Total posts: 13,876
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
Any initial creation hypothesis is still wholly reliant on magic, so It doesn't matter where you place your God.
Sequential universes possibly, involving some sort of evolved influence maybe.
But that's unlikely to be some ethereal, berobed, fair skinned, beardy guy..... God's made in our own image.
More likely to be some form of data influence, that we will assist in the development of....God's made but not in our image.
An influence which some form of life force may well have assisted in the development of, in a previous universe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Of course, it begs the question.
Was Jesus gay?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
I will say one thing for you.
You would make a great politician.
You never quite answer the question that gets asked.
You subtly skew meaning and phrasing, thus avoiding the tricky bits.
Do you have political aspirations?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Ok. so the above rhetoric was a tad sardonic, but nonetheless contained a valid observation and question.
If you believe that you have a solid hypothesis, then why are you still trying to sell it here?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Discussions shouldn't be problematic.
Just transfers of data.
Regards.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Even a conventional atheist can run with the above non-specific interpretation of God.
Though I would suggest that the words observe and observable are multi-faceted and not as easy to pin down as you are suggesting.
I would make the simple suggestion that.
That which can observe is therefore observable.
Whether that be extra-sensory, ergo sensory observability, or internal data processing/thoughtful observance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
If you know you know.
So get out there and receive the global acclaim that you so rightly deserve.
What's the point of hanging around on a relatively insignificant debating website (no offence to debateart intended) arguing the toss with numpties like me?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
I am against any type of taking innocent lives.
At what point does a live cease to be innocent?
At what point did the life of an Afghan or Syrian or Iraqi child cease to be innocent.
All life is inherent and matters the same.
Well, super-contradiction, given the content of your previous posts. But did you not just also precede this statement with one that differentiated life on the grounds of presumed or assumed innocence?
Nonetheless and disregarding other non-human life forms for the sake of this particular discussion. As a true human Pro-lifer, will you now put your hand on your heart and condemn all U.S. military intervention in overseas sovereign territories, that is unavoidable resultant in extensive collateral damage?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Quite.
Though it was the simplicity of the journey that amused me.
But does it now transpire that EV was the one who was mocking?
Or are they back peddling?
I'm not certain.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
Firstly. I am not the one making the assertion. That's your baby!
Secondly. If you're going to attempt to take the moral high ground, then you have to be prepared to be fully open to scrutiny.
And cherry picking only the life that you want to be bothered about, certainly isn't morally high.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
@EtrnlVw
@Paul
P...….. I've decided that I want to be spiritual.
E...…...Good luck pal. Bon voyage.
E.V...…Ok P here's what you do.
P...…... Thanks E.V. I'm getting the hang of it.
E.V...….That's great P, you'll be fully spiritual in no time.
Seriously?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
Well at the moment, the U.S.A's response to terror, is terror.
In the end It doesn't matter whether you call it terror, or war on terror, the end result is typically the same....Pro-choice.
You choose to take lives when it serves your best interests.
And yet you would pontificate to your fellow citizens who would wish to be able to make the same choice.
Which is undoubtedly selective morality and also a somewhat whimsical approach to being Pro-life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Trouble is:
No one as yet as been confronted with the truth.
We are all, still only guessing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
I'm open to suggestions on how we should combat terror.
Changing the focus and avoiding the tricky questions is something of a politicians response.
How we should combat assumed terror is a separate discussion.
You are clearly only Pro the lives that you selectively choose to consider and discuss within your own little safe and self righteous bubble.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
The onus is always on the one making the positive claim.
Which is the one that attempts to promote the primary concept as reality.
He certainly would be expected to back it up.
You'd Better ask 3RU7AL to back it up then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
You've let me down.
Thought so.
Same old selective morality and hypocrisy.
"These organizations kill many innocent people".
Therefore it's also perfectly ok for the U.S to kill many innocent people.
Including non-combatant children and women and (given the high numbers involved) inevitably pregnant women and their associated foetuses.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Come on it's just entertainment Jim but not as we know it.
It's Cowboys and Injuns in outer space.
Phasers locked and ready.
Any warty headed bad guy is gonna get it.
F**K the directive.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
"Spirituality" is internal brain function.
Either, a reaction to external sensory stimulation, or a reaction to an internally generated flow of data.
Nonetheless, spirituality is self generated and self contained.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
And so furthermore.
You can also put your hand on your heart and say.
That even as a declared U.S. Conservative, you nonetheless are totally against the U.S. led war on terror, and all it's associated civilian and combatant deaths.
Sorry but I just need to be certain of your complete dedication to pacifism and "Pro-Life".
Created:
Posted in:
@RationalMadman
If the Earth is flat.
Then how thick is the discoid?
And what does the underside look like?....Do you have any photo's?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
Can you explain the mechanics of life?
And particularly, how it differs between species.
If you can explain that, without just simply saying that a god sorted it, then perhaps we can move on.
It's just to easy and convenient to say that a god did it.
You cannot claim to be "Pro-Life" if you cannot differentiate between lives that you do not have the same regard for.
I would suggest that it would be far more productive if gods rather than animals were removed from the discussion.
And furthermore, can you honestly put your hand on your heart and say that you regard all human lives with equal measure?
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Men being the operative word.Holy men of God.
And once again you just quote the words of the man, Peter.
Peter the fallible man and all his fallible friends.
And it might have been a holy spirit that moved them. But it was just as likely to have been some other mind altering plant derivative.
Highly popular stuff amongst shamanic types, wishing to transcend to that higher plain.
No apples or oranges required!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
You've just sort of brought religion into politics.I don't bring religion into politics
Nonetheless:
I personally regard the mechanics of all life to be the same in all living things. No God required.
And the top predator is not necessarily always going to be the human.
If a god did design life, it also designed animals that eat humans. So the god certainly didn't regard it to be necessary to separate animal rights and human rights.
I think that humans probably made that rule up for themselves.
Created:
Posted in:
@RationalMadman
Ah ha.
As my old Dad used to say to me.
The thing that hurts the most is the truth.
And both you and I know the truth.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
As I stated previously.
You are not quoting the words of "The Hebrew God Yahweh/Jesus".
You are quoting the words of men.
Those that created and compiled the mythologies that later became the collective work known as The Bible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Relatively primitive, ignorant and superstitious.
But not necessarily savage.
And the "Bible" is undoubtedly a collection of superstition and ignorance based tales, which mix fact with fiction and fantasy.
Ergo a mythology.
Comparable with other mythologies of the day and also comparable with other older mythologies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Also, the use of spaces between separate words would be a good idea.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
I'm Pro Life. Change my mind.
That was the proposition.
And of course, who isn't actually "Pro Life" ?
Nonetheless our personal survival depends just as much upon extinguishing live as it does upon the maintenance of life.
Therefore we all have to make selective judgements, which inevitably require us to have selective principles/morals.
Your assumption that human life has a greater value than that of other life forms is an inevitable bias, but nonetheless an unfounded assumption .
Though I suspect that you are also selectively moral in regard to the value of human life, which admittedly, is typically how we are conditioned to be.
Therefore irrespective of law. To cherry pick the human lives on which you care to pin the "Pro Life" badge is therefore somewhat hypocritical.
That is not to say though, that I do not understand the assumed moral dilemmas associated with the issue of abortion.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Thanks for responding.
You are man quoting man. Not man quoting a god.
Simply saying that because an assumed god must have existed therefore there must also have been air to breathe, doesn't really cut the mustard these days in terms of evidence based proof.
And you simply requoting such archaic, illogical information/stories, is what it is.
It's far more logical to assume, given what we actually know, that men created these particular versions of gods in their own image.
Hence the "Penis and the Butthole".
And I suppose that women didn't get much of a look in back in the day.
So therefore, no vagina.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
I'm just stating the obvious Bro.
You either refuse to discuss or cannot discuss relative issues that occur outside of your comfort zone.
Created:
Posted in:
@RationalMadman
I wasn't suggesting that you loved me. Far from it.
I was merely suggesting that despite your blocking move, you cannot resist responding to my replies.
Anyway my position remains unalterable.
You and I both know, that you are fully aware that the Earth is spherical.
Created:
Posted in:
@Rational Madman.
The data is out there and consequently in there.
Your "Belief" is simply open denial of the data. That is to say, how you deliberately chose to output data.
Nonetheless spherical data is unavoidably in there, and spherical data is knowledge.
And you might as well unblock me, because you know you love it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
You have acquired and stored data in a particular way. (As do we all)
And consequently you attach tags to certain bits of data that you regard as belief.
You "believed" that you could differentiate between one life and another.
Therefore, given your stance in this discussion, it is only fair that others with different "belief" variants, should regard your position as somewhat hypocritical.
As it would seem that your "beliefs" allow you to be selectively moral.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Responsibility for oneselfStandard of living.
Stepping outside the narrowing margins of social expectancy and social dependency.
And questioning the reality of everything.
And understanding the situation of the independent mass that is oneself.
And recognising the relative nanosecond moment that is existence.
And the relative stupidity of the God Dollar.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
One doesn't necessarily need to prove that all spirituality is delusion.
Of course any argument against an abstract idea, has an easy counterargument.
Nonetheless, the onus must fall upon the one that attempts to promote the primary concept as reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
There goes that old "belief" word again.
Some might argue that such single minded "belief" is as about as immoral as it get's.
Belief is simply picking and choosing the bits that correspond with your own personal level of conditioning.
Created:
Posted in:
@RationalMadman
I'm not trying to tell you anything.
I'm simply stating a fact.
Which is, that everyone knows that the Earth is spherical.
What else you care to get up to in your spare time is entirely up to you.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Definitely something of a contradiction there.
With a pinch of conditioned bias thrown in for good measure.
Just what one would expect.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
No you don't.
Your just saying that.
And One doesn't need entitlement in order to be able to state the obvious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
No theism intended.
You obviously couldn't be bothered to consider my comments.
Though if this were just a debate about the birds and the bees, why would a pro-lifer or a pro-chooser need to change their mind?
Q. Can you tell me what life actually is?
Q. And why should life in humans be any different to life in other forms?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I think that the dragon, princess, knight thing was perhaps a fairy tale.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Can you prove that some spirituality isn't delusion?
That is to say. The assumed bases of religious spirituality.
One isn't attempting to assert that the physiological responses to assumed spirituality are not real enough mind trickery.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Religious hypothesis.
Exactly my opinion too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
And no worries.
Created: