A Sad Day For Free Speech In Italy
-
It doesn't. It's just that for a book that 'has all the answers', it's fairly light in the useful-information-department. I mean, God should've just ditched the first 15 or whatever chapters of Leviticus and explained how General and Special Relativity works.
This is just ignorant. The bible has the answers for the things it claims to talk about. It makes as much sense to suggest that a chemistry book is useless, because it has no information on art.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
I spend too much time isolated in my bedroom for my parents to get sick of me.
-
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Yes, let us brainwash them into believing there is no God.
As opposed to brainwashing you that there is?
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Or it provides answers you are not willing to accept.
No, answers that are not believable which is somewhat different.
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Are you prepared to deny the Cardinal the right to protest a company's decision simply because you don't agree with him?
Indeed not: just dismayed at the craven and cowardly way they caved in. As per the other day: is catholocism worried that a sign on a bus will cause the worlds catholics to turn away from them? How feeble.
digital man wrote:
As opposed to brainwashing you that there is?
Now you get it. Any form of presentation of views, for or against any viewpoint, can be called brainwashing, if you want to.
digital man wrote:
No, answers that are not believable which is somewhat different.
But wait, doesn't your inability to believe something imply free will, which means that the presentation of this information doesn't 'brainwash' at all, but just present a point of view that people are capable of rejecting ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
It doesn't. It's just that for a book that 'has all the answers', it's fairly light in the useful-information-department. I mean, God should've just ditched the first 15 or whatever chapters of Leviticus and explained how General and Special Relativity works.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Leviticus and explained how General and Special Relativity works.
Yes, but then he would have had to give humanity algebra and calculus, not to mention an introductory course in Newtonian physics, which, of course, would not have been Newtonian since the man had not been born yet, as well as Maxwell's equations. And the obvious discourse on the laws of motion. And all this to some guy who's most advanced intellectual ambition was counting his goats, who would have been all like "shit, this religion crap is freaking hard, dude". Somehow I think the condensed version was more useful.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
So, what price Democracy when free speech is censored by Religious Pressure Group. Apparantly it is ok to say there is a God, but not ok to Deny it. Here[^] So much for the Rights enshrined in EU Law, it seems a cardinal of the catholic church can veto freedom of expression. Go, Intolerance, Go, don't allow poeple to think for themselves. Let people be brainswashed into following a fundemental faith so that they cannot get uppity and start demanding answers that religion cannot provide!
------------------------------------ "The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion" Arthur C Clarke
I think that the action to block the adverts itself, is an indication that there is no god, but a man made fairy tale. A fairy tale on which so much power is relying on, that it must be protected at all cost.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Yes, let us brainwash them into believing there is no God.
As opposed to brainwashing you that there is?
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Or it provides answers you are not willing to accept.
No, answers that are not believable which is somewhat different.
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Are you prepared to deny the Cardinal the right to protest a company's decision simply because you don't agree with him?
Indeed not: just dismayed at the craven and cowardly way they caved in. As per the other day: is catholocism worried that a sign on a bus will cause the worlds catholics to turn away from them? How feeble.
digital man wrote:
How feeble.
What fascinates me is the religious fervor with which some atheists seem to proselytise. To tell the truth, I cannot tell the difference between a true believer on either end of the debate - both seem to get quite upset if you suggest that they may not have all the facts they need to guarantee their answers.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
It's just that for a book that 'has all the answers', it's fairly light in the useful-information-department.
With all due respect, did you ever stop to think that, at your age, you aren't qualified to decide what is useful information and what isn't? Right now you ought to be worrying less about what you filter out and more on what you can absorb. For what it's worth, I'd suggest that you might want to do a fairly detailed research on the writing and collation of both the Old and New Testaments as well as the Apocrypha. Then move on to study the history of the Semitic peoples we now call Jews. Then spend some time studying the difference between Pauline and Petrine Christianity. Who knows, you might learn something "worthwhile."
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Who knows, you might learn something "worthwhile."
That far too much time and energy was spent on whipping the sheeple in to neat lines, when that same time and energy could've been spent for studying the universe as it is?
