Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion? Showing 4,551-4,600 of 12,463

[[deleted user]]

Sorry about the stupid typos, btw. I know how to write, I promise :)
It's that darn auto-correct thing on the phones that's messing me up.

[Hazel]

Amani wrote: "Hazel wrote: "Actually I was talking about posts that dispute what you say, that point out the innate hypocrisy in posting that you'd want to get rid of science while using a computer to say it, th..."

first, I'm not your darling. Second, your post is so ignorant, I can't even be bothered addressing it. How about you read the last 5 pages or so, its quicker and easier than saying it all again. If you'd worded your post in a non condescending, and coherent fashion, I might have considered addressing it.

Maria, the post I'm responding to, that would be trolling. The condescending way of calling me darling is trolling.

[Maria]

Lila, that is because it should be up to the parents to instill the morals and ethics of their family into their children, not the school system. Not to sound mean, but if your daughter doesn't know the meaning of the word ethics, it may be time for you to teach her.

[Travis]

Cerebus wrote: "@Gary, I think at this stage I'm happy to defer to you on most replies, I particularly like the 10 commandments one :) I'm sure cs will see this as part of an atheist conspiracy, but since he is st..."

Direct questions do seem to have the same effect as garlic to a vampire.

[Drew]

Amani wrote: "Hazel wrote: "Actually I was talking about posts that dispute what you say, that point out the innate hypocrisy in posting that you'd want to get rid of science while using a computer to say it, th..."

There is no God

[Travis]

Maria wrote: "Lila, that is because it should be up to the parents to instill the morals and ethics of their family into their children, not the school system. Not to sound mean, but if your daughter doesn't kn..."


I was thinking the same thing. If you want your kid to learn about ethics and morals and expect it's going to happen outside your home, you are in for a world of disappointment and most likely a sizable therapy bill.

[Hazel]

Maria wrote: "Lila, that is because it should be up to the parents to instill the morals and ethics of their family into their children, not the school system. Not to sound mean, but if your daughter doesn't kn..."

I think one of the most astounding things I ever heard was the story told to me by a teacher who had just had a parent/teacher evening. She was a infant school teacher, and was discussing a little boy with his mother, and said "he's having trouble with some of the reading activities, do you find he struggles at home when you read together?" And the mother responded "at home? Isn't it your job to do that stuff?"

[Travis]

Hazel wrote: "Maria wrote: "Lila, that is because it should be up to the parents to instill the morals and ethics of their family into their children, not the school system. Not to sound mean, but if your daugh..."

makes you weep for humanity, while at the same time allowing you to understand how Kim Kardashian has a career.

[Hazel]

the only cardassian I have time for

[Drew]

Don't get me wrong, parents should definitely play the bigger role of teaching their children right from wrong but I also feel that these are things that should also be taught in school. Some parents just aren't skilled at this or don't care enough to put time into it unfortunately.

[Tim]

Quite the contrary, Amani. I have gained immeasurable strength of character from abandoning 'my faith'. I do not seek strength from anywhere but within myself and from my great group of friends. There is no hole inside yearning for the creator to fill, and in fact I have noticed that some people of faith have enormous holes which they could have filled if they had read a bit more, taken up painting or learned to play an instrument, for example.

You may say I am deluded and that one day my need to worship god will announce itself and I will see the error of my ways. I honestly wouldn't know how to answer that. Maybe I will. Maybe you'll abandon god. Maybe god will touch our planet with a star and end this charade.

[[deleted user]]

Gary wrote: "Lila wrote: "Ok,this discussion is a lot more intriguing and entrancing, I suppose, than I gave it credit."

Glad you approve. :-) Most people on here don't want to argue, they want to discuss or..."

Thank you for such a nice reply, Gary.

I'll get the easy part out of the way first. The Dawkins thing I only mentioned in reference to the Bible's literary merits. I wouldn't need to read the article to know that he would most certainly not recommend Bible to anyone as a moral compass, lol.

