homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Rants, Raves, Rumors!   » Rant: Religion, Dogma, and the "I'm right, you're wrong" philosophy (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Author Topic: Rant: Religion, Dogma, and the "I'm right, you're wrong" philosophy
Too Cool To Quit
SuperBlabberMouth!
Member # 2217

Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 12:11      Profile for Too Cool To Quit     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What do we have here. A topic started on the basis of saying that there should be no name calling, rights, wrongs or otherwise bullshit testaments of faith or lack there of turns into the very thing it was created to express detest for.

Such as how religion has turned ...

*sigh*

I'll join the fight though, for a minute, but only just for that.

Firesnake, you know as well as anyone could that I have complete and utter respect for you, but I feel as if what I'm about to say might not express that in the magnitude of which it is true.

I can get what you're saying in regards to Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Christians, and the whole wad of them.

But I personally feel that what you're saying about public prayer to be a bit, to be less descriptive than I could, disgusting.

Are you saying now, that when you are in a restaurant and a family at the next table bows their heads and prays, even if not completely silently, that it offends or disturbs you in some way?

Going ahead with the assumption that this is what you mean, and correct me if I am wrong because I do want to know, I only want to know one thing and that is how someone quietly, if not silently, saying a prayer before a meal can be offensive or disturbing?

I get heckled a lot by Christians for my beliefs and I also get heckled by Atheists for my beliefs.

I get flack from both sides and on a regular basis. Does it offend me? Not the slightest. But I can see how it would. But then being offended by someone recognizing their religion in public is a completely different story, and if there is some reasoning for it please let me be aware of it, but personally I'm not seeing it.

I'm rambling a tad bit, but I am interested in your response.

- Signed,
Someone who is against religion of any form.

--------------------
Alright now, that's the last straw, I'm calling the ass taxidermist to tell him to stop making hats in your size RIGHT NOW.

Posts: 1097 | From: North Carolina | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 15:14      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Too Cool To Quit:
I can get what you're saying in regards to Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Christians, and the whole wad of them.

But I personally feel that what you're saying about public prayer to be a bit, to be less descriptive than I could, disgusting.

Are you saying now, that when you are in a restaurant and a family at the next table bows their heads and prays, even if not completely silently, that it offends or disturbs you in some way?

Going ahead with the assumption that this is what you mean, and correct me if I am wrong because I do want to know, I only want to know one thing and that is how someone quietly, if not silently, saying a prayer before a meal can be offensive or disturbing?

Hi Taco [Big Grin]

I never said that I found it to be offensive in my initial post. What I said was that it makes me feel embarrassed, awkward, or uncomfortable. Those are my exact words to describe it. Later on in the discussion, there was some putting words in my mouth, which I've done my best to clarify, including in which situations I do find religion to be deliberately intrusive and offensive. (I positively hate when people do the "so your saying..." thing in a discussion and proceed to tack on what they heard, not what you said. That's a whole different topic though. [Smile] )

Why is it disgusting that I feel embarrassed if people pray in public? Why is it any worse for me to think "gee, thats really tacky - if I had a religion I wouldn't do that" than it is for someone to think that about something like breast feeding?

I'm not trying to be argumentative with those questions [Smile] . I would have expected that the reaction would be from some people "yeah, I feel that way too" and from other people "oh, I didn't know that some people feel that way."

Taco, I'm not upset or offended by this discussion. I do find it extremely interesting that, although I went to great lengths to say that this is just how I feel in these situations, it's really gotten some people worked up. Maybe it's just that nobody else feels that way about religion. (Incidentally, that's why I did my best to come up with other situations that I thought most people would be able to identify with when trying to describe my feelings.)

I'm trying to understand exactly what the problem with my feeling that way is? Especially since I support people's right to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, etc. I also said I was embarrassed when mentally handicapped people touch themselves (inappropriately) in public, but no one has accused me of trying to deny the mentally handicapped their rights or told me that my feeling that way is disgusting and offensive.

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
TMBWITW,PB

Member # 1734

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 15:44      Profile for TMBWITW,PB     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by FireSnake:
Why is it disgusting that I feel embarrassed if people pray in public? Why is it any worse for me to think "gee, thats really tacky - if I had a religion I wouldn't do that" than it is for someone to think that about something like breast feeding?