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
digital man wrote:
How feeble.
What fascinates me is the religious fervor with which some atheists seem to proselytise. To tell the truth, I cannot tell the difference between a true believer on either end of the debate - both seem to get quite upset if you suggest that they may not have all the facts they need to guarantee their answers.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
What fascinates me is the religious fervor with which some atheists seem to proselytise
No-one is more irrational than a fervent athiest, in my experience
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
This is just ignorant. The bible has the answers for the things it claims to talk about. It makes as much sense to suggest that a chemistry book is useless, because it has no information on art.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
It's just that I always found it a little suspicious that the Bible doesn't contain any information that couldn't possibly have been known in those days without divine inspiration. When it could've proven itself beyond any doubt to be the word of God with just one physics equation, one chemical formula, it instead talks about unicorns and dragons and God killing people.
-
Oakman wrote:
What fascinates me is the religious fervor with which some atheists seem to proselytise
No-one is more irrational than a fervent athiest, in my experience
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Christian Graus wrote:
No-one is more irrational than a fervent athiest, in my experience
And it is getting worse all the time. I grew up argueing against religion, but have never met a Christian who gets as outraged as an athiest does when their assumptions are challanged.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
I think that the action to block the adverts itself, is an indication that there is no god, but a man made fairy tale. A fairy tale on which so much power is relying on, that it must be protected at all cost.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
I think it's proof of an attempt to create a 'Christian country', like what Stan wants the US to be. I disagree with any attempt to stop such a sign, I could care less what they write on the side of a bus, it doesn't make them right ( they are wrong ). But, I am all for free speech, and for people to be able to voice their views. I'd welcome the chance to discuss it with people. Catholics, of course, are not Christians, and their religion is based on layers of tradition that move from the bible and often have no basis in fact.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
digital man wrote:
As opposed to brainwashing you that there is?
Now you get it. Any form of presentation of views, for or against any viewpoint, can be called brainwashing, if you want to.
digital man wrote:
No, answers that are not believable which is somewhat different.
But wait, doesn't your inability to believe something imply free will, which means that the presentation of this information doesn't 'brainwash' at all, but just present a point of view that people are capable of rejecting ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Christian Graus wrote:
But wait, doesn't your inability to believe something imply free will, which means that the presentation of this information doesn't 'brainwash' at all, but just present a point of view that people are capable of rejecting ?
To be capable of rejecting or accepting any religion one must be mature and well-informed enough to make that decision, therefore children should be protected from any form of contact with any religion until they are at least 18, then educated about many different religions and atheism and only then make their own choice. :)
-
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Yes, let us brainwash them into believing there is no God.
As opposed to brainwashing you that there is?
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Or it provides answers you are not willing to accept.
No, answers that are not believable which is somewhat different.
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Are you prepared to deny the Cardinal the right to protest a company's decision simply because you don't agree with him?
Indeed not: just dismayed at the craven and cowardly way they caved in. As per the other day: is catholocism worried that a sign on a bus will cause the worlds catholics to turn away from them? How feeble.
So we are in agreement that free speech didn't take a hit as Dalek believes?
digital man wrote:
just dismayed at the craven and cowardly way they caved in
I suspect it was a business decision that was done in support of their own best interest.
digital man wrote:
is catholocism worried that a sign on a bus will cause the worlds catholics to turn away from them?
I can't really say what the Catholics are worried about. I do support his right to complain about it.
Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read
-
It's just that I always found it a little suspicious that the Bible doesn't contain any information that couldn't possibly have been known in those days without divine inspiration. When it could've proven itself beyond any doubt to be the word of God with just one physics equation, one chemical formula, it instead talks about unicorns and dragons and God killing people.
Well, that's fine. As I said below, your ability to make this error of judgement, shows that you have free will, and that people telling you about God, or the Bible, has not proven to be an effective means of 'brainwashing' you. Which makes the whole thing of putting signs on buses almost as idiotic as the fact that some organised churches were stupid enough to fall for it.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
But wait, doesn't your inability to believe something imply free will, which means that the presentation of this information doesn't 'brainwash' at all, but just present a point of view that people are capable of rejecting ?
