quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

What exactly does this mean...."when I used to push notes up the chimney?"......

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle

If this is now moving onto does god exist or are any of the religions relevant can someone explain to me the following. If god created us in his own image was he just practicing what he looked like when he first created the dinosaurs? He wasn’t sure maybe if he had a long neck and tail or if he was capable of flight?

You probably already realize that not every Christian disagrees with evolution, and that not all of us are literalists.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

Is it only a "justification", or an honest attempt at finding truth? And what about scientists with beards? Hmmm??

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

Is it only a "justification", or an honest attempt at finding truth? And what about scientists with beards? Hmmm??

Fair enough it’s trying to reconcile differences but you have to be careful it doesn’t constrain thought processes. You can’t find the answers if you already think you know what they are and I think this is the danger of this subject being taught as a science based one. Good point about the bearded scientists though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

I absolutely agree. Truth is truth, and we need to be open to it, wherever it leads. I would not put Creationism up as a scientific truth, as of yet, but I'm satisfied that there are those at least looking in that direction.
 
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

 I vigourously disagree about there being a right and wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level
I absolutely agree. Truth is truth, and we need to be open to it, wherever it leads. I would not put Creationism up as a scientific truth, as of yet, but I'm satisfied that there are those at least looking in that direction. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

If John Doe (whom you've never met, nor done anything to) walks up to you, pulls out a gun, and shoots you in the head, how can you argue that it's anything other than wrong? Thus making it right, to not do so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

If John Doe (whom you've never met, nor done anything to) walks up to you, pulls out a gun, and shoots you in the head, how can you argue that it's anything other than wrong? Thus making it right, to not do so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level
I absolutely agree. Truth is truth, and we need to be open to it, wherever it leads. I would not put Creationism up as a scientific truth, as of yet, but I'm satisfied that there are those at least looking in that direction. 

I don’t want to offend anyone so if you are not open to religious debate please don’t read the following.

I only worry because I think of kids today being told that things in the bible have been proven and tested to the same extent that some scientific theories have. It kind of blurs the lines and I’m glad it wasn’t around when I grew up or it would have confused me.

Most scientific theories are superseded like Newton’s laws were based on time being a constant and Einstein’s works have shown this not to be true. Although Newton’s laws are adopted for most cases because they still apply for most things we are concerned with. I wish religions showed the same kind of evolution and people concerned with them were as self critical as the scientists are of their works.

If you want to know the second thing about God the first thing you have to admit to yourself is that you don’t know anything about him/her/it. This is a hard position for most to accept but I think it is true because of the following:

Everyone above has spoken of a God capable of answering prayers because they have all been told he is all powerful and if he fails to answer it’s because he has his own reasons for not doing so. No one considers the fact he is unable to. Therefore in searching for answers you have already set limits outside the problem if in fact god isn’t all powerful.

I’m sorry the above is a long response but I’m trying to get across my fears and it’s the easiest way I can phrase it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

If John Doe (whom you've never met, nor done anything to) walks up to you, pulls out a gun, and shoots you in the head, how can you argue that it's anything other than wrong? Thus making it right, to not do so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

If John Doe (whom you've never met, nor done anything to) walks up to you, pulls out a gun, and shoots you in the head, how can you argue that it's anything other than wrong? Thus making it right, to not do so.

....but if they hold a reasonable yet erroneous view that i am a danger to children for instance, are they still wrong? Or less wrong maybe? Once we begin assigning degrees of rightness or wrongness then absolute right or wrong becomes tricky to define.

quote:

ORIGINAL: gooddogbenji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

If John Doe (whom you've never met, nor done anything to) walks up to you, pulls out a gun, and shoots you in the head, how can you argue that it's anything other than wrong? Thus making it right, to not do so.

I can't explain it in one post, but I don't believe in right and wrong, mostly because if someone never learned our culture, they will not know our rules.  And if they don't know them, sending them to hell over it seems kinda unfair.

I totally agree with the not knowing the rules part, benji. And as an aside, I'm not a hell kinda guy to begin with.

Take the example of theft.  Most moralists will argue that theft is wrong.  Then they go home and download some hymns that they do not own.  On the work computer.  During work hours.  And take the CD they burned home. 

It's still theft, it's still wrong. Now, maybe "less" wrong, as phil and Gent as putting forth, but wrong.
 
*hides my Kaaza-spawned cd of Burl Ives*

As to the killing randomly example, what if there was a political motivation?  What if it is a war?  What if they do it for your money, or someone paid them to do it? 

That's taking the example away for the original premise, though; staying with "stranger, not wronged, shooting someone", I don't see how it isn't wrong, and even using your premises, doesn't necessarily change that.

We destroy lives on a daily basis for our own enjoyment.  Maybe not directly, but who hasn't bought some unnecessary gadget made in Indonesia that they did not need?  Who has sacrificed a larger house for a smaller house and a $10 000 donation to a charity?  Or spent a year in Africa volunteering?

We're very comfortable preaching morality and taking extreme circumstances and basing an ethical code around it, but to expand those and decide that our actions, indirectly, do far worse for far more people because we want to live in a wealthy country seems off limits.

Our actions do affect others around the world, I agree.

I'm not saying I have done any of this, I'm just saying I don't think it's "wrong" to do anything.  Condemning is easy when your sins are hidden and accepted.

I don't know, I can see you going to Africa for a year, banging poor chicks, then taking off [:D]

Yours,


benji

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

My dearest lev,

Someone sent me your post because I have you "on block."  What your story fails to mention is what led up to your moment of prayer....Not to sound too harsh...But where was God as you gained the excess weight and as your health declined?  It seems the same person that got you into this mess is probably the same one who helped you out of it....you!  If you had logged on and the first thing you saw was "Domiguy's diet by chocolate...Which is a diet which one loses weight by in lieu of eating they have tremendous amounts of sex with women of color." ...Anywhoo you probably might have moved on till you found Dr..so and so's diet....That actually worked....My diet is much funner....Funner?...anywhooo...No big shakes either way, really.