightly differently, the athiest view of god is an invulnerable system of order imposed upon the Universe. To adherants of this religion, it is offensive to refer to god in personifying terms... not entirely unlike the Hebrew description of the ineffable name of God.

The United States Supreme Court accorded atheism the protections of a religion in 1961. A recent decision by the 7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals re-affirmed this definition in a decision earlier this year (an atheist prisoner was granted the right to start a reading group under the 'religious study group' privelages accorded to Wisconsin prisoners).

I'm not sure how one teaches a very detailed theory of evolution next to a sketchy theory of intelligent design and call it balance, but the explicit exclusion of any other theory except evolution is endorsing atheism... and government endorsing a specific religion is supposed to be prohibited in the United States.


Is this for real? You can't even be an atheist without it being a religion? The world is crazier than I thought.

I consider myself an atheist because I don't believe in god. I don't believe in the absence of god, I just don't need god to explain my world. Does this mean that science is a religion? I don't believe in the theory of evolution, it just convincingly explains how we got here and there is a lot of evidence for it. If a better theory comes along that explains it then great, it won't shake my world.

____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2908
Credit: 6,477,555
RAC: 2,031
United States
Message 176808 - Posted: 11 Oct 2005, 21:27:10 UTC - in response to Message 176787.

Teaching evolution as fact is endorsing a religion. Atheism is a belief that there is no intelligent force behind the Universe... the ultimate power is a set of impersonal, immutable laws of physics, and some even claim that these laws are unknowable (in their "real" form) by humanity.

Put slightly differently, the athiest view of god is an invulnerable system of order imposed upon the Universe. To adherants of this religion, it is offensive to refer to god in personifying terms... not entirely unlike the Hebrew description of the ineffable name of God.

The United States Supreme Court accorded atheism the protections of a religion in 1961. A recent decision by the 7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals re-affirmed this definition in a decision earlier this year (an atheist prisoner was granted the right to start a reading group under the 'religious study group' privelages accorded to Wisconsin prisoners).

I'm not sure how one teaches a very detailed theory of evolution next to a sketchy theory of intelligent design and call it balance, but the explicit exclusion of any other theory except evolution is endorsing atheism... and government endorsing a specific religion is supposed to be prohibited in the United States.


Octagon, I don't buy this. Evolution is not religious, atheism is not religion and teaching evolution in schools is not endorsing either atheism or religion. Even the Supremes deciding that atheism should be protected like a religion (notice, this protection itself is not unconstitutional) does not make atheism a religion.

The Constitution says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . . ." This clause, commonly referred to as separation of church and state, nowhere prohibits teaching religion or religious concepts, unless that teaching is, in effect, either State endorsement of the religion or somehow prevents others from practicing their own religion (or atheism). Teaching a scientific model does neither.

Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 176892 - Posted: 12 Oct 2005, 1:01:59 UTC

Teaching evolution as fact is endorsing a religion. Atheism is a belief that there is no intelligent force behind the Universe... the ultimate power is a set of impersonal, immutable laws of physics, and some even claim that these laws are unknowable (in their "real" form) by humanity.


Atheism is NOT a belief. You don't need Faith not to believe.

Science is not a religion.

____________
Account frozen...

Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21790
Credit: 2,510,901
RAC: 0
United States
Message 176894 - Posted: 12 Oct 2005, 1:03:23 UTC - in response to Message 176799.

I consider myself an atheist because I don't believe in god. I don't believe in the absence of god, I just don't need god to explain my world.

That sounds more agnostic than atheist.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 16 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Religious Thread [5] - CLOSED

Copyright © 2014 University of California