To be capable of rejecting or accepting any religion one must be mature and well-informed enough to make that decision, therefore children should be protected from any form of contact with any religion until they are at least 18, then educated about many different religions and atheism and only then make their own choice. :)
Well, this is plainly not possible. Just as you raise your kids to know that you don't believe in God ( which is not the same as them starting with a blank slate ), I can't help but tell my kids that I do.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
No-one is more irrational than a fervent athiest, in my experience
And it is getting worse all the time. I grew up argueing against religion, but have never met a Christian who gets as outraged as an athiest does when their assumptions are challanged.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
I find that even magazines like Scientific American, are a call to war. I saw one issue while I was here with an article 'Creationists - their latest tricks'. I hardly read an article on *anything* without a few snide comments against people who believe in God, or who believe in creationism in any form. It's frankly childish and only makes them look bad.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
It's just that for a book that 'has all the answers', it's fairly light in the useful-information-department.
With all due respect, did you ever stop to think that, at your age, you aren't qualified to decide what is useful information and what isn't? Right now you ought to be worrying less about what you filter out and more on what you can absorb. For what it's worth, I'd suggest that you might want to do a fairly detailed research on the writing and collation of both the Old and New Testaments as well as the Apocrypha. Then move on to study the history of the Semitic peoples we now call Jews. Then spend some time studying the difference between Pauline and Petrine Christianity. Who knows, you might learn something "worthwhile."
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
With all due respect,
See, this just confuses me. Since when...?
Oakman wrote:
did you ever stop to think that, at your age, you aren't qualified to decide what is useful information and what isn't? Right now you ought to be worrying less about what you filter out and more on what you can absorb.
Hey, I try and learn as much as I can about everything I can, excluding world geography and most history.
Oakman wrote:
For what it's worth, I'd suggest that you might want to do a fairly detailed research on the writing and collation of both the Old and New Testaments as well as the Apocrypha. Then move on to study the history of the Semitic peoples we now call Jews. Then spend some time studying the difference between Pauline and Petrine Christianity. Who knows, you might learn something "worthwhile."
*faints* That is a lot. I'll put it on my 'to-do' list.
-
Oakman wrote:
Who knows, you might learn something "worthwhile."
That far too much time and energy was spent on whipping the sheeple in to neat lines, when that same time and energy could've been spent for studying the universe as it is?
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
spent for studying the universe as it is?
Excpet that what we have learned about what the 'universe is' is that we are a bunch of unnecessarily intelligent, ultra-violent, apes on a rock that there is no way to get off of and go anywhere to do anything interesting, but we have to set here for the next few billion years trying to get along with all the other asshole primates, waiting for the sun to explode. Shit, yeah, how the hell could we have ever gotten along without all that information? I'm sure glad someone told me about it. Thanks for sharing....
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Leviticus and explained how General and Special Relativity works.
Yes, but then he would have had to give humanity algebra and calculus, not to mention an introductory course in Newtonian physics, which, of course, would not have been Newtonian since the man had not been born yet, as well as Maxwell's equations. And the obvious discourse on the laws of motion. And all this to some guy who's most advanced intellectual ambition was counting his goats, who would have been all like "shit, this religion crap is freaking hard, dude". Somehow I think the condensed version was more useful.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Yes, but then he would have had to give humanity algebra and calculus, not to mention an introductory course in Newtonian physics, which, of course, would not have been Newtonian since the man had not been born yet, as well as Maxwell's equations. And the obvious discourse on the laws of motion. And all this to some guy who's most advanced intellectual ambition was counting his goats, who would have been all like "sh*t, this religion crap is freaking hard, dude". Somehow I think the condensed version was more useful.
He doesn't have to teach it to them. He just has to get them to write it down so that several thousand years later we find out that the Schrödinger equation was in the Bible all along. I mean, how unbelievable would that have been! :omg:
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
I spend too much time isolated in my bedroom for my parents to get sick of me.
We all did. And our poor mothers had to do our laundry.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Funny! gets my 5!
------------------------------------ "The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion" Arthur C Clarke