Messages

Theoretically.

I'm also sending PMs to people now to help speed things along.

Although I still have two of the first writers who responded within the first 24 hours saying they were working on it who haven't responded with the story.  They've got about two hours by the original deadline. 

Edit:  One is in, and the other asked for a slight extension which I've granted.  Moving along!

I wasted some time on two of these stories that, for some reason, got picked up by Google's spam filter.  I've learned my lesson and told gmail to keep those precious emails.  So far, I've received four people's writings, still waiting on two more who have about 11 hours till their deadline.  Stories so far are looking really good!

Have not heard back yet from any of the four people that I forwarded the stories on to, so just a fair warning to everyone: Check your spam folders!  I'll be sending PMs from now on to make sure people check.

Those aren't aliens, they're just His meatball eyes, rolling around the sky, watching over us all.

Vince, then we can accept that politicians are the new Crusaders of the modern world?

See? We can agree! 

SSH that is just one example of the ridiculous bullshit being thrown out across all types of media here to the brainless mobs who just eat it up and repeat it at the top of their lungs to anyone who will listen.  I shudder to think how many people heard that guy's claim, nodded, agreed, pumped their fists in the air, and then never even noticed the misleading retraction:

Editor's Note: This version corrects the original editorial which implied that physicist Stephen Hawking, a professor at the University of Cambridge, did not live in the UK.

The retraction should say "This version corrects the original editorial which implied clearly stated that physicist Stephen Hawking would be euthanized by a system such as the British NHS, when in fact, he lived under it for most of his life and credits it for saving his life."

With all this intentional spread of misinformation and fear, I have no idea how America managed to make it to it's current position in the world, and certainly can't see it maintaining that position.

[way]

Scientists are behind nuclear weapons. Where is their born-with notion of right and wrong?

And several popes, and other religious leaders and churches were behind the Crusades, which killed way way way more people.  Innocents and non-combatants included.  Where were the popes' bible-taught notion of right and wrong?

The most dangerous thing in the world is people, not science.  People and asteroids.  Fucking asteroids...

Ok, the stories are in the wild!  I sent six people emails telling them to start their stories.  I used random.org to choose the teams and writing orders.  There were three themes: "Science Fiction" "Medieval Fantasy" and "Adventure Game Parody"  We'll see where these go!

I'll keep the first post in this thread updated on how far each story has progressed.

Good luck and don't post spoilers here!

I do agree with you but maybe you can acknowledge that Moses did established the principles of it to a universal prism.

No.  Sorry, but there isn't even proof that Moses was real.  There's a very strong possibility that he's just a fictional character in a really old book...

Regions of the world where the teachings of Judaism hadn't reached still developed concepts of wrong and right and also believed killing and stealing to be wrong.  And societies had established laws about it before the time Moses may or may not have been born.  So, no, I can not agree that Moses established any principles.

We clearly can't scientifically prove it but there are many written documents that prove that he was inspired by God.

Again, sorry but I can't accept the bible as proof that anything it contains actually happened.

Vince, for a person that likes profs of everything I could link you to experiments done by scientists just to mention the last 25 years of history. If we go back to the beginning of what is called "modern medicine" then some documented events are just to horrible to talk about. I will not go before that because you might say the persons involved were not "scientists".

And I could quote you thousands of cases of terrible things being done in god's name.  Wars waged by churches.  Priests raping little boys.  Bombings and terrorist attacks by Christians.  Hell, even the pope has gotten in on the bloody, corrupt, and amoral action.

Lets not say that all scientists are amoral because some have done bad things, and I won't say that churches are amoral because they all have blood and hypocrisy throughout their history.

What is right and wrong are defined by the people and is constantly changing and evolving with society.  The notion that killing another person is wrong has been around much longer than Christianity, and whether or not this concept of morality and good will towards men was first planted in our souls by a god, or even whether or not we have souls, is not something that you can state as fact, or use as proof of some other point, because there is no evidence, nor can there be.

State it as a belief, and I won't have a problem with it.

I believe that men are naturally good and are born with some sense of morality.  That morality is governed by their understanding of the world around them and the society that they live in.  I don't think that we are so weak that we needed to be given this by a supernatural being.  Again, maybe it's just that I have more faith in humanity than you do.

It wasn't a scientist. In fact, from his point of view, killing is just part of the process.

No.  You would be very hard pressed to find a scientist who thinks that killing other human beings is justified.  Just as you would any other type of person.  This is just silly, sorry. 

Do not forget  who told man that killing was wrong.

Other men?  Men developed concepts of right and wrong which allowed us to grow and flourish as a society.  Does that idea of right and wrong (which are still somewhat subjective and shifting to this day) have to have come from some supernatural being?  Do I just have more faith in humanity than you do?

I am Miguel and I am this being that is so enlightened that what I believe is the Truth, and what the 98% of the world that disagrees with me believes is False. I mean, look at me! I believe in what I want, God? Exists, to my specifications, and we are beings running around doing his will, AKA robots! Philosophy? It's true, as long as it agrees with me.

  Just playing here!  Please don't quote me and pick apart my choice of words!

The concept you have from the God that most of you write about and even Jesus is not accurate.

That's just the problem Miguel!  The god and Jesus that he's writing about are accurate portrayals to certain branches of Christianity.  There are a huge number of different beliefs within Christianity and most of them don't agree with each other.  What kind of church do you go do?  If Catholic, why not Lutheran?  If Lutheran, why  not Protestant?  If Protestant, why not Southern Baptist?  (I know some of these probably aren't found around your parts, which only further demonstrates the role of upbringing and geographic region in the development of religious beliefs)

You're right Andail.  I'll still leave this open for one more day so that people can have a chance to read and understand the rules before handing out the first stories.  I'll generally be following the structure I laid out in the first post, but may make some small changes based on suggestions here.

The reason I'm thinking of something short like 150 to 200 words is because the final product is going to wind up being really long.  Maybe that's not a bad thing though.

Yeah, last time was really fun.  If there's some kind of consensus that we should do it that way again, I'll definitely do it!  Anybody else of the Babar persuasion?

Alright, I finished with

Spoiler

$1050 and didn't get killed or hauled off to jail.  Is that the best ending?

[close]

By the way, I was totally happy to see that I could use "Vince" as my whore name, unless... you know... that was for another Vince... 

[in a book]

Edit: Darn, everybody's faster than me!

About evangelizing, I think the main concern you might have is that teaching the Bible to young kids without any form of pedagogical knowledge may create wrong interpretations of it.

No, not really.  It's more that there may not be a correct interpretation.  With all the branches of Christianity and all the different interpretations of the bible being taught by priests and ministers around the world, how can you be sure that your interpretation is the correct one, and thus, should be taught to kids?  Going further than that, with all the different religions in the world, how can you be sure that Christianity is the one that is right, and that all the others, which together make up something like 75% of the planet's population, are all wrong?

And unless you know that your religion is the one true religion, how can you justify teaching it to children as truth?  That's my problem with evangelizing.  Not "Oops, that might not really be what god meant in that verse of the bible," but "Oops, that entire book, and indeed the entire idea of an omniscient being, might be wrong."

Again, I'm saying that it might be wrong.  I'm not trying to insult anyone for believing, so no mean spiritedness.    But, I think that even a believer like yourself could agree that the power of faith comes from a person deciding what he or she believes by themselves and not because it's what they've been told.  Now, if a person has learned about all the different religions out there, read all the different holy books, meditated with monks in Thailand, felt the caress of His Noodly Appendage, and comes out of it thinking, "You know, that story of Jesus just feels right in my heart.  Something about it makes me want to live a better life and spend all my Sundays bowing my head in prayer," then that would be a more powerful kind of faith than "You guys shut up!  You're all wrong!  My mom and dad told me so!  And it says so in a book!"

So, in a way, teaching one religion in schools as the all powerful undeniable truth would rob students of the ability to find truth themselves, since they have already been biased from a young age.  Let's let schools teach verifiable things like evolution, and leave the "Nuh uh! The world is only 6000 years old and man walked with the dinosaurs!" out of it.

I'm of the opinion that religion should be taught to people seeking it, not thrust upon people who are just in their most impressionable years, or forced down my throat when I'm downing my morning coffee and throwing open the door to go to work only to find two guys in short-sleeve button up shirts, ties, and bicycle helmets with some pamphlets for me.

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.   

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.

I had been planning on generic themes.  Previously we had "Detective story" and "Contemporary Urban Satire".  In the sign up thread, two people suggested sci-fi.  So, I was thinking along the lines of "Sci-fi," "fantasy," and "adventure game parody" or something like that.  Not restrictive, but at least a ballpark genre.  Did you have another idea for restrictions?

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.

I considered google docs.  I love it and use it all the time, and maybe that would be a good way to go.  Especially since 10 out of 20 people signed up use gmail already.  The only worries that I would have with it would be that people would have to be checking it for their turn to come up, or their might be confusion about who's turn it is and no one would really be in charge of declaring one person MIA and going on to the next.

It would be fun, though, for everyone to be able to read along as the story develops.  Hopefully that wouldn't lead to collusion or something, though.

As for worries about me being AFK for an extended amount of time, I'm at the computer all day at work (like now) and am very rarely away from a computer for more than 8 hours (I have to sleep, right?) so I wouldn't see it as being a big risk.  Plus, I'm always in my email with my blackberry, so I could forward an email even if I were off at the zoo with my daughter or whatever.  If I had some emergency, I could just email the writing order along to the people with the stories and it could just be forwarded along by each writer like we did the last two times.

Anybody else thinking Google Docs would be a good way to go?

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.