Hi everyone. I've enjoyed reading the "thread" - it's interesting where things can go when you get a group of people together...
WENDY - Thanks for clarifying that hell, to you, isn't a fiery place but is, instead, existence without God. I still wonder why that has to be an eternal existence without Him if you happen to, on this earth, be a doubting Thomas or Teri. And, it would seem, to me, that gullible people would have an advantage in having faith (NOT that I'm saying that religious people are gullible). Regarding your vision of your Nana passing away and you feeling that she was saying goodbye -- a close friend of mine had the same experience. I don't doubt that there are dimensions which we can't imagine. Einstein theorized some of them and yet remained religious.
PEGGIANN - I'm glad you and my brother connected and that you received some of his sermons. One thing I like about my brother is that he, despite his love of writing sermons (he delivers them occassionaly to the homeless in shelters), he's not what you'd call "preachy." He doesn't have a holier than thou attitude and just simply gives his take on things.
DENNIS - Like you, I feel that blaming wrongdoings on the devil is kind of a cop out. When non-religious people do immoral things, they usually don't blame things on the devil.
RANA - I'm sorry that we got into pedophelia but I guess it just kind of happens because it's such a big news event in the Catholic church. Like you, I know that it goes on in other churches. And obviously non-religious people can be into pedophelia. You mention that the Catholic "Church has no objection to gay people - its the "lifestyle" that is against doctrine. If the doctrine says that being gay or having a "gay lifestyle" is bad, I guess I'll have to disagree -- not that the church or you don't have just as much a right to disagree with me. As many gay and transsexuals say, I don't ask that you agree with me, just that you respect me and my right to have a choice.
SARA LOUISE - You mention, "Organized Churches have many problems because they look more to their "Doctrine" than they do the Bible. This does not negate my belief in God." I'm not sure I understand...are you saying that the doctrine and bible are in disagreement? Shouldn't both profess the same ideologies or rules? Pardon my question...I'm not that literate in terms of religious things.
LEIGH - Yes, it sure seems like the Catholic church is plagued with pedophelia. I've wondered, if they let priests marry, whether that might bring in a lot of more average people. To me, it's asking a lot for anyone to give up marriage and devote themselves wholy to God. I realize that that's part of the doctrine but I note that many things that people now consider silly have been eliminated from religious actions...why not eliminate the no-marriage provision? And, were I to have my way, I'd allow gay marriage, too, but that just shows how "twisted" I am!
STEPH - I agree that clothing has nothing to do with pedophelia or rape. Unfortunately, it never stops rapist from proclaiming, "she was asking for it."
DENNIS - Your story about the principal and the girl was very funny! ("Yes, but [you wear boring outfits because] you're old"). It reminded me of how a principal friend of mine mentioned that, at his school, he's sent some girls home when they dress too provocatively. This reminded me of how girls in high school back in the '60's were reprimanded when they wore short skirts. The principal would have them bend their knees on the floor and measure from the knee up to the skirt. As a kid, I was sometimes in wonder at how girls could wear short skirts on freezing days (well, as freezing as southern Calif. gets, lol).
SHELLEY - You mentioned how "age does not prevent some from wearing fashions too young for them." When I was transitioning, I noticed some TS's wearing outfits that were, in my opinion, too young for them. I probably went the other direction, wearing things that were too dull. I wanted like heck to fit into the look of average women my age. I was so strict with myself that I had to give myself permission to wear something fun. These days, my best friend still chides me, "why don't you wear something more feminine?" At times, I do.
RANA - I'm sorry that the "thread" started making you sad. And, again, am happy you decided to rejoin the "thread." I feel the others were just trying to express their opinions and am sure that nothing was intended to be personal. But I guess it's like people arguing, on television, whether transsexualism is an illness. Even though they are not referring to me, specifically, it nevertheless is a bummer to be hearing such a conversation. Even if there is one guy on TV arguing my side, it makes me sad to be hearing negative things like "people who do SRS, are butchering themselves." I empathise with you and can understand why such discussions can make you sad. And such discussions don't deal with my need -- to hear aloud why some people have strong beliefs in God. Again, it would be my hope that something said here might click me into the "believer' column.