It is disgusting for people to feel that way about breastfeeding.

--------------------
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye."
—Miss Piggy

Posts: 4010 | From: my couch | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 16:07      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TMBWITW,PB:
quote:
Originally posted by FireSnake:
Why is it disgusting that I feel embarrassed if people pray in public? Why is it any worse for me to think "gee, thats really tacky - if I had a religion I wouldn't do that" than it is for someone to think that about something like breast feeding?

It is disgusting for people to feel that way about breast feeding.
lol, Peebs.

(The example came from one of the earlier posts, actually. I can replace "breast feeding" with "cross dressing" though, if it would make you feel more comfortable. [Big Grin] )

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 16:16      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by FireSnake:
I can replace "breast feeding" with "cross dressing" though, if it would make you feel more comfortable. [Big Grin] )

Cross-dressers breast-feeding? eeewww! [Eek!]

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Too Cool To Quit
SuperBlabberMouth!
Member # 2217

Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 16:20      Profile for Too Cool To Quit     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, I'm not really trying to argue, in all honesty, it's more like trying better to understand what you're saying, in the meanwhile expressive my own opinion on the same matter.

As far as you saying that you wouldn't do that if you had their religion, or a religion, according to most (if not all) Christian preachers, by not praying in public you are denying the Lord before human beings, and the bible says that if you deny Jesus before mankind, he will deny you before the Father (and again, this is according to the Christian Bible, not saying it's the absolutely truth, because I myself don't believe in it either) so a lot of them do it on the understanding that by constantly having the Lord as a part of their life, they are closer, and by the logic of Faith in Jesus Christ, it makes a lot of sense. It's one of those 'you'd have to be there' kind of things.

Uh, I hope you can get what I'm saying.

Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled debating about religion in a thread that was supposed to be about NOT debating about religion.

What I think Kris is trying to say is that there are BETTER things to worry about besides little differences and nuances between religions and he's wanting you all to realize that despite what ever faction of Christianity you fall into, and other religions included, that we need to realize that every one of us Human being and that by boxing each other in to "you are here" and "you are there" or putting us on a point somewhere on a line in between this and that that we are actually destroying our own civilization by saying that there is only this and that, and by saying that everyone is either this or that, or that every one is somewhere between this and that, is completely detrimental to all human life and that we need to stop this because in all honesty, it's fucking stupid.

Uh...

*dies*

--------------------
Alright now, that's the last straw, I'm calling the ass taxidermist to tell him to stop making hats in your size RIGHT NOW.

Posts: 1097 | From: North Carolina | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 17:42      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Too Cool To Quit:
Well, I'm not really trying to argue, in all honesty, it's more like trying better to understand what you're saying, in the meanwhile expressive my own opinion on the same matter.

I get that. I'm still interested in the answers to those questions, if you get around to answering them. [Big Grin]

quote:
Originally posted by Too Cool To Quit:
As far as you saying that you wouldn't do that if you had their religion, or a religion, according to most (if not all) Christian preachers, by not praying in public you are denying the Lord before human beings, and the bible says that if you deny Jesus before mankind, he will deny you before the Father (and again, this is according to the Christian Bible, not saying it's the absolutely truth, because I myself don't believe in it either) so a lot of them do it on the understanding that by constantly having the Lord as a part of their life, they are closer, and by the logic of Faith in Jesus Christ, it makes a lot of sense. It's one of those 'you'd have to be there' kind of things.

Christian preachers may say that, but it seems to be in direct contradiction to the Christian holy book. Matthew 6:1-8 (KJV) reads to me as opposed to public displays of religion. Other religions do have differing rules, of course. I actually think various holy books make for fairly interesting reading. I think it's sad that the Christian bible has been so butchered in the process of translation and editing. But that's off topic. [Smile]

(I definitely don't want to argue Christian dogma, since there is supporting evidence for just about everything, including human sacrifice, in the Christian bible.)

quote:
Originally posted by Too Cool To Quit:
Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled debating about religion in a thread that was supposed to be about NOT debating about religion.

I don't think (with the exception above) that we are debating points of religion. It seems to me that the underlying topic in the heated part of the discussion is far more related to groupthink and the need to drag those outside that line in with everyone else. While that is actually the basis for a lot of religion (uniform codes of morals and behaviors for a society) there are plenty of other groups that practice it. Almost any group of people based on an ideology of some kind exhibits that behavior.

I guess it just never occurred to me to claim that religious people are attempting to deny my freedom of religion (or lack of) and my freedom of speech by thinking it's weird or strange that I don't have a religion, or feeling awkward or uncomfortable if I do something that is in plain contradiction to their norm, based on a religious lifestyle. I do think it was interesting that those implications were the first cats out of the bag in response to a statement that was clearly one of personal feeling, and did not at any point even hint that curtailing rights or freedoms was acceptable.

Quite honestly, I figured this thread would devolve long ago into another punfest or something, because how can anyone really debate "we should put aside our differences and all get along, love each other, and play nice"? I think it ended up turning into a fairly interesting example of why that can't/won't/doesn't happen. Not based on only religion (as Peeb's comment illustrates), but based on the collective idea that "I'm right, you're wrong" and that disagreement is offensive and disgusting.

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
MacManKrisK

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 955

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 18:32      Profile for MacManKrisK     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by FireSnake:
how can anyone really debate "we should put aside our differences and all get along, love each other, and play nice"? I think it ended up turning into a fairly interesting example of why that can't/won't/doesn't happen. Not based on only religion (as Peeb's comment illustrates), but based on the collective idea that "I'm right, you're wrong" and that disagreement is offensive and disgusting.

"I'm right, you're wrong" is a learned behavior. We are taught that certain things are bad, and that people that don't do the same things we do are "bad people."

Although it cannot be argued that there is such a thing as bad behavior (behaving in the manner of a serial killer is certainly a clear example of such), I detest the notion of bad people. Good people do bad things, and even "bad people" can do good things.

We are more then the sum of our actions! Our worth as humans should not be judged by our actions. Nay, our worth as humans should not be judged! We are worthy because of our humanity!

Furthermore, I would like to suggest that people that do bad things do them because they feel devalued. People who are told they are "bad people" will continue to do bad things for the thrill or excitement of doing them. If their life has no value, then why should they care about the consequences of their actions? Furthermore, doing bad things allows the person to attain value, even if it is a negative value. To a person who feels valueless, a negative value is better than none at all.

[make a point about terrorism here...]

To love someone means to value their life, simply for the sake of the life that it is. Love, true unconditional love, can be taught just as fear, hate, and the "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality can be taught. Note, that your actions do speak louder then your words, particularly when teaching others.

The question I ask you is: what do you teach?

--------------------
"Buy low, sell high
get rich and you still die"


Posts: 2331 | From: Southwest Michigan, USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Black_Pearls_and_Lace
Geek Larva
Member # 4586

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 18:42      Profile for Black_Pearls_and_Lace     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What I was taking issue with is not your discomfort, but your metaphor. You compared public displays of religion with a lack of control (an old person wetting himself, etc.). I think that this comparison is flawed and offensive for the following reasons:

1. it assumes that a public display of religion is an act which shows lack of control

2. it assumes that the standard of behaviour prohibits public displays of religion

3. it implies that these people know better (i.e. are aware of the standard), but are unable to comply, presumably due to a flaw (e.g., senility or retardation prevent people from controlling their bodily functions).

In fact,

1. a public display of religion is a very willing act.

2. there is no standard, especially in multicultural societies, prohibiting religious behaviour as long as it does not constitute harassment (e.g. while you may be embarassed when you see me crossing myself, I am not harassing you).

3. these people act in such way because in their worldview, this is perfectly acceptable; they are not failing to obey a known standard because such standard is not exactly in place and they do not recognize it as valid.

This may come down to choice of words. If you said, for example, that these people cause you embarassment because they are INSENSITIVE, I wouldn't have taken much issue. It's equating their acts with acts of no control which bothered me.

Also, as far as the guides go, I said clearly that I do not agree with those who intentionally harass. But there may be people who, in good faith, ask questions or express objections to the content of the exhibit, and they should be answered politely, which is why I think special training is in order. If other visitors have a problem, it means they are no more accepting of someone else's worldview. I repeat, I'm not referring to someone preaching in the middle of the exhibit about how it's all a bunch of crap.

At the same time, I'm happy you brought this up because it helped me realize that I too have been intolerant at some point with other people visiting Renaissance exhibits and asking the guides how come Leonardo wasted his time on religious subjects when he was such an enlightened man. Just like creationist objections in a science museum, this betrays an utter ignorance of the period and of its discourses. It made me angry at the time, not on religious, but on intellectual grounds (so yes, I know that my example is a bit different). Looking back, I am happy that the guide explained patiently instead of snubbing them. Maybe they walked out with a better sense of the period, just as creationists may be left questioning their beliefs if the importance of an Archaeopteryx bird is properly explained. So I do believe that we shouldn't complain about funds being used to make guides more aware and more sensitive to opposing beliefs.

--------------------
HwÆT, we Gar-Dena in geardagum theodcyninga...

Posts: 28 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 20:16      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Black_Pearls_and_Lace:
What I was taking issue with is not your discomfort, but your metaphor. You compared public displays of religion with a lack of control (an old person wetting himself, etc.). I think that this comparison is flawed and offensive for the following reasons:

1. it assumes that a public display of religion is an act which shows lack of control

2. it assumes that the standard of behaviour prohibits public displays of religion

3. it implies that these people know better (i.e. are aware of the standard), but are unable to comply, presumably due to a flaw (e.g., senility or retardation prevent people from controlling their bodily functions).

In fact,

1. a public display of religion is a very willing act.

2. there is no standard, especially in multicultural societies, prohibiting religious behaviour as long as it does not constitute harassment (e.g. while you may be embarassed when you see me crossing myself, I am not harassing you).

3. these people act in such way because in their worldview, this is perfectly acceptable; they are not failing to obey a known standard because such standard is not exactly in place and they do not recognize it as valid.

This may come down to choice of words. If you said, for example, that these people cause you embarassment because they are INSENSITIVE, I wouldn't have taken much issue. It's equating their acts with acts of no control which bothered me.


I'm sorry my example offended you. I chose the situations that create the same type of feelings for me, including the component that comes from knowing that the person who has performed the act that results in the feeling of embarrassment is not doing it deliberately to create discomfort in others. (That behavior would be offensive.)

There is no question that religious people make a conscious decision to be religious in public. I do think that they are unaware that other people may experience some level of awkwardness or discomfort because of it. Have you ever thought that by very publicly stopping and crossing yourself in front of a church, a nearby person may be made uncomfortable for any number of reasons? It is, of course, your right to continue to do so and no one is going to suggest you stop. I don't think it's part of your right to demand that others feel the same way about it that you do. I don't think it's your right to demand that a passerby not find it embarrassing. The possibility that you will make that demand is partly the cause for awkwardness and discomfort.

As for a multicultural society, there is no standard of behavior for the society as a whole either prohibiting or requiring public religious displays. I fail to see where I implied it or stated anything that would make it a logical assumption that there was when we both quite plainly know that isn't the case. In a multicultural society, one generally adopts the beliefs, standards of behavior, etc. of their subculture, if for no other reason than it's impossible to adopt all the conflicting (and even mutually exclusive) mores that come from each subculture. I think it's weird to make cross signs at churches, you think it's weird not to.

Of course you wouldn't have taken issue if I had said people are deliberately being insensitive to me. How could you? But it would sound ridiculous to claim that a family praying in a restaurant before they eat or you crossing yourself in front of a church is insensitive to me in some way. I think you would have taken issue with whether any insensitivity was occurring, though.

And you are perfectly capable of taking issue with what I think and how I feel about things. Would you have had an issue with my feelings if I had never said anything? Even though I would still think the same things and feel the same way? Even though I'm in no way infringing on your religious expression, freedom of speech, or any other rights that you brought up in your first response? I'm wondering if maybe the issue here isn't that I think and feel that way, it's realizing that other people do have a negative reaction to certain behaviors that we accept as the norm in our particular subculture. I'm sorry if it upsets you that I feel that way, but I'm not sorry for feeling that way.


quote:
Originally posted by Black_Pearls_and_Lace:
Also, as far as the guides go, I said clearly that I do not agree with those who intentionally harass. But there may be people who, in good faith, ask questions or express objections to the content of the exhibit, and they should be answered politely, which is why I think special training is in order. If other visitors have a problem, it means they are no more accepting of someone else's worldview. I repeat, I'm not referring to someone preaching in the middle of the exhibit about how it's all a bunch of crap.

At the same time, I'm happy you brought this up because it helped me realize that I too have been intolerant at some point with other people visiting Renaissance exhibits and asking the guides how come Leonardo wasted his time on religious subjects when he was such an enlightened man. Just like creationist objections in a science museum, this betrays an utter ignorance of the period and of its discourses. It made me angry at the time, not on religious, but on intellectual grounds (so yes, I know that my example is a bit different). Looking back, I am happy that the guide explained patiently instead of snubbing them. Maybe they walked out with a better sense of the period, just as creationists may be left questioning their beliefs if the importance of an Archaeopteryx bird is properly explained. So I do believe that we shouldn't complain about funds being used to make guides more aware and more sensitive to opposing beliefs.

I've been conducting this entire conversation on intellectual grounds, so I think your example works just fine. [Smile]

I'm not talking about good faith questioning of the presentation though, or simple ignorance of the subject. I'm talking about straight up heckling with the express purpose of being disruptive. In addition to paid employees, many museums also employ volunteers as guides and for other assistance. While some level of education on how to handle polite questions from different views is necessary, when it reaches the level of teaching your volunteers to excuse themselves to the restroom to avoid any more rhetoric, and even personal attacks, I don't think the museum is the one that needs sensitivity training. I think that deliberately trying to create an unpleasant and disruptive experience for other visitors and the staff is unpardonably rude. If you are a strict creationist, why are you going to go to a facility that you know has exhibits based on evolution, and then proceed to be obnoxious about it? Those are the people that offend me.

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Black_Pearls_and_Lace
Geek Larva
Member # 4586

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 22:03      Profile for Black_Pearls_and_Lace     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Actually, it doesn't bother me that you are an atheist. I'm pretty discreet with my religion because Eastern Orthodoxy, although the original church of the early fathers (I know catholics will take issue with that [Razz] , but the issue of the schism depends on what side you are) is considered strange by Reformed and Neoprotestant Christians. I only cross myself in front of an Orthodox church, for example, of which there aren't many. We are also a non-proselitizing, non-evangelical church - very few people become Orthodox, as most people are born or marry into the church. This is why, while I enjoy discussing religion (any religion), I was never programmed to be a missionary machine. And since I also see it from an academic angle, I was never upset by expressions of disbelief or by objections. I find it a lot less iritating (actually, not at all) to talk about it with an atheist than with a Jehovah's Witness.

I respect your worldview. I understand where it's coming from and how one becomes an atheist. Actually, I think that from a rational point of view, it's a lot easier to be an atheist than a believer, and aside from those completely brainwashed, many Christians (I can't talk about religions I have no direct experience of) have struggled to reconcile their trust in scientific discovery with their need for spirituality.

My impression is that you are not extending the same empathy. Maybe you were strictly referring to those who make a show of religion. But I detected that you may also be embarassed FOR those who practise religion. I'm simply deriving that from your metaphor again: I'm not only embarassed when an old man wets himself, but I'm also embarassed FOR him, because it's such a shameful thing. If that's the case, then it's a lot deeper than simply thinking they are wrong (which is not insulting). And when you equate religion with a shameful act of which one ought to be embarassed, it is easy to see that there is not much respect for the opposite view. I strongly believe that you can still respect an opinion while very much disagreeing with it.

So that's my beef. Again, if the thought of someone else being a believer doesn't embarass you as long as they do it away from you, I think we're all good.

--------------------
HwÆT, we Gar-Dena in geardagum theodcyninga...

Posts: 28 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted November 15, 2005 23:52      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
...

Now what are we going to discuss?

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Black_Pearls_and_Lace
Geek Larva
Member # 4586

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 01:07      Profile for Black_Pearls_and_Lace     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The oppression of satanists? [evil]

--------------------
HwÆT, we Gar-Dena in geardagum theodcyninga...

Posts: 28 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Grummash

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 4289

Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 02:04      Profile for Grummash     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
originally posted by Black_Lace _And_Pearls
quote:
The oppression of satanists?
But are you pro or con???

--------------------
...and yet, across the gulf of space, minds immeasurably superior to ours regarded this earth with envious eyes...

Posts: 2335 | From: Lancashire,UK | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 03:29      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, you pick one, I'll be the other. [Big Grin]

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
ChildeRoland
Alpha Geek
Member # 3880

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 05:05      Profile for ChildeRoland     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I've been conducting this entire conversation on intellectual grounds,
You say that, but I have yet to hear (and maybe I missed the post) you give a good, reasonable, intellectual explanation for why you are "uncomfortable" and "embarassed" with other people expressing their religion. Those seem very emotional and anti-intellectual to me.

--------------------
=====================
Childe Roland

Posts: 311 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
spungo
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1089

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 05:33      Profile for spungo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hey, man - let it go. Bygones, baby. Why can't we all just get along? [Smile]

--------------------
Shameless plug. (Please forgive me.)

Posts: 6529 | From: Noba Scoba | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 07:44      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by spungo:
Hey, man - let it go. Bygones, baby. Why can't we all just get along? [Smile]

Because I'm right and you're wrong, of course. Besides which, your all freaking gay!!!!
 - [Big Grin]

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Grummash

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 4289

Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 09:41      Profile for Grummash     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Because I'm right and you're wrong, of course. Besides which, your all freaking gay!!!!
Garlicguy - In Lancashire we have a saying:

"They're all daft bar me and thee...
.....and thee's a bit!" [Big Grin]

--------------------
...and yet, across the gulf of space, minds immeasurably superior to ours regarded this earth with envious eyes...

Posts: 2335 | From: Lancashire,UK | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
spungo
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1089

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 09:46      Profile for spungo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Grummash:
Garlicguy - In Lancashire we have a saying:

"They're all daft bar me and thee...
.....and thee's a bit!" [Big Grin]

[Big Grin] Ee, there's nowt queer as folk.

--------------------
Shameless plug. (Please forgive me.)

Posts: 6529 | From: Noba Scoba | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sxeptomaniac

Member # 3698

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 11:10      Profile for Sxeptomaniac   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've noticed some people in the forums don't like it when people start arguing about a topic, but I've actually liked what's been said here. It got a little heated and there were some misunderstandings, but I didn't see anything said that really bothered me.

I think that dogmatism and "I'm right, you're wrong" can be a bad thing, but I also believe that there has to be room for people to express disagreement. I learn a lot more about what people think and believe when they are defending those beliefs instead of just explaining them without criticism (although there is a time and place for that, too).

quote:
Originally posted by MacManKrisK:
Ecumenism doesn't quite fit what I'm talking about either. I guess what I'm really talking about (and I hadn't thought of it until now) is Bagism.

Bagism seems interesting, but it struck me as tending towards hiding differences rather than addressing them. I believe that hiding or pretending differences don't exist is problematic. We need to learn to appreciate and allow for differences, not ignore them.

--------------------
Let's pray that the human race never escapes from Earth to spread its iniquity elsewhere. - C. S. Lewis

Posts: 1590 | From: Fresno, CA | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
drunkennewfiemidget
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2814

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 11:22      Profile for drunkennewfiemidget     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6225867209
Posts: 4897 | From: Cambridge, ON, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 11:42      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by drunkennewfiemidget:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6225867209

Wow! That's a full-out assault on the senses. [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 12:23      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sxeptomaniac:

quote:
Originally posted by MacManKrisK:
Ecumenism doesn't quite fit what I'm talking about either. I guess what I'm really talking about (and I hadn't thought of it until now) is Bagism.

Bagism seems interesting, but it struck me as tending towards hiding differences rather than addressing them. I believe that hiding or pretending differences don't exist is problematic. We need to learn to appreciate and allow for differences, not ignore them.
Besides, which, people will soon start judging each other on the quality, shape, style, etc., of your bag!
[crazy]

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Serenak

Member # 2950

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted November 16, 2005 13:31      Profile for Serenak     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Holy nodding dogs and bobbleheads Batman!

$660 ... I mean $660...

Now who is the madder...???

Retires stunned to nurse his bleeding ears...

--------------------
"So if you want my address - it's No. 1 at the end of the bar, where I sit with the broken angels, clutching at straws and nursing my scars..."

Posts: 1937 | From: Suffolk England | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam