We have graveyards here with graves going back about 400 years.

If you look at the ones from the turn of the twentieth century, there are lots of baby graves. Sometimes the mother is buried there too.  It used to be too easy to die.

Now you have to hire a good assassin. If you can find one. All the ones I've met tend to leave the job unfinished.   

Where did the article go?! Oh Well...

Well is God "Pro-Life" or "Pro Choice"? Depends on what you mean by God. If you mean the God as in Jesus, then I can't say for certain but I would guess "Pro-Life". If you mean Yahweh, then "Pro-Choice" for sure. We can tell by looking at his commandments (Not the primary ten, I mean Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy).

First of all, one of the laws says that (obviously not in these exact words) if there is a scuffle and someone causes a woman to miscarriage, a fine must be paid. If the woman is hurt though it will be "an eye for and eye". Whats interesting is that it says that a fine is to be paid if no one is hurt. Wasn't a baby killed? Doesn't that count as a person? Apparently not... Yet the brutal Assyrians didn't punished abortion by impaling the offender on a stake and refusing them burial.

In another commandment: it is said that if a woman becomes pregnant but her husband thinks she has been unfaithful; she is taken to the temple, where a priest gives her a potion to end the pregnancy. The idea is that if she wasn't faithful, it will work and abort the pregnancy, but if she was faithful then God would step in and stop it from working.

I am not arguing the merits of a "Pro-Life" or "Pro-Choice" stance here. In fact, I don't know where I stand on the issue. [Start Rant] It's just that I wish Conservative "Christians" would actually read their Bibles instead of declaring that they are against Abortion because it's a sin against God or some such. And yes, I put "Christian" in quotes because those people are totally not Christians. If anyone can be called a blasphemous than it is Conservative "Christians". I may get annoyed with hard core atheists (not agnostics mind you...) but Conservative "Christians" really truly piss me off. It's terrible, but I really find it comical how with near-death experiences, the only people who find themselves in a fire and brimstone hell are those people who were hard core fundamentalists at the time of their experience. It's like poetic justice. [End Rant]

Quote from: Aelita_Lynn on December 14, 2008, 03:48:22 PM
I may get annoyed with hard core atheists (not agnostics mind you...) but Conservative "Christians" really truly piss me off.

Why do you get annoyed with hard core atheists?  Is it something about how specific atheists have behaved, or do you just strongly dislike their (un)belief?  I'd really like to know, since I'm one myself.

Quote from: Aelita_Lynn on December 14, 2008, 03:48:22 PM
If you mean Yahweh, then "Pro-Choice" for sure. We can tell by looking at his commandments (Not the primary ten, I mean Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy).

You mean commandments from Deuteronomy like the one that says that men cannot wear female clothing and vice versa?
Rather a hypocritical stance on a site like this, yeah?

I think the Christian God is both anti-life and anti-choice, per a literal reading of the Bible.  He seems to spend a lot of time cursing, slaughtering, and damning people for not doing what he says.  It's really very much like an infinitely one-sided abusive relationship.

I know that people have different interpretations of Christianity, but the simple fact is that the God depicted in Scripture is not a nice or loving guy, and you have to discount most of Christianity's own history, teachings, and holy writings in order to claim otherwise - and if you're going to do that, why don't you call your religion something else?  Stop trying to "reclaim" it from the people you disagree with, and just be the better person by walking away.

Even though I dislike uber-fundamentalist Christianity, I have to credit the fundies with being more consistent than mainstream Christians.  The Christian (and Jewish) God described in Scripture really is an awful, hateful, violent, raving bastard lunatic, and the fundies understand and embrace that.  If your God isn't like that, then stop trying to excuse or explain away all that stuff - it just doesn't wash.  Walk away from it.  Turn the other cheek, so to speak.

EDIT: This isn't directed at anyone here... it's just a general commentary on all the Christians IRL who don't seem to realize that they're wrestling with pigs by trying to take the "Christian" label away from the fundies.

QuoteWhy do you get annoyed with hard core atheists?  Is it something about how specific atheists have behaved, or do you just strongly dislike their (un)belief?  I'd really like to know, since I'm one myself.

I get annoyed with hard core atheists because so many of them like to claim that their point of view is the epitome of logic. I really don't think that is the case. The only way you can claim to be oh so logical is by being agnostic. Really, saying that you know for certain that there is no God is just as irrational as saying that it that you know for certain that there is one. I don't have any problem with people thinking one way or the other. I just can't stand it when people falsely claim superiority. It just seems like there are so many atheists who are just so much like the fundamentalists. It's kind of like how communists and fascists hate each other but they are so similar in practice.

QuoteYou mean commandments from Deuteronomy like the one that says that men cannot wear female clothing and vice versa?
Rather a hypocritical stance on a site like this, yeah?

I guess I should have been a little clearer. I don't think anyone should follow old testament law. I completely disapprove of it. I'm just trying to point out how ridiculous it is to use biblical morality to condemn abortion. At risk of offending most of the world; although I am a theist, I think that Yaweh (aka the god of the Old Testament) may in fact be "the devil". I do consider myself a Christian, but I also consider myself a practical theosophist. In my opinion, Yaweh is Angra Mainyu (aka Ahriman). My personal theology is a terribly complicated affair, and I can't cover it all here, but that's kind of off topic anyways. The point is that I really don't espouse any of that Old Testament stuff. I REALLY don't. I think that much of it was either the creation of evil people or maybe even inspired by "the devil". I feel so silly saying something like that. I find it hard to believe something like that, but I just wanted to leave it open. I am sure there are supernatural things but I'm not so sure about such a direct interaction. Evil people is a MUCH more likely scenario.

Quote from: Emme on December 14, 2008, 05:23:45 PM
I fail to see this "stance" that you speak of.  She was pointing out that Old Testament wasn't explicitly against abortion, and said nothing about clothing.

You're right. I kneee-jerked when I saw the dreaded Deuteronomy mentioned.

QuoteAs to whether God is pro-life or pro-choice, I don't think that's answerable for certain.

If he'd kindly come down to Earth and tell us, that would be super.
In fact, there are thousands of things that could do with clarification by God himself.

How about it big fella? I'm sure John Stewart would be happy to make some room for you on his show 

Quote from: Aelita_Lynn on December 14, 2008, 05:33:16 PM
I get annoyed with hard core atheists because so many of them like to claim that their point of view is the epitome of logic.

Well, it's unfortunate (for you) that their 'belief' is in fact the by-product of concrete logic.
You can be annoyed with them for having a logically consistent belief framework all you like.

QuoteI really don't think that is the case. The only way you can claim to be oh so logical is by being agnostic. Really, saying that you know for certain that there is no God is just as irrational as saying that it that you know for certain that there is one.

Okay then.
Really, saying that you know for certain that there is no Santa Claus is just as irrational as saying that you know for certain that there is one.
Replace Santa Claus with any deity or mythical creature of choice.

QuoteI don't have any problem with people thinking one way or the other. I just can't stand it when people falsely claim superiority.

Which seems sillier:
a) Believing in Invisible Pink Unicorns?
b) Not believing in them?

QuoteIt just seems like there are so many atheists who are just so much like the fundamentalists. It's kind of like how communists and fascists hate each other but they are so similar in practice.

You'll find that militant or hard-core atheists are a direct response to fundamentalist deists.

Quote from: Aelita_Lynn on December 14, 2008, 05:33:16 PM
I get annoyed with hard core atheists because so many of them like to claim that their point of view is the epitome of logic. I really don't think that is the case. The only way you can claim to be oh so logical is by being agnostic. Really, saying that you know for certain that there is no God is just as irrational as saying that it that you know for certain that there is one.

I see what you're saying, but I've got a different take on what it means to say, "There is no God", that has nothing to do with just lacking evidence.  It's more about how the idea of God can't be defined with logical consistency, which is a prerequisite for existence.  It's not about saying, "I don't understand God, so therefore he doesn't exist" - it's about the idea that the believer can't put forward a coherent definition of "God", so not only is talk of his existence right out, but  I don't even know what I'm being asked to believe in.

Also, if I said "You can't say for certain whether or not there is a Santa Claus", people would start giving me funny looks.  Why does the topic of God get special treatment?

Quote from: Vexing on December 14, 2008, 05:50:43 PM
Really, saying that you know for certain that there is no Santa Claus is just as irrational as saying that you know for certain that there is one.
Replace Santa Claus with any deity or mythical creature of choice.

Jinx!

Quote from: Kaitlyn on December 14, 2008, 05:53:14 PM
Also, if I said "You can't say for certain whether or not there is a Santa Claus", people would start giving me funny looks.  Why does the topic of God get special treatment?

