Summer means no religion or politics?

[Misj']

Are you honestly equating the story of God flooding the world with a doctor removing a tumor or just saying something to keep an argument going?

Doctor cuts out the threat (tumour) to protect the (healthy) body. God cuts out the threat (evil people) to protect the healthy situation (people might disagree with his opinion of healthy, but I'm pretty sure cancer cells would disagree being killed as well)...are you honestly telling my that there is no similarity? - Please tell me why it's a poor argument then...

Ps. By the way, I wasn't defending anything or anyone...I was indicating the hypocrisy in certain 'arguments' (or rather one-liners) postulated in this thread. This hypocrisy I still see. There are also many really good arguments uttered on either side. But these 'one-liners' really weaken the discussion. Hence my reaction.

[MrColossal]

Humans are not single cells with a rebuilding telomere chain. Cancer cells can't and will never be able to disagree with being killed.

A better argument would be any other example of genocide from history, in my opinion. Someone deems a certain population unfit and puts a plan in action to murder them all.

Also, as soon as the flood was over Noah got roaring drunk and then his daughters raped him, RIGHTEOUS! I wonder if God slapped His Forehead after that happened.

[Jim Reed]

Ps. By the way, I wasn't defending anything or anyone...I was indicating the hypocrisy in certain 'arguments' (or rather one-liners) postulated in this thread.

Can you elaborate on that? If it was me who said those one-liners, I'll gladly respond.
As for cancer, I belive that cancer is a symptom, not the disease (more or less).

[Misj']

Also, as soon as the flood was over Noah got roaring drunk and then his daughters raped him, RIGHTEOUS! I wonder if God slapped His Forehead after that happened.

Maybe it's me not knowing the bible too well...but I don't know that story...could you show me the quote?

Oh...and I know many people whom I consider righteous (both believers, and non-believers (including atheists))...that doesn't mean that I think they are perfect. It just means that I think they try to be good people. Maybe I have a wrong idea about the whole righteous-thing...but I always thought that a righteous (wo)man was a (wo)man who tried to be the best (wo)man that he/she can be (both towards himself and others). If that's wrong, please tell me what it means then...

A better argument would be any other example of genocide from history, in my opinion. Someone deems a certain population unfit and puts a plan in action to murder them all.

So a better example would for example have been: people who tried to kill Hitler. Some people deemed him 'unfit' and putted a plan in action to murder him (just extrapolate a plan to kill one Hitler to killing an entire population of Hitlers). Hitler probably didn't want to die (well...until he took his own life that is). Before you answer, people read my remark below!

Can you elaborate on that? If it was me who said those one-liners, I'll gladly respond.

It's not you personally...on both sides there are people using one-liners to 'silence' the other side (I use them myself as a sarcastic responds to such one-liners, although people don't always seem to get the joke...they're a little less clear than Ghost's bananaphone (hmm, still love the bananaphone)).

But one-liners are easy; take my own example with Hitler's father a few posts back: there is no way to argue against anything like that...if one would say that 'yes, it would have been okay to kill Hitler, even if you were his father', than I could easily repost by claiming that you 'thus claim that killing people is good'. On they other hand, if you say 'no, it's would not have been okay to kill Hitler', than I would argue that you say that you agree with the things he did in his life because you don't think someone like him should be stopped.

It's of course a win-win situation for me, but could hardly be considered a proper way of discussion. The only thing it could do is proof to me that I have a superior intellect to all who disagree with my opinion (which I don't think to be true by definition).

But there's a Dutch expression (and I guess it exists in English as well): a fool can ask more than a thousand wise men can answer. To me such one-liners are the questions by fools, and have no place in a real discussion...and should be left for arguments and action-movies.

As for cancer, I belive that cancer is a symptom, not the disease (more or less).

Personally I would consider the cancer the disease...

[Ghost]

...they're a little less clear than Ghost's bananaphone.

That's one of the many cool things about the bananaphone. And it doesn't stop there.
People who actively FIGHT the devil with very unbalanced skill trees use it!

[Jim Reed]

I'll be back! =D

[MrColossal]

I guess I just understood the logical path of Nacho's post more than I did yours about doctors. Rereading the one about Hitler and his father [who would also have been called Hitler!] makes more sense to me. I like that one better actually. So the idea is that God knew that every human except Noah and his family were going to grow up to be the final boss in Wolfenstein? Man, that would have been an amazing boss fight.

Also my mistake, it was Lot that got raped by his daughters, a different story of the only righteous people around being saved from little Hitlers.

[Misj']

Rereading the one about Hitler and his father [who would also have been called Hitler!] makes more sense to me.

Yes he was called Hitler too, and look at that moustache: [Alois Hitler sr.]

I like that one better actually. So the idea is that God knew that every human except Noah and his family were going to grow up to be the final boss in Wolfenstein?

Or God just thought it was about time for people to learn how to swim...who knows.

Man, that would have been an amazing boss fight.

I feel a game idea coming up

Also my mistake, it was Lot that got raped by his daughters, a different story of the only righteous people around being saved from little Hitlers.

Hahaha...I now really have a vision of a game about little Hitler-clones with banana-phones.

[discordance]

Finally, we can call in a Godwin's Law on this.

[miguel]

I've been trying not to mention this but you leave me no option.
The God you have been writing about is actually very much like all of us. It has a name and it's not the name of God.
Confused?
Check out the Gospel of Judas if interested. Through it you will get other relevant links. It's fascinating.

[Nacho]

I have a doubt.... When we see the bad things that happened in the world, believers say "It's not God's fault. In his inmense wisdom he gave us the biggest gift: Free will. If he does not intervene it's a gift he gives to us. Bad things happen because of us, not because of him". Okay... Then... Why he did intervene with the deluge? Does God change his mind? That does not seem to be something that a being of infinite wisdom should do. He invented time, even the future, I guess... Can't he forecast the future and do things propperly from the first moment?

One other explanation is that he had to destroy his creation not because humans were actually that bad because of human's fault, but because God pissed it off when creating them. He made a defective race which was going to be bad yes or yes if they had free will, so he had to start a new one.

Again... How can a being of infinite wisdom do a defective race? Specially when that race was the one that was going to "look similar to him". The creation where he was going to put more love and effort... I don't understand.

Believe me... I am not impermeable to the religious message... Sometimes it's cool, and good (Not very original, though...) but some of the episodes are so, so unlogical and contradictory that I simply can't swallow it. If you think of it God contradictes himself once and again...

[rharpe]

Why do people try to understand an infinite being before figuring out their own finite being? If we can't understand everything about ourselves, how the heck can we even BEGIN to understand God?

[Vince Twelve]

How can we begin to understand ourselves, if some people insist on teaching things like creationism or intelligent design in schools or fill their children's minds with other falsehoods about our universe.

[miguel]

Vince, the way you (not you particularly but others that say it too) keep repeating that idea about teaching religion at school is something that I find very strange.
In Portugal, no public school will teach religion. When a kid reaches his 5th year of school his fathers are asked if they want the kid to have Religion & Moral Classes. Those classes do not count for the final grade and they are like I said optional.
Also, the idea that kids are just mindless creatures that believe everything they are told isn't exactly true and more often you will find teens rebelling against any form of rules or commandments no matter what we are talking about.
And, unfortunately, there are hundreds of sites in the internet that are of a fascist nature and do recruit young kids around the web. As for religion forums they can be counted easily and most of them go back to the beginning of the internet.

[Vince Twelve]

I'm not talking about teaching religion in schools.  I'm talking about people putting stickers like this



on kid's textbooks and wanting "equal time" for teaching intelligent design and/or creationism.

It may not be an issue in Portugal.

And saying that "It doesn't matter what you teach kids because they won't necessarily believe it" isn't really a good argument in this case.

[miguel]

You did write: "...ourselves, if some people insist on teaching things like creationism or intelligent design in schools or fill their children's minds with other falsehoods about our universe."

Well I guess it might be an issue in your country.
Does every school in your country force kids to learn religion?
And I did not say it doesn't matter what you teach kids, you said it.
To me it's very clear that science thoughts about the universe are still in its prime.

[Vince Twelve]

I just meant that teaching creationism and intelligent design in schools is different than teaching religion.  Creationism isn't explicitly tied to a specific religion, nor is intelligent design, though they are both championed by hard-line christians as a way of undermining scientific teachings in order to leave that opening to slip religion into the schools.

I separate that from teaching religion in schools, though, you're right, it's about the same thing.

No, public schools are not allowed to teach religion.  They can teach ABOUT religion, which they obviously must when you're covering subjects like history, etc.  But teaching the religion to the kinds or evangelizing is definitely out of bounds, though many groups try to challenge and bend this boundary in schools around the country. (Which is what I was referring to.)

Also, the idea that kids are just mindless creatures that believe everything they are told isn't exactly true and more often you will find teens rebelling against any form of rules or commandments no matter what we are talking about.

And I did not say it doesn't matter what you teach kids, you said it.

Maybe I was misreading that first quote, but it seemed to be saying that teaching kids something will have an impact on them.  I just don't think the notion that some kids will think the opposite of what they're told is an argument against me not wanting my kids to be taught Intelligent Design in the classroom.

[SSH]

Vince, are you saying kids should study evolution with a closed mind, carelessly and uncritically?

[Vince Twelve]

Not at all.  Never suggested such a thing.  I think the schools should give equal time to all theories that have comparable amounts of evidence.   

[Matti]

Yeah, creationism should be presented in form of an 8 second clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhqrcxrpCMs