JT wrote:Now my question to at least Patrick and Moon-Crane is: Are you theophobic?
Me, no. How can one fear that which does not exist?
JT wrote:Now my question to at least Patrick and Moon-Crane is: Are you theophobic?
Moon-Crane wrote:JT wrote:Now my question to at least Patrick and Moon-Crane is: Are you theophobic?
Me, no. How can one fear that which does not exist?
Moon-Crane wrote:JT wrote:Funny how liberals will accept a birthright basis for certain civil rights but balk at others. Inconsistent, isn't it?
Yes, of course, it's only 'liberals' who do that. I've never heard of a conservative ever being inconsistent on any subject [/snark]
JT wrote:...
But the logical error you are making is in claiming that these churches, such as the Catholic church, are criminal. It has to be agreed that historically most organized religions have indeed behaved, at least on occasion, reprehensibly. But the modern version of these Christian churches are not on the whole criminal. Simply having another moral or political view than you does not make one a criminal. That is clearly intolerance. Now, if you want to point a finger at a religion for modern-day systemic reprehensible behavior, look no further than Islam.
JT wrote:Now my question to at least Patrick and Moon-Crane is: Are you theophobic?
JT wrote:Moon-Crane, its not that you haven't heard any coherent arguments for traditional marriage, its that you won't accept them.
But adherents of traditional marriage don't have to accept your rationale either.
And many, including the many 'african americans who are as stupid and bigoted as their white brethren on certain issues' think comparing the racial and gender civil rights to homosexual 'rights' is a false equivalency.
And. let me add, homosexuality is WEIRD (haha).
JT wrote:Moon-Crane wrote:JT wrote:Funny how liberals will accept a birthright basis for certain civil rights but balk at others. Inconsistent, isn't it?
Yes, of course, it's only 'liberals' who do that. I've never heard of a conservative ever being inconsistent on any subject [/snark]
But that doesn't answer the question, does it?
JT wrote:Moon-Crane wrote:JT wrote:Now my question to at least Patrick and Moon-Crane is: Are you theophobic?
Me, no. How can one fear that which does not exist?
By theophobic, I mean do you fear organized religion. You know, people who do believe a God exists and have set up institutions supporting that belief.
And by the way, how do you know that a God does not exist?
Moon-Crane wrote:Me, no. How can one fear that which does not exist?
By theophobic, I mean do you fear organized religion. You know, people who do believe a God exists and have set up institutions supporting that belief.
Then also no. In general/overall terms, i'm not at all fearful of religious people. I may disagree with what they belief but there's a right to believe in what you like as those beliefs don't affect me or interfere in my way of life. And i believe the majority of people holding any religious belief in the world are just happy to quietly get on with living their own lives. There's nothing to fear from that. You appear to hold some religious beliefs. We (and others) bang heads over stuff and have fun getting aggravated. Doesn't make me fear you or stop me from buying you an ale if we were ever in the same place.
Of course there are a small percentage of people in most religions (and, of course, of no particular religious persuasion) that should put the 'fear' in any sane person. I tend to fear for women under the thumb of Taliban led regimes throughout the world. I fear for the dysfunctionality of people brought up within any of the more extreme religious households. I fear for vulnerable people taken in by the likes of scientology or various cults. In those terms there's always something to feel a fear for. None of these are things that i personally fear for myself. There are probably more appropriate words to feel than fear.
The conclusion of examining the presented evidence. Yes, i can't be any more certain of gods non-existence than i can of the unicorn's non-existence, but there's a point where you have to place the burden of proof on the other side. We're not going to play Pascal's Wager are we?
JT wrote:Many religions think that there is no definitive evidence for the existence of a God because it presents a sort of 'veil' that requires faith. In other words, its designed that way. I have always had a hard time with that. Most of my life I have been a flaming agnostic. Always had to have evidence to believe anything. Very recently I decided, for multiple reasons, to give organized religion a chance. One of the reasons was, ironically, arrived at through my head. We, our bodies and psychology, are the result of a quaternary code. Think about it, nucleotide base arrangements code for the production of specific biological molecules called proteins. These proteins have EVERYTHING to do with our existence. Tissues. Physiological behavior. even psychology to a large extent. Even when certain genes turn on or off. This quaternary code results in the folding of proteins into a specific three-dimensional structure that determines its activity. And its all self-replicating. I just have a hard time believing that is by complete 'accident' from beginning to end. I have always been willing to have an open mind about that, but ironically my head tips me towards a designer.
JT wrote:Now, as far as what I am calling 'theophobia', that is my catch word for anyone who seems to me to be disproportionately, way-over-the-top, anti organized religion. Or even aggressively atheist. Patrick. You also, in my opinion, have shown some of this. Organized religion, along with just about all other persistent institutions, have a suspect history. But today I think too much criticism is placed on MODERN churches for THE SINS OF THEIR PAST. Modern Islam is an exception. Too much of that religion is 200 years behind. Or as Thomas Friedman has said, they need an Islam 2.0 update.
CatNamedRudy wrote:Well said MC!
JT wrote:CatNamedRudy wrote:Well said MC!
Cat, don't you have anything original to say? Debate for yourself. That is one thing I've noticed about you.
Moon-Crane wrote:Citations please.
I know we've got the list. I'll post one that was submitted for peer review and made the news at the time from Daryl Bem, which was then taken up by others: Three Unsuccessful Attempts to Replicate Bem's ‘Retroactive Facilitation of Recall’ Effect
Moon-Crane wrote:Everybody's got the right to do what they want with like-minded consenting adults. I don't want to stop anyone doing anything that's not hurting other people.
CatNamedRudy wrote:JT wrote:CatNamedRudy wrote:Well said MC!
Cat, don't you have anything original to say? Debate for yourself. That is one thing I've noticed about you.
Why should I say anything when MC just made the point?
JT wrote:...Obviously the reason you don't say anything original and intelligent is because you cannot. MC can express his opinions intelligently. Unlike the utterances some make that are befitting of a 12 year old cheerleader. I guess anything more in-depth and insightful is not forthcoming. "Why should I say anything when MC just made the point?" is of course just more evidence of that.
Moon-Crane wrote:You might find my approach too harsh to religion, but, to be clear, i'd defend 100% your right to believe what you want to believe. However, I have no time for any religious people who try to push their religious faith on others or perpetuate clearly debunked falsehoods as fact; using their privilege to push divisive rules based upon sexual orientation, gender, race, etc; telling people how they are allowed to live their lives and filling people with fear about what is going to happen to those people when they die if they don't do exactly what these religious experts say.
My beefs with religion are very much to do with what's happening today. When you have the likes of David Barton, Ken Ham, Glen Beck, Bryan Fischer, Ray Comfort, etc, with public platforms to spout unsupportable rubbish - unequivocally pushing their belief as an absolute truth and for it to form the basis for government, social and educational policy - then you have to push back with equal force.
Moon-Crane wrote: I'm no biologist and lack the personal ability to technically explain the scientific reasons why I believe it's unfounded, but i've read explanations from qualified biology academics, such as PZ Myers, about the mechanics of how cells, proteins, enzymes, etc, emerge and evolve until you get to the diversity of life we know today.
Patrick wrote:I don't give a rat’s ass about religion one way or the other. I am willing to consider it a harmless hobby, like collecting stamps or watching TV as long as it stays that way.
I don't consider myself stamp-collector-phobic or TV-watcher-phobic then why would someone define me as "theophobic" which isn’t even a real word, unless he has some ulterior motive?
If a stamp collector starts bothering people and impose his stamp-collecting ethics on them, THEN I will have a problem with it, that's what you people do.
Patrick wrote: that's what you people do.
Moon-Crane wrote:I've got replies to make to your posts, BGF, but i'm lacking time now so will do it later.
Also, to stop derailing this particular thread i'll move the discussion elsewhere. I seem to recall a thread called 'random philosophical rubbish', or some such, that was set up by DG - so i'll dig that out and we can maybe continue there?
Bee Gees Fan wrote:Okay, that's cool. I don't know if having the discussion in this thread was irritating anyone or not, but it's probably more appropriate there.
Moon-Crane wrote:Bee Gees Fan wrote:Okay, that's cool. I don't know if having the discussion in this thread was irritating anyone or not, but it's probably more appropriate there.
No, i don't think anyone was bothered, but i think there's plenty of proper news to stick in this section
Bad train crash in the south of Paris http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23294630 to add to the terrible train crash in Quebec and the crash landed plane in San Francisco.
Do you know the area, Patrick?
Return to Off Topic Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests
© Site contents are copyright Stuart Lee 1999 - 2024. This is a Frasier fan site and is not affiliated in any way with the program, Grub St Productions, Paramount or NBC. |