Which reminds me of another great mystery:
People who believe in Jesus are left to their own devices.
People who believe they are Jesus are locked up.
Curious.
Is the Second Coming languishing in an asylum somewhere, turning the oatmeal into twinkies?

Quote from: Vexing on December 14, 2008, 05:58:07 PM

Quote from: Kaitlyn on December 14, 2008, 05:53:14 PM
Also, if I said "You can't say for certain whether or not there is a Santa Claus", people would start giving me funny looks.  Why does the topic of God get special treatment?

Which reminds me of another great mystery:
People who believe in Jesus are left to their own devices.
People who believe they are Jesus are locked up.
Curious.
Is the Second Coming languishing in an asylum somewhere, turning the oatmeal into twinkies?

Another thing...  lots of people say that God talks to them, but how can they know whether it's really God?  Couldn't it be Satan?

QuoteI know that people have different interpretations of Christianity, but the simple fact is that the God depicted in Scripture is not a nice or loving guy, and you have to discount most of Christianity's own history, teachings, and holy writings in order to claim otherwise - and if you're going to do that, why don't you call your religion something else?

If you aren't going to call it Christian than what else are to supposed to call it... wait sec... scratch that Now that you mention it... Chrestian would be good. As is the original term Chrestos (Is that spelled right?) meaning benevolent one rather than the later Christos; meaning the anointed one or messiah.

Also I have TOTALLY disagree with this idea about discounting it's history. If you actually look at the history, Christianity's teachings are distinctly Zoroastrian and so the Torah can't really be called Christian. Now if you want to take issue with the Avesta then OK, I'm willing to listen. Modern Judaism is what emerged out of the confused mess that was the syncretism of the religion of Yaweh and the Zoroastrian tradition that was picked up during the Babylonian captivity. If are worried about the New Testament Canon, well why can't we look at things from a reasonable historical perspective, evaluating all documents from the period by there own merits? Why do we have to accept a few books that were probably chosen for political reasons in the third or fourth century? And honestly, are you going to say Paul wasn't Christian? He seems to espouse almost Manichean world view with Jesus as the Savior. I think he needs to be view with a special kind of skepticism due to the obvious Hellenic influence on his ideas, but does that mean he is or isn't Christian. Then there is the question of the authenticity of his later epistles. They change in style and start to go against all of the things that his earlier epistles talk about! Does accepting fraud make you more Christian?

In the end, so what if I recognize that Jesus does not fit the role of the Jewish Messiah but instead the fits the promised savior foretold in Zoroastrian tradition? Does that mean I'm not Christian? Do I have to make up a term so that I can be conveniently categorized! Do I just have to sit down and shut up and let them insult me, insult other, even insulting the very people that they quote their scriptures from?! 

Edit: I'm sorry... I didn't mean to come across the way that I did. I'm not really angry at any of you.

Quote from: Cindi Jones on October 06, 2008, 12:58:40 AM
Personally, I feel that all life is sacred.  Even down to the cow that donated its life for my Sunday dinner.  I don't relegate human life to the level of a cow, rather I am raisig my awareness of how valuable all life is.

I would think that an all powerful god could and would have controls on the soul dispenser so that all would have a chance at life. 

I hate to do this... but.... I really resent the movement to push this to the forefront of all that is important in our government.  Those who have been in power, controlling all branches of the government these past years, have pandered to those with faith and conviction and what have they done?  Nothing.  They have had complete control and have done nothing.  I do hope that those who have voted based on this issue can see how they have been used.  Government will not ever change the current laws unless we progress to a church run state.... like those terrorists we fight on the other side of the world.

Abortion has to be the most profound decision a woman must ever face.  Sometimes it is an easy choice.... and sometimes it must be agonizing.  I truly have sympathy for women in this situation. Even though I could never consider abortion for myself, I do realize that my feelings have nothing to do with other people in other situation.  I can not dictate to them how to live their lives.

Cindi

Bravo! I really wish my mother understood this. Her sole reason for voting is the abortion issue because she is very pro-life. I wish she understood that she's being used.
I, on the other hand, am pro-choice because I believe women should own all rights to their bodies, not the government.

Quote"You can't say for certain whether or not there is a Santa Claus"

Please flesh this out a little. To use this as a valid example you need to be a little more specific. Do you mean that there is some guy going around giving out presents? Do you mean that there is a guy on a sleigh with flying reindeer? This notion does really have much value to us as a thought experiment (or whatever it would technically be) unless we know what exactly we are disputing.