Now, almost all the answers I would revert back to my post saying that the interpretations of the Bible are many and constantly changing. So when I choose the good parts and don't live by the outrageous parts (the homophobia, the misogyny, the hatred) it's because it's very likely that the good things were always there but the bad ones were put in by small minded people, who thought (just like many think today) that this is what God would have wanted them to do. The same thing applies to Catholicism. The Catechism changes, the religion is not stagnant. The rules are not as strict as they used to be even thirteen years ago. From my personal experience (forgive the personal references, it's not because I'm self-centered but because I just don't like to talk about general experiences or those of others, since I really have no way of knowing them), I got divorced from my first husband 13 years ago and the outcry it caused in my family was ridiculous, as if I was going to be excommunicated or something. And on top of that I remarried, to an agnostic of all people :O. Anyway, the canonical laws have changed and we, Roman-Catholics can now get divorced and I'm in the process of annulling the first marriage. And no, my children were welcomed into my Church and my Faith, we didn't get banned from it because of me being a divorcee and now remarried without having gotten the first marriage annulled first. So, the Catechism changes for the better.

Thank you for your words about my grandparents. They really were wonderful people and sadly, you are right, they didn't give themselves enough credit but I think most of the people around them appreciated and loved them (at least I like to believe that)...brb.

[Tim]

Maria wrote "I don't think anyone should tell anyone else what to believe. Ever. I think everyone should do all the research they can, question everything, then come to their own conclusions. This discussion is a great way to hear lots of differing opinions and to get clarification if need be as well."

That seems to be something we all agree on, atheists and religious folk alike. But we don't think twice about telling little children what to believe, for years and years of their young lives. What does that make us? Belief bullies, picking on the defenceless.

[Travis]

Tim wrote: "Maria wrote "I don't think anyone should tell anyone else what to believe. Ever. I think everyone should do all the research they can, question everything, then come to their own conclusions. This ..."

Everyone starts out in the belief system of their families and then grows up and evolves their own.

Not as if you can tell a three year old 'Yeah, kid go believe whatever you want.'
You'll end up with a sociopath that won't eat their green beans.

You hope you've given the kid a solid foundation and then let them find their own belief system as they get out into the world and pick and chose things.

[[deleted user]]

Maria wrote: "Lila, that is because it should be up to the parents to instill the morals and ethics of their family into their children, not the school system. Not to sound mean, but if your daughter doesn't kn..."
Goodness gracious! I guess I wasn't clear that I was only answering a question whether it was taught at school or not by saying it wasn't. I also said, my daughter wouldn't know the definition. Trust me, I wouldn't rely in school to teach my kids anything to do with morals and ethics. Unfortunately, teachers and schools are two different things nowadays. A teacher cannot open her/his mouth without making sure the administration approves. That's how it us at least in my neck if the woods.
And honestly, I'm not so sure you weren't trying to be offensive.

[Hazel]

Lila wrote: " A teacher cannot open her/his mouth without making sure the administration approves.."

and bingo was his name-o

[Hazel]

Maria wrote: "Totally off topic, but speaking of evolution, did you guys see the Animal Planet special the other night about the Mermaids or "aquatic apes" that washed up on the shore along with beached whales? ..."

I checked up on this:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/supernat...

[Tim]

No, but be sure to let Shanna know if Sean Bean washes up somewhere...

[Fiver]

I'd rather live in a world without religion.

We've already tried a world without science.

[Tim]

Travis wrote: "
Not as if you can tell a three year old 'Yeah, kid go believe whatever you want.'
You'll end up with a sociopath that won't eat their green beans."

There's a big difference in telling a child she should eat her beans/ not play with scorpions/ be kind to people etc etc, and telling her to believe in talking snakes and virgin births and eternal damnation. I think you're nitpicking. That clearly wasn't what i meant.

[Maria]

Lila said:

"And honestly, I'm not so sure you weren't trying to be offensive."

I was not trying to be offensive. It sounded like you meant that your daughter had no idea what ethics was since they don't have a class for it in her school. If you'll notice, Travis agreed with me - we both took it the wrong way, obviously. Just correct us if/when we are wrong about something on this discussion, please don't take offense. For the most part everyone is pretty polite, they just sometimes call you out on your comments. It's the nature of the beast.

[Hazel]

that pesky lack of emotive gestures and facial expressions over written communication ;P

[[deleted user]]

Maria wrote: "Lila said:

"And honestly, I'm not so sure you weren't trying to be offensive."

I was not trying to be offensive. It sounded like you meant that your daughter had no idea what ethics was since th..."

Ok, sounds good to me :)

[Tim]

"It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no real meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well so fucking what."
Stephen Fry

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "I'm sure that truth will involve Sean Bean"

;)

[Hazel]

Tim wrote: ""It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no real meani..."

I love how frightfully upper class he is when he says that :D

[[deleted user]]

Gary wrote: "*Checks time* Lets face it. Probably dead again! "

Ahahahahahaha!

Now, regarding the rest of your post ... lots of stuff to think about. Truly. The great thing, I think, is that we get to think ... we can choose to think it through and talk it out and bounce things off one another ... if we choose. :)

[[deleted user]]

Tim wrote: ""It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no real meani..."

Witticisms, witticism...they mean just as much as what Stephen Fry thinks of 'I find that offensive' phrase.

Besides, what would he prefer, I wonder. 'You're fucking rude!'?

[Hazel]

Actually, I think that Stephen Fry would prefer someone to be that honest with him if he was being rude.

[cHriS]

Maria wrote: "Hazel said:

"troll
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument"

I don't think I'm doing that. ..."

You will have to get use to this word, you will be called it lot when you start to disagree with some folks here.

[Maria]

cs said:

"You will have to get use to this word, you will be called it lot when you start to disagree with some folks here."

You were called that because none of your posts relate to the comments you quote and it seems you are just trying to argue. After this comment of mine, I will be ignoring you.

[[deleted user]]

Gary wrote: "My only point is not "why" it happens, but how people justify it to others and more importantly to themselves. "

Yeah .... I'm definitely aware of the scriptures that involve women. I'm also aware of people using that "word" as a justification for horrid and immoral behavior. No doubt.

This is what goes through my mind, though. I want it to stop. So, for me, I skip to the "why" ... why does it happen .... In my mind, we don't have a chance of eradicating such attitudes and behaviors without going to the root cause ... for me, the why.

I know some would disagree with me and they might have a point. But, I don't think the root cause is religion. It's something else. Until we admit that and work on that, women will still be treated as chattel by some.

Now, I also get what you're saying. Beliefs .... Beliefs can and do lead to actions. Patriarchal religions have sponsored these beliefs, at the very least. If those religions disappear, maybe the beliefs regarding treating women as property will also die out.

Maybe.

But, I'm left thinking ... women are treated poorly and as objects in many societies, not just societies with patriarchal religions .... So, is that the root? I don't know enough about how women were treated back during hunter/gatherer times. I mean, I know that's when all the Venus statues were made. I believe some think people worshiped women at this time ... right ... life, procreation ... in a time when it was so hard to survive. It was after we started farming, I think, and settling in cities that the male centered gods came into being ... war gods to protect our ancestors' belongings, etc.... I've got a simplistic understand of life at that time. I don't know enough about how women were treated pre and post, if you know what I mean. Again, getting to the root cause ....

If we're not on the same page on this issue, I'd say we're at least on the same chapter ... or book. I think we're just looking at different ways of stopping some of the bad things that happen.

[[deleted user]]

Drew wrote: "I haven't been in a grade school forever it seems like and I don't have children of my own so my question is, do they not teach morals and ethics in grade school? It seems like they would, you know..."

Not at my school. Of course, that's just my school.

I can tell you that we need to teach the "standards" and "GE's" and, soon, the "Common Core" in the US.... I've never seen anything dealing with morals or moral education in those documents. We do teach about laws, specifically bullying and harassment, and deal with those issues. General morality, no.

I can tell you; however, that there are, hmmm..., companies of sorts who sell kits and a curriculum to schools that are based on "moral" education. I've even met a couple of teachers, one from Iowa and one from Texas, who were shocked we didn't teach a morals/ethics curriculum.

I think you'll likely find it depends on the region.

Now, there are some schools whose "disciplinary" systems might be viewed as dealing with morality. The idea behind it ... one must feel one is part of a community in order to feel safe enough to learn, etc.... A lot of work is done around building a community and agreeing to rules, etc.... Lots of role play, teaching empathy, etc....

[Hazel]

I suspect its difficult to come up with an ethics and morality curriculum that someone won't complain about, it will always be teaching the wrong sort of ethics according to someone.

[[deleted user]]

Tim wrote: ""It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no real meani..."

And, you're not offended by people teaching children to believe in talking snakes ....?

;)

[Hazel]

I'm not, I'm saddened, and often astounded, by it.

[cHriS]

Maria wrote: I don't think I'm doing that. If anyone does, please let me know and I'll leave the group. It was not my intent.

You did troll and offend, twice.

[Hazel]

Maria wrote: "cs said:

"You will have to get use to this word, you will be called it lot when you start to disagree with some folks here."

You were called that because none of your posts relate to the comments..."

ironically, the last two posts made by he who must not be named are both attempts to cause upset and contention...

[Maria]

Hazel wrote:

"ironically, the last two posts made by he who must not be named are both attempts to cause upset and contention..."

I know! That's why I am not going to respond to him anymore, I'll still read his posts, but I don't think he is someone I want to engage in conversation....

[Shanna]

Gary wrote: "Shanna wrote: "I always thought it had to do with the idea of the female sexual insaitability and curbing it by making sex unpleasant thus ensuring a faithful wife and children of your blood line."..."

I'm with you, as I read it I thought Aha! I'd never really been able to come up with a reasonable (not that it is "reasonable") reason for why a mother/aunt/grandmother or any other woman would do it to their own children especially having experienced it themselves. In the cases when it's not the religious leader doing it.

[[deleted user]]

Shanna wrote: "I'd never really been able to come up with a reasonable (not that it is "reasonable") reason for why a mother/aunt/grandmother or any other woman would do it to their own children especially having experienced it themselves"

What would happen to them, I wonder, if they didn't carry out these mutilations?

I realize this is different, but ....

Why would a mother who is beaten by her husband allow him to beat their children?

Why would a husband who is beaten by his wife allow her to beat their children?

Different ... but not so different, perhaps.

[cHriS]

Gary wrote: When was I sarcastic to Professor Hawking?

…not to, about Hawking. While at the same time dropping a hint about how well qualified you were.

I also did not mean to ridicule him as I have enormous respect for the man.

Ok job done. You have answered your own question. I will leave it at that.

You have failed to respond again with a direct quote where Hawking says there was "always" something.

It was not a quote. It was the essence of the book and the conclusion of what the Grand Design was about.

You also were using Hawking to imply the existence of a god when Hawkings position was diametrically opposite to your claim.

No I was not. I suggested that Hawking’s conclusion about there never was ‘nothing’ before the big bang, because there was always ‘something’, still left room for something or someone to have created the ‘something’; which I suggested could be god.

It reminded me of the Jack the Ripper books. The blurb suggests that the Ripper will be named and the case closed, but by the end of the book we are none the wiser.

Here you arrogantly assume that you understood Hawking better than me.

Do you not think that it could be arrogant to assume that I should not understand Hawking at least the same as you.

What is your qualification in Cosmology

I read a lot, like I guess most folks here.

But, is this yet another hint for us to ask how qualified are you? I did ask you to tell us if you want to but you said no. Qualified to some, means trained to others, trained to have only one thought process on a particular subject and because of that, finds it hard sometimes to be objective.

That seems to disqualify every possibility of moral guidance from religion as you can do what you like as long as you do not feel guilty.

Yes you are correct. But you have missed the point, most people will feel some sort of guilt if they know what they are doing is wrong.

What is your qualification in Theology?

My father is the Pope.

[[deleted user]]

Hazel wrote: "I'm not, I'm saddened, and often astounded, by it."

Yes, I can see that.

Personally, I don't take issue with people being offended, though. We're all human and capable of all emