FORUMS > Gay News & Events Forum Rules

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

Red_Vespa said"I'm not anti-gay -- I just worship at a church that is"

MikePhilPerez saidYeah, intolerance will really help to create a more tolerant world. I see where you are go with that. NOT

MikePhilPerez said

Red_Vespa said"I'm not anti-gay -- I just worship at a church that is"

It's not the Church that is anti-gay, just some elements within the Church.

BeachBiMan saidShit like that pisses me off. How Christian is the Italian population?

When I was a kid growing up outside Boston I went to the same elementary school my mother went too, had the same third grade teacher my mother did as well as the same principal.

We said the Pledge of Allegiance every morning, we sang religious Christmas Carols and we said a prayer if someone in our class had some tragedy in their lives. We didnt exclude people of color or other religions. WTF is wrong with society?

czarodziej saidi think its great that they recognize that religion- particularly the christian flavor- is pretty much the ANTITHESIS of education and intellectualism lol- look at creationism for christ's sake! lol or the dark ages for that matter.
schools look forward, the church looks backward, and that's how it is. doesn't make sense on any level to mix the two.

MunchingZombie saidWe live in a predominantly heterosexual society so...
We live in a predominantly white society so...

leixguy saidthe european court of justice is an extremely dangerous body if a predominantly christian school wants to have the crusifix displayed then, then they should! I respect other peoples cultures and traditions as long as they respect the cultures and traditions of their host country, I went to a convent primary school and a catholic secondary school (most schools in ireland have either roman catholic or church of ireland (anglican) patronage) and any parent that did not want their child to be thought religion, or to say the angeles at 12 noon simply wrote a letter to the school and the pupil was exempted from religion class, i dont see any problem with this because we are a predomintly christian society.

leixguy saidand what rights exactly were denied by having a damn cross on the wall??

czarodziej saidi think its great that they recognize that religion- particularly the christian flavor- is pretty much the ANTITHESIS of education and intellectualism lol- look at creationism for christ's sake! lol or the dark ages for that matter.
schools look forward, the church looks backward, and that's how it is. doesn't make sense on any level to mix the two.

leixguy saidthe european court of justice is an extremely dangerous body if a predominantly christian school wants to have the crusifix displayed then, then they should! I respect other peoples cultures and traditions as long as they respect the cultures and traditions of their host country, I went to a convent primary school and a catholic secondary school (most schools in ireland have either roman catholic or church of ireland (anglican) patronage) and any parent that did not want their child to be thought religion, or to say the angeles at 12 noon simply wrote a letter to the school and the pupil was exempted from religion class, i dont see any problem with this because we are a predomintly christian society.

BeachBiMan saidShit like that pisses me off. How Christian is the Italian population?

When I was a kid growing up outside Boston I went to the same elementary school my mother went too, had the same third grade teacher my mother did as well as the same principal.

We said the Pledge of Allegiance every morning, we sang religious Christmas Carols and we said a prayer if someone in our class had some tragedy in their lives. We didnt exclude people of color or other religions. WTF is wrong with society?

phemt said

czarodziej saidi think its great that they recognize that religion- particularly the christian flavor- is pretty much the ANTITHESIS of education and intellectualism lol- look at creationism for christ's sake! lol or the dark ages for that matter.
schools look forward, the church looks backward, and that's how it is. doesn't make sense on any level to mix the two.

Actually Catholic schools do a good job teaching sciences. I dare to say people going to Catholic schools (in the USA) get a much better education than those attending public schools.

leixguy saidthe european court of justice is an extremely dangerous body if a predominantly christian school wants to have the crusifix displayed then, then they should! I respect other peoples cultures and traditions as long as they respect the cultures and traditions of their host country, I went to a convent primary school and a catholic secondary school (most schools in ireland have either roman catholic or church of ireland (anglican) patronage) and any parent that did not want their child to be thought religion, or to say the angeles at 12 noon simply wrote a letter to the school and the pupil was exempted from religion class, i dont see any problem with this because we are a predomintly christian society.

NickoftheNorth said
The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

jackofhearts46 saidit's a great day for democracy when a high court rules that a sovereign nation has to remove some of it's cultural heritage in lieu of the other 10% of society. the europeans will realize this mistake too little too late.

realifedad said I submit that the Catholic Church has probably the worst history of Human rights violations of any such religious institution on this planet. What may I ask is so charming about the catholic crucifix which exposes a man nailed to a cross and bleeding, that anyone would want that hanging before their children in every classroom, talk about desensitising children's sensitivities to violence. Just because some religion sponsors such things doesn't make it automaticly what's best for everyone. Separation of Church and state is the best policy.

_chuck_ said
Were the crosses there as decoration, as part of a history lesson, brainwashing indoctrination, or for torture?

jackofhearts46 saidthen let them. Italy still is a sovereign nation that still enacts its own law, and imposes its own taxes. and you're exactly right, popular vote isn't fair or right, but neither is democracy. look at maine, it's not fair or right how that turned out, but it happened in a democratic process

jackofhearts46 saidthen let them. Italy still is a sovereign nation that still enacts its own law, and imposes its own taxes. and you're exactly right, popular vote isn't fair or right, but neither is democracy. look at maine, it's not fair or right how that turned out, but it happened in a democratic process

leixguy saidits not about separation of church and state that happened a long time ago! having a crucifix- that i didn't realise was unique to catholicism until now hanging on a wall does not in any way take away the 'rights' of non catholics to have their own beliefs. I often use an internet cafe just around the corner from my house it is run by hardcore muslims, they always wear their religious clothing have issues of 'irish muslim' on sale etc but i don't consider my right to be a catholic is infringed upon in any way!

leixguy said

realifedad said I submit that the Catholic Church has probably the worst history of Human rights violations of any such religious institution on this planet. What may I ask is so charming about the catholic crucifix which exposes a man nailed to a cross and bleeding, that anyone would want that hanging before their children in every classroom, talk about desensitising children's sensitivities to violence. Just because some religion sponsors such things doesn't make it automaticly what's best for everyone. Separation of Church and state is the best policy.

its not about separation of church and state that happened a long time ago! having a crucifix- that i didn't realise was unique to catholicism until now hanging on a wall does not in any way take away the 'rights' of non catholics to have their own beliefs. I often use an internet cafe just around the corner from my house it is run by hardcore muslims, they always wear their religious clothing have issues of 'irish muslim' on sale etc but i don't consider my right to be a catholic is infringed upon in any way!

leixguy saidwhat are you talking about "The Crucifix is basicly an idol that was pretty well introduced to the Christian belief system by the Catholics" - catholicism is christianity, all other churches are only breakaways from the roman catholic church (or break aways from the breakaways)

judoguy saidGood for them...

a public school, should be neutral ground and not show a preference for any religion.

religious private schools, can tattoo crucifixes on their foreheads if they want to, as far as I care.

just as you're free to choose a religion, you should have the choice to be free from it.

leixguy saidthe presence of religious artifacts in schools offends far less people than would be offended if they were not there, tell me one good reason why anybody would feel offended by seeing a cross on the wall, next thing you will want to ban churches from displaying anything religious outside the church because it is a public footpath, or even denying any public service broadcaster to show a man and woman kissing because it somehow offends gay people, get real!!

leixguy saidno its not and if i was to use your logic then i would not want to see a jew wearing that weird hat of theirs in public because it would somehow offend me, or i would not want the bbc or any other publicly owned t.v station showing any violence, nudity or sex because it would offend the prudes, hell you could even go as far as wanting to ban bin men who wear orange jackets because it might offend ira terrorists- where does all this political correct crap end?

MsclDrew said

leixguy saidno its not and if i was to use your logic then i would not want to see a jew wearing that weird hat of theirs in public because it would somehow offend me, or i would not want the bbc or any other publicly owned t.v station showing any violence, nudity or sex because it would offend the prudes, hell you could even go as far as wanting to ban bin men who wear orange jackets because it might offend ira terrorists- where does all this political correct crap end?

Your kind of stupid aren't you

Someone chooses to attend a church for the purpose of practicing a religion. By choosing to do that, presumably they will not be offended.

Children are not consenting adults they required by law to attend to school for the purpose or receiving an education. You think it's right to force a child to attend school and be surrounded by religious imagery, they do not believe in. Would you like to have been sitting in school under a gays are evil and will burn in hell poster, would you like that for your children.

Further more do you think it's right to force a parent to choose between allowing their children to be influenced by religious ideals or not sending them to school

meninlove saidlexiguy said, "having a crucifix- that i didn't realise was unique to catholicism until now "

It isn't lexiguy, evangelists and some other christian faiths also make great use of the cross.

You know, there was a topic some time ago about religious attire worn by teachers is freedom of religion. Several people trounced us thoroughly because we don't agree with allowing it. So where are they all ? Not on this topic, for some reason.

NickoftheNorth said

jackofhearts46 saidthen let them. Italy still is a sovereign nation that still enacts its own law, and imposes its own taxes. and you're exactly right, popular vote isn't fair or right, but neither is democracy. look at maine, it's not fair or right how that turned out, but it happened in a democratic process

Here's the fun thing about democracy and the Italian law that required crucifixes to be part of the public school classrooms: the law stems from Italy's (decidely not democratic) fascist rule, and not from a democratic period.

realifedad said

meninlove saidlexiguy said, "having a crucifix- that i didn't realise was unique to catholicism until now "

It isn't lexiguy, evangelists and some other christian faiths also make great use of the cross.

You know, there was a topic some time ago about religious attire worn by teachers is freedom of religion. Several people trounced us thoroughly because we don't agree with allowing it. So where are they all ? Not on this topic, for some reason.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lexiguy, no-one ever said that a crucifix was unique to catholocism, the point was that the crucifix came about by the roman catholic religious institution and is known to be primarily a catholic symbol in other words a religious symbol (whether or not other churches use it too) the point is sepatation of church and state. Are you so Catholic indoctrinated that you cannot see the value of separation of church and state? Its a simple and necessary stance for the 'state' to take.

leixguy said<
I'm not even religious, i choose to believe in god simply because i find atheism so depressing on many levels..

phemt said

leixguy said<
I'm not even religious, i choose to believe in god simply because i find atheism so depressing on many levels..

Belief or lack of belief, is about what you think is true not "how it makes you feel". Not being an atheist and "to choose to believe in God" to make yourself feel better is like not believing have cancer (when in fact you do) because well the thought of having cancer is so depressing. Is that really the only reason you believe in God: because it makes you feel better?

leixguy said

realifedad said

meninlove saidlexiguy said, "having a crucifix- that i didn't realise was unique to catholicism until now "

.

I'm not even religious, i choose to believe in god simply because i find atheism so depressing on many levels. over 90% of the pop is christian and you decide to ban the crucifix from publicly funded schools because it somehow offends the 10% of students that are not brought up christian, then should it not follow that you ban the school canteen from serving meat because it might offend the 10% of students who are brought up vegetarian, i say simply live and let live.

I have to agree with you here. It seems to me that over compensation is the name of the game when it is a religious idea only.

Blackguy4you said
That's as good a reason as any for believing in God

Don't you and many guysexercise because it makes you feel good?

Lostboy said

Blackguy4you said
That's as good a reason as any for believing in God

Don't you and many guysexercise because it makes you feel good?

Your epistemology is seriously fucked up (this comment plus your comment on evolution elsewhere today)

leixguy said

realifedad said

meninlove saidlexiguy said, "having a crucifix- that i didn't realise was unique to catholicism until now "

It isn't lexiguy, evangelists and some other christian faiths also make great use of the cross.

You know, there was a topic some time ago about religious attire worn by teachers is freedom of religion. Several people trounced us thoroughly because we don't agree with allowing it. So where are they all ? Not on this topic, for some reason.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lexiguy, no-one ever said that a crucifix was unique to catholocism, the point was that the crucifix came about by the roman catholic religious institution and is known to be primarily a catholic symbol in other words a religious symbol (whether or not other churches use it too) the point is sepatation of church and state. Are you so Catholic indoctrinated that you cannot see the value of separation of church and state? Its a simple and necessary stance for the 'state' to take.

I'm not even religious, i choose to believe in god simply because i find atheism so depressing on many levels. over 90% of the pop is christian and you decide to ban the crucifix from publicly funded schools because it somehow offends the 10% of students that are not brought up christian, then should it not follow that you ban the school canteen from serving meat because it might offend the 10% of students who are brought up vegetarian, i say simply live and let live.

leixguy saidwhy is everyone here so anti christian, we have a christian heritage and culture. there is no reason to deny this, the vast majority of students have some level of belief in Christianity, those few that don't simply don't partake in any religion classes if they happen to be going to a school which teachers religious studies.

on a side note it works out cheaper to allow religious bodies to run schools than if the state had to run them directly, so our taxes are spent more economically by allowing religious bodies to run schools.

Blondizgd said

leixguy saidwhy is everyone here so anti christian, we have a christian heritage and culture. there is no reason to deny this, the vast majority of students have some level of belief in Christianity, those few that don't simply don't partake in any religion classes if they happen to be going to a school which teachers religious studies.

on a side note it works out cheaper to allow religious bodies to run schools than if the state had to run them directly, so our taxes are spent more economically by allowing religious bodies to run schools.

Simple -because lots of gay guys don't want to be reminded that there is such a thing as morality and that no- it is not about fucking your brains out morning, noon and night.

Any religious icon or thought does provide that reminder. And god forbid there should be any such.

styrgan said

Blondizgd said

leixguy saidwhy is everyone here so anti christian, we have a christian heritage and culture. there is no reason to deny this, the vast majority of students have some level of belief in Christianity, those few that don't simply don't partake in any religion classes if they happen to be going to a school which teachers religious studies.

on a side note it works out cheaper to allow religious bodies to run schools than if the state had to run them directly, so our taxes are spent more economically by allowing religious bodies to run schools.

Simple -because lots of gay guys don't want to be reminded that there is such a thing as morality and that no- it is not about fucking your brains out morning, noon and night.

Any religious icon or thought does provide that reminder. And god forbid there should be any such.

Or it could be more reasonable to assume that gays tend to be anti-religion because religion is anti-gay and is a constant source of discrimination.

It's why we hate the pope but idolize MLK.

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

leixguy saidwhy is everyone here so anti christian, we have a christian heritage and culture. there is no reason to deny this, the vast majority of students have some level of belief in Christianity, those few that don't simply don't partake in any religion classes if they happen to be going to a school which teachers religious studies.

on a side note it works out cheaper to allow religious bodies to run schools than if the state had to run them directly, so our taxes are spent more economically by allowing religious bodies to run schools.

Blondizgd said

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

Our morals are based on no such thing

Blondizgd said

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

Our morals are based on no such thing

leixguy saidwe have separation of church and state (in theory at least), allowing a school teacher to hang a crucifix on the wall does not mean that the church is influencing the government of the day!!! (which is what separation of church and state is about)

MsclDrew said

Blondizgd said

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

Our morals are based on no such thing

I'm sorry, my morals and the morals of the gay men I choose as my friends are based on our humanity and human empathy

leixguy saidplease give me ONE good reason why the hanging of a crucifix in a publicly funded school is wrong?????

leixguy saidsaying blankly the fucking separation of church and state is meaningless!!! now can you please just give one good reason??

Daedalus304 said

Blondizgd said

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

Our morals are based on no such thing

Mine are. As a side note, whatever makes you think that God is moral?

Blondizgd said

Daedalus304 said

Blondizgd said

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

Our morals are based on no such thing

Mine are. As a side note, whatever makes you think that God is moral?

Two separate things you are asking.

And like I've advised an earlier poster - what you may call morals I may not.

If you are basing your morals on humanity then your morals are relative. And no-one really believe in moral relativism - no matter how much they claim to. It is inherently contradictory.

If God is God He She or It has to be perfectly moral - inorder for He SHe or It to be God. It's as simple as that

Blackguy4you said

Thoughts of God for thousand of years have had the ability to provide comfort and to console. Why do you think this is?

we like being comforted. Ganesh has done just as good a job, as did Marduk.

A central tenet of evolution is that we are here by chance and there's nothing to anything, but random atoms and selfish genes: and there's nothing exceptional about human existence. Do you honestly think that such a view of existence can really provide any comfort?

Not so. BB Warfield, the major architect in the C20 north american account of inerrancy, believed in evolution. Also, your priority seems to be providing comfort. Is that not to just admit that religion is the crutch of the weak?

All humans whether they want to admit it or not are instinctively religious.

All humans are spiritual. That is not the same as religious.

Where do you think the saying "there are no atheists in foxholes" come from?

Daedalus304 said

Blondizgd said

Daedalus304 said

Blondizgd said

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

Our morals are based on no such thing

Mine are. As a side note, whatever makes you think that God is moral?

Two separate things you are asking.

And like I've advised an earlier poster - what you may call morals I may not.

If you are basing your morals on humanity then your morals are relative. And no-one really believe in moral relativism - no matter how much they claim to. It is inherently contradictory.

If God is God He She or It has to be perfectly moral - inorder for He SHe or It to be God. It's as simple as that

Morals based on humanity needn't be relative, they can be just as solid as deity inspired morals. A simplified example, I dont want to be killed, it could be plausibly assumed that an imagined census would yield the same result for the vast majority of others. It logically follows that if I would like my desire to remain alive to be respected, I must respect everyone elses. Ergo, killing people is wrong

Your definition of God is circular. 1) In personifying God, one assumes he/she/it exists as a defined body, i.e. it has immutable characteristics. 2) You fail to define morality other than that it is whatever God is (how is that not relative I ask you) 3) Posit me this, suppose there were two beings supremely more powerful than human beings, but which espoused different viewpoints. Which one is God?

meninlove said
liexguy, please google shariah law, as an example of reasons for secular government.

leixguy said

meninlove said
liexguy, please google shariah law, as an example of reasons for secular government.

as i have already said ireland HAS separation of church and state, any reference to the 'special position' of the catholic church was removed from the constitution in 1972. and frankly i find it very insulting for someone to compare the practice of hanging crucifixes in schools to shariah law!!

leixguy saidi said reference to the catholic church not to christendom, ireland is a christian country and the constitution acknowledges this. it also is a liberial constitution protecting, many freedoms and rights etc.

and that reference to the catholic church should be considered in the context of the times-

Though perceived in retrospect as a sectarian article, Article 44 was praised in 1937 by leaders of Irish protestant churches (notably the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Dublin) and by Jewish groups. Conservative Catholics condemned it as "liberal".

When asked to approve of the constitution by de Valera to boost the constitution's chances of getting voted through, and to silence its Catholic critics, Pope Pius XI, having received reports of its contents, replied "I do not approve. I do not not approve. I have no opinion".

Blondizgd said

Daedalus304 said

Blondizgd said

MsclDrew said

Because our morals are based upon humanity,

Our morals are based on no such thing

Mine are. As a side note, whatever makes you think that God is moral?

Two separate things you are asking.

And like I've advised an earlier poster - what you may call morals I may not.

If you are basing your morals on humanity then your morals are relative. And no-one really believe in moral relativism - no matter how much they claim to. It is inherently contradictory.

If God is God He She or It has to be perfectly moral - inorder for He SHe or It to be God. It's as simple as that

MsclDrew saidOh and have you ever browsed the Irish constitution

# Article 40.6.1 “The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offense which shall be punishable in accordance with law.”

# Article 44.1 “The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion."

Or in English, saying perceived anything as being against the christian god, is a crime. Including denying his existence

Lostboy said

realifedad said Leixguy, I am curious about the reasoning behind your stand on separation of church and state. Do you believe that there is an effort, and possibly a conspiracy against christianity behind keeping symbols of christianity and/or any other religion out of public places. Are you a devout member of a christian church?

leixguy said

realifedad said Leixguy, I am curious about the reasoning behind your stand on separation of church and state. Do you believe that there is an effort, and possibly a conspiracy against christianity behind keeping symbols of christianity and/or any other religion out of public places. Are you a devout member of a christian church?

lol no I'm certainly not a devout christian i haven't been to mass in about 6 months, but i believe students who go to religious schools have better manners, morals and values, and no i doubt there is some conspiracy theory i think its just we have a nanny state/pc gone crazy especially when it comes to religion.

Lostboy said

Lost Boy said:we like being comforted. Ganesh has done just as good a job, as did Marduk.


We like being comforted? How come then do you account for so many guys running away from solid human relationships? Marduk, Ganesh, Allah, Still comforted by thoughts of a higher power. I’ll stick to God given that Marduk and Ganesh are nowhere to be found.

Lost Boy:"Not so. BB Warfield, the major architect in the C20 north american account of inerrancy, believed in evolution. Also, your priority seems to be providing comfort. Is that not to just admit that religion is the crutch of the weak?

I think you are confused about the position of B.B Warfield. He did not believe in evolution as the following indicates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Breckinridge_Warfield

"I do not think that there is any general statement in the Bible or any part of the account of creation, either as given in Genesis 1 and 2 or elsewhere alluded to, that need be opposed to evolution. The sole passage which appears to bar the way is the very detailed account of the creation of Eve ...
We may as well admit that the account of the creation of Eve is a very serious bar in the way of a doctrine of creation by evolution."

Dr. Warfield also said in the same lecture that evolution could not account for the origin of the human soul. In short, he held a rather agnostic position in regard to evolution. He specifically disallowed it as a sufficient explanation, but he allowed the theoretical possibility of it. He insisted that it had not been proven and that it would be ill-advised to accept it as such."

Dr. Francis Collins a devout Christian and who was involved in the HGP also believes in evolution and he tries to reconcile his Christianity with evolution.

I would bet you though that he like most humans in times of trial, tribualtions, testing and hardship does not turn to evolution or quantum mechanics for answers. He like most will look to the divine for answers and comfort.

Hey if you think comfort is overrated, far be it from me to gainsay you.



All humans whether they want to admit it or not are instinctively religious.

Lost BoyAll humans are spiritual. That is not the same as religious.

I won’t quibble over the definition of both words. Enough to say that both you and I recognize that humans are created with the instinct to look to a higher power:

definition of Spiritual.
of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit : INCORPOREAL
2 a : of or relating to sacred matters
b : ecclesiastical rather than lay or temporal
3 : concerned with religious values

LostBoy"there were, however, lots of atheists in Auschwitz.

Yeah true that- there absolutely were. And they went by such names as Göring, himmler and Goebbels – Men who believed that the divine was not watching them.


Lost Boy:"My comment about your epistemology is this: to reject belief in evolution - not to doubt, or suggest that it has weaknesses... THEN you move onto saying that we should believe in god as it makes us feel good. I find that confused.

The theory of evolution’s ultimate goal is to prove that God did not create humanity. That we just happen to come about due to random chance.

1.If evolution is correct then the Bible is incorrect and God is a liar. Not only this but there would then be little purpose to Him being there at all.

2.If evolution is correct then God does not exist and we are free to be as bestial as we care to be

So yes I categorically reject evolution out of hand as morally bankrupt.

But even more than this. It is just a nonsensical, absurd theory that makes no sense.

We all begin to believe in God for various reasons. Father God provides comfort beyond anything you can imagine. If someone wants to come to God because of that- hey the Father will not turn him away
We all have our path to walk...

Are you saying that being gay and Christian is mutually exclusive. Let me know now coz I would have to surrender my gay card. Coz there's no way in hell I'm giving up my relationship with Jesus Christ.

meninlove said Hey Blackguy4you,

This,"If evolution is correct then God does not exist and we are free to be as bestial as we care to be"

and this,

"If evolution is correct then the Bible is incorrect and God is a liar. Not only this but there would then be little purpose to Him being there at all.

2.If evolution is correct then God does not exist and we are free to be as bestial as we care to be"

wellllllll.....

How you read the bible determines how limited god is.

If evolution is correct it just means that you've been underestimating limitless creation, complex beyond our wildest dreams. Why would god be simple?

We know what stars are. Those that wrote genesis didn't. They thought the sun and stars orbited the Earth.

If evolution is correct then the bible is flawed, like it already is (slavery etc) because god didn't write it, making god no liar.

If evolution is correct (which I think it is) then we can only marvel anew at this gigantic complicated magnificent existence that I think god created.

-Doug

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

chuckystud said

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

False belief systems (religion/cults/witchcraft) have no place in our public schools. Score one here for the advancement of civilization. Schools need to be free from ANY false belief systems, no matter whether it's the religion of the day, or some other cult.

Blondizgd said

chuckystud said

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

False belief systems (religion/cults/witchcraft) have no place in our public schools. Score one here for the advancement of civilization. Schools need to be free from ANY false belief systems, no matter whether it's the religion of the day, or some other cult.

Yes and look we now have metal detectors in schools and school mass shootings. Hooray for us!

phemt said

Blondizgd said

chuckystud said

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

False belief systems (religion/cults/witchcraft) have no place in our public schools. Score one here for the advancement of civilization. Schools need to be free from ANY false belief systems, no matter whether it's the religion of the day, or some other cult.

Yes and look we now have metal detectors in schools and school mass shootings. Hooray for us!

Are you making this claim: Take religion out of classrooms and society and the result is metal dectectors in school and school shootings?

Blondizgd said

phemt said

Blondizgd said

chuckystud said

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

False belief systems (religion/cults/witchcraft) have no place in our public schools. Score one here for the advancement of civilization. Schools need to be free from ANY false belief systems, no matter whether it's the religion of the day, or some other cult.

Yes and look we now have metal detectors in schools and school mass shootings. Hooray for us!

Are you making this claim: Take religion out of classrooms and society and the result is metal dectectors in school and school shootings?

That's exactly the claim I'm making. We have verifiable data to prove this.

Blondizgd said

chuckystud said

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

False belief systems (religion/cults/witchcraft) have no place in our public schools. Score one here for the advancement of civilization. Schools need to be free from ANY false belief systems, no matter whether it's the religion of the day, or some other cult.

Yes and look we now have metal detectors in schools and school mass shootings. Hooray for us!

phemt saidI would also add that sometimes religious beliefs sometimes lead people to act badly. Just look at how religious beliefs has lead people to treat gays and others not believing like the religious think people should.
From a practical standpoint there are both good and bad aspects of religious beliefs. I believe Liberal religious beliefs has more of the positive (e.g., helping the needy) whereas fundamentalist beliefs tends to contain more of the negative (e.g., intolerance). Usually it is the fundamentalist trying to ram their religion down everyone eles throat.

phemt said

Blondizgd said

phemt said

Blondizgd said

chuckystud said

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

False belief systems (religion/cults/witchcraft) have no place in our public schools. Score one here for the advancement of civilization. Schools need to be free from ANY false belief systems, no matter whether it's the religion of the day, or some other cult.

Yes and look we now have metal detectors in schools and school mass shootings. Hooray for us!

Are you making this claim: Take religion out of classrooms and society and the result is metal dectectors in school and school shootings?

That's exactly the claim I'm making. We have verifiable data to prove this.

I am open to the claim. Though I am an atheist, I admit religion/belief in God can have a social control aspect to it that benefits society. Prisoners are less likely to commit crimes if they "find Jesus". I would rather they "find Jesus" than continue to commit crimes. This would just show that most people need to be controlled to act moral. I believe it is totally possible to be moral without religion, but I also think it is harder. I know atheist who are as (in some cases more) moral than theist I know. There are those people who wouldn't steal even if they knew could get away with it. There are also those who wouldn't steal only because they are concerned about getting caught and punished - remove the threat of getting caught/punishment and they would steal. People needing religion/belief in God to act moral are like that: they only act moral because they are concerned that God is watching and will punish them if they act badly. It takes a highly developed person to act moral for the act itself without needing external forces to control their actions.

"I am a Humanist, which means, in part, that I have tried to behave decently without expectations of rewards or punishment after I am dead"
Kurt Vonnegut

McGay saidBig difference between acting morally and being moral. If fear is the only thing keeping one in check, one is not moral, just fearful.

Blackguy4you said

phemt said

Blondizgd said

phemt said

Blondizgd said

chuckystud said

NickoftheNorth saidFor all recovering from Maine's Tuesday vote and angered by the Roman Catholic Church's role in it, you take some schadenfreude from this bit of news.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled against the Italian government and judged the Italian use of crucifixes in public school classrooms to be a human rights violation. Source: The Guardian - Human rights ruling against classroom crucifixes angers Italy

We are losing some of the battles, but they'll be the ones who'll lose the war.

False belief systems (religion/cults/witchcraft) have no place in our public schools. Score one here for the advancement of civilization. Schools need to be free from ANY false belief systems, no matter whether it's the religion of the day, or some other cult.

Yes and look we now have metal detectors in schools and school mass shootings. Hooray for us!

Are you making this claim: Take religion out of classrooms and society and the result is metal dectectors in school and school shootings?

That's exactly the claim I'm making. We have verifiable data to prove this.

I am open to the claim. Though I am an atheist, I admit religion/belief in God can have a social control aspect to it that benefits society. Prisoners are less likely to commit crimes if they "find Jesus". I would rather they "find Jesus" than continue to commit crimes. This would just show that most people need to be controlled to act moral. I believe it is totally possible to be moral without religion, but I also think it is harder. I know atheist who are as (in some cases more) moral than theist I know. There are those people who wouldn't steal even if they knew could get away with it. There are also those who wouldn't steal only because they are concerned about getting caught and punished - remove the threat of getting caught/punishment and they would steal. People needing religion/belief in God to act moral are like that: they only act moral because they are concerned that God is watching and will punish them if they act badly. It takes a highly developed person to act moral for the act itself without needing external forces to control their actions.

"I am a Humanist, which means, in part, that I have tried to behave decently without expectations of rewards or punishment after I am dead"
Kurt Vonnegut

the question is often posed- what if anything makes man good. without fail the resounding answer – nothing.

i do not believe that anyone is innately good. so yes- not most people- but every single person I would argue needs an idea of the divine to act morally. that person in your example may not steal, but they may lie or slander or hate his brother....( there are a multitude of sins and only one perfect man has ever been known to live.)

clearly we have had instances over the years showing to what levels men can descend when they believe the divine is not watching them. so if a belief that God is watching you makes you act morally then this is a good thing. history has already shown what happens when some men don’t believe this is the case – and i don’t think any of us would care to have such monstrous actions repeated.

phemt said

Blackguy4you said

phemt

Let us not forget that some men of faith have tortured, burnt people at the stake etc all the while thinking God was watching them. They even thought god was approving of these actions. I hope those monstrous acts are never repeated.
Just because people fail in their attempts to be perfectly moral dosn't discredit that people attempt to live as moral lives as possible. Rarely is the Christian or the Humanist atheist perfect in their attempt to live a moral life. The differece, and this is a great difference, is that the Christian fears the consquence of being punished by God for acting immorally. The atheist Humanist fears not living up to his own internal standard he sets for himself.

I agree that during the “dark ages” heinous acts were committed. But as I’ve stated once before it was also during this era that we had Thomas Aquinas -arguably one of the greatest thinkers in human history. As well as a proliferation of knowledge in architecture, art, law etc. Now contrast this with the rise of Nazism and the rule of Stalin and Lenin to name a few.

I was not discrediting anyone attempting to live a moral life. How could I as a Christian? It is something that I wish everyone would actually aspire to.
My point is that unless morality is centered in the divine no one is truly moral-since we are all innately immoral. Without the influence of the divine, a person’s morality is like the shifting sands – and is that truly moral?

Yes you are right: I agree there is a great difference. However I think your emphasis is misplaced. I would argue that although a Christian may only be moral because he has a fear of consequences, said Christian by and large is still morally superior to someone who does not take the divine into account. This said Christian would have to believe in moral absolutes. The atheist/humanist would not and because he is innately immoral and also has no fear of divine wrath, would tend to act more immorally.

And what does it really matter whether you are moral due to fear or not? Fear of consequences has inhibiting effects on behaviour. Surely you are not arguing that this is a bad thing….

Blackguy4you said

phemt said

Blackguy4you said

phemt

Let us not forget that some men of faith have tortured, burnt people at the stake etc all the while thinking God was watching them. They even thought god was approving of these actions. I hope those monstrous acts are never repeated.
Just because people fail in their attempts to be perfectly moral dosn't discredit that people attempt to live as moral lives as possible. Rarely is the Christian or the Humanist atheist perfect in their attempt to live a moral life. The differece, and this is a great difference, is that the Christian fears the consquence of being punished by God for acting immorally. The atheist Humanist fears not living up to his own internal standard he sets for himself.

I agree that during the “dark ages” heinous acts were committed. But as I’ve stated once before it was also during this era that we had Thomas Aquinas -arguably one of the greatest thinkers in human history. As well as a proliferation of knowledge in architecture, art, law etc. Now contrast this with the rise of Nazism and the rule of Stalin and Lenin to name a few.

I was not discrediting anyone attempting to live a moral life. How could I as a Christian? It is something that I wish everyone would actually aspire to.
My point is that unless morality is centered in the divine no one is truly moral-since we are all innately immoral. Without the influence of the divine, a person’s morality is like the shifting sands – and is that truly moral?

Yes you are right: I agree there is a great difference. However I think your emphasis is misplaced. I would argue that although a Christian may only be moral because he has a fear of consequences, said Christian by and large is still morally superior to someone who does not take the divine into account. This said Christian would have to believe in moral absolutes. The atheist/humanist would not and because he is innately immoral and also has no fear of divine wrath, would tend to act more immorally.

And what does it really matter whether you are moral due to fear or not? Fear of consequences has inhibiting effects on behaviour. Surely you are not arguing that this is a bad thing….

Blackguy4you said

McGay saidBig difference between acting morally and being moral. If fear is the only thing keeping one in check, one is not moral, just fearful.

doesn't really matter- fear of punishment engendgers moral behaviour.
lack of fear of punishment does the opposite.

sure, it is possible for some men to act morally some of the times, and do this while not having an appreciation for the divine, but more often than not they won't. beccause man is not innately good.

meninlove said lol Blackguy4you - leviticus 15

...in some churches today, women are not to take communion when menstruating. And of course the classic directly stated curse of Eve - pain and suffering during childbirth - there was an uproar from churches when chloroform was first used to ease childbirth - a couple hundred years ago.

Blackguy4you, we have a profound unbridgeable difference in opinion as you read the bible and take it literally, and I don't - for me it's allegorical.

I can't see you believing yourself unclean if your seed spills outside of a woman. They also didn't know that the egg only takes one sperm and the millions of others are then spilled seed.

Now I've thoroughly hijacked the topic and apologize to all.

-Doug of meninlove

meninlove said heheh Blackguy4you when leviticus talks of a man's discharge he's talking about sperm. Unclean.

As what could have happened if they never touched that apple? Well, Adam and Eve couldn't die. They were told to have children.

Romans 5:12 - Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned--

Now Eden is endlessly described as a place here on Earth so I wonder how big the population would be by now if no one had ever died.

In fact the order to be fruitful and multiply is going to kill us all. We're quickly reaching critical mass in terms of population and what the planet can handle. Food and pollution for instance.

As for Satan (which I don't believe in at all), in Job the two make quite the tag team, with god allowing Satan to do this and that to Job to prove Job's faith, after listening and believing Satan's lie (doing exactly what he punished Eve for - listening and doing what Satan said), Ugh. I also found it interesting that god wouldn't already know the sincerity of Job as god is all knowing. ..."


My gosh. Blackguy4you, we really have to stop meeting like this! lol!

Interesting discussion though....

-Doug