If you want to go with everything that's ever been said about Santa Claus then okay, here I go. Based on what I currently know, I cannot conceive of there being a real Santa because there is no conceivable way to explain his supposed attributes. There are so many real problems that I can think of, but most of them are inconsequential. The real problem is that some of his attributes have to suspend the laws of physics for them to happen. For examples, look at Santa from (an engineer?)'s perspective (sorry I forgot the exact name, but it was pretty popular so I'm sure it wouldn't be to hard to track down). A God however, can be conceived of in a completely naturalistic setting. I have yet to see any argument that showed otherwise.

The problem with taking the academic view of a religion is that it doesn't jive with how 99.9% of people actually treat the topic.  How many believers are going to know what an ecumenical council is?  How many can name even a single major heresy?  Documentary Hypothesis... what's that?

The fact is that the important documents pertaining to modern-day Christianity are a bunch of fragmentary, dubious translations, chosen for political motives, and gathered together in a big book labeled "King James Version" or "New Revised Standard Version".

Quote from: Aelita_Lynn on December 14, 2008, 06:36:51 PM
The real problem is that some of his attributes have to suspend the laws of physics for them to happen.

You mean like conjuring a planet out of nothing?
Or perhaps making a living creature out of dust?
Flaming swords, burning bushes that talk, serpents that speak human language, rivers of blood, the sun standing still, setting a soaking wet altar alight with prayer, chariots of fire coming down from the sky, parting the sea?
A fat guy that can put presents under every household Xmas tree in one night sounds practically plausible by comparison!

Oh... the Invisible Pink Unicorn argument is particular annoying to me because it plays on bias to short circuit rational thought. An invisible pink unicorn sounds utterly ridiculous. I honestly can't say that it doesn't exist but I am predisposed to saying it doesn't for no conceivable reason. If I really were oh so logical then I would say hey, maybe there are (once we get past the issue of why they would be invisible - after all what does it matter if you are pink if you are invisible, you don't need an earthy color for camoflauge since you are invisible!) It would be most logical to accept that there may be pink unicorns, but if we logical, then we would all look silly wouldn't we. Maybe logic isn't all it is cracked up to be? I don't like the argument, but only conclusion I can come up with from it though is that logic makes you silly; which doesn't really support the questions original purpose. But whatever, I don't like the argument because it makes logic look bad, and using it is as silly the idea of that invisible pink unicorn. 

Quote from: Vexing on December 14, 2008, 06:44:17 PM

Quote from: Aelita_Lynn on December 14, 2008, 06:36:51 PM
The real problem is that some of his attributes have to suspend the laws of physics for them to happen.

You mean like conjuring a planet out of nothing?
Or perhaps making a living creature out of dust?
Flaming swords, burning bushes that talk, serpents that speak human language, rivers of blood, the sun standing still, setting a soaking wet altar alight with prayer, chariots of fire coming down from the sky, parting the sea?
A fat guy that can put presents under every household Xmas tree in one night sounds practically plausible by comparison!

Where did I say that he did those things? Oh and conjuring a planet out nothing? What about energy? And don't try to tell me that you can't make matter out of energy, cause that's BS. Energy and matter are interchangeable. It is thought that before the "big bang" the universe consisted of a single point containing an infinite quantity of energy.

Quote from: Aelita_Lynn on December 14, 2008, 06:51:08 PM
Oh... the Invisible Pink Unicorn argument is particular annoying to me because it plays on bias to short circuit rational thought. An invisible pink unicorn sounds utterly ridiculous. I honestly can't say that it doesn't exist but I am predisposed to saying it doesn't for no conceivable reason. If I really were oh so logical then I would say hey, maybe there are (once we get past the issue of why they would be invisible - after all what does it matter if you are pink if you are invisible, you don't need an earthy color for camoflauge since you are invisible!) It would be most logical to accept that there may be pink unicorns, but if we logical, then we would all look silly wouldn't we. Maybe logic isn't all it is cracked up to be? I don't like the argument, but only conclusion I can come up with from it though is that logic makes you silly; which doesn't really support the questions original purpose. But whatever, I don't like the argument because it makes logic look bad, and using it is as silly the idea of that invisible pink unicorn.

Eureka! Now you understand why atheists find the concept of God to be so ludicrous!
After all, the idea of an Invisible Pink Unicorn (Blessed be her Hooves) is no less valid than an Invisible Space Daddy with Three Parts (Amen).