DAWN - I like, though you were joking, your idea of a Charleen's Angels show with three guys in Speedos. I wish that guy's clothing was a bit more interesting...three guys in nearly-identical tuxes is, for me, kinda boring. I think back to Elizabethan times when men's clothes were frilly and, dare I say, peacockish. Then conformity and business blahs came in and that style has lasted centuries. And if any male exudes any sense of style, they're considered, oh my gosh, gay. I think the three guys in your show, Speedos or not, would be suspect. They'd have to act very macho-ish and rough to shake homophobic suspicions in the U.S.
DENNIS - Though faith is seemingly illogical, I still wonder at scientists like Einstein having strong religious beliefs. What did he know that I'm not seeing? I agree with you that "You can't try and logically convince someone that something or someone is beautiful." I've faced this in trying to find music for television shows -- the hardest thing is to get a group of people to agree on one piece of music. Amazingly, though, a LOT of people seem to agree on this God-thing. I keep pondering, as I said above, what they see that I'm not seeing.
CELIA - You state that "arguments about deviant inclinations and behavior are far off topic for this thread. Shall we put this train back on its track?" Sure, that'd be neat. The track I'm looking for is the one down that dark tunnel into that bright light.
KIMBERLY - You mentioned, "How do you explain surviving time after time when you should have died?" The agnostic would say that it's coincidence or luck. When I started this post, I wondered how people can attribute survival of disaster as God's doing. There was a lot of that after 9-11. I felt sorry when a VERY religious person died...it seemed contradictory. Some used the argument, "It was his time." I didn't understand that, either. None of this is to say you aren't right. I just notice some contradictions and this confuses me.
VICTORIA - You mention, "I don't know why I'm here, and I'd really like to know." A previous post led me to a website that stated that trees and flowers don't have to have an all-compelling reason for being. Perhaps, as humans, we're being egotistical to imagine that we have a reason to be here. Maybe we, like the trees and flowers, are just here. A further extension might be that we're here because God likes looking down on the trees, flowers and humans.
STEPH - "The forums would be a very dull place if we all agreed with each other all the time." That reminds me of the Twilight Zone where "Number 12 looks just like me." Yes, no one can accuse us of being "Stepford Wives," lol.
JAMES - I'm happy that you've been enjoying the "thread." I certainly have, too. You mention, "Till about roughly 40 A.D. information was passed on through oral transmission." You further state, "Because people didn't have it written down till later they would have had it memorized and it would have been commonly discussed amongnst the Jews." I'm sure you're aware of a term "group think." It's when a group of people agree on something that may or may not be true. That could have happened with the Christian stories. And, as I mentioned, passing stories by word of mouth can be totally wrong -- the latest example is when a miner was misheard and everyone thought the "12 miners are alive!" Again, I would prefer that, ideally, something that people value so strongly as religion should be backed with written corroberating stories by impartial reporters. You state that "Christ was fought against on many occassions and condemned as a heretic. Not all agreed with him." I'll take your word that many disagreed with Christ when he was alive. This I don't dispute. Yet, somehow today, we only hear of the Christian side. That He died for us, that son of God.
I will admit that my questioning doubtful side has trouble whenever a martyr is involved. John F. Kennedy was a great president but I remember, before he was killed, that many were unhappy with him. Now, he's like a Camelot god. Were Marilyn or James Dean truly worthy of being THE female and male icons of being an Hollywood movie star? (Don't believe me? Check out the stores on Hollywood Boulevard selling Marilyn and James Dean statues, posters and other assorted junk). Did Martin Luther King or Ghandi ever have a day when they felt like punching someone? Sometimes, in war movies, I've heard an actor comment, "We can't kill him -- it'll turn him into a martyr."
I know the bible intimates Jesus wasn't perfect but his death certainly couldn't have been more icon-creating than if a Hollywood screenwriter had written it. I can't imagine a more excruciating death. Or, if you want to be a contrarian, a more "perfect" death that destined millions of people to believe. It is that perfect martyrdom, ironically, that makes me doubt Christ as son of God above all else. If it weren't so perfect, I'd have a lot easier time believing.
None of this is to say that I don't believe SOMETHING is out there. When you look at the perfection of the inside of our bodies or the inner workings of a tree or flower, my inclination is that SOMETHING came up with these intricacies. Some of you talk of chance of surviving disaster as proof of religion. I prefer to think of the logic necessary for us to have hearts, livers, lungs, veins, fingers, brains. That "intelligent design," in my opinion, logically cannot be a random occurance.
Teri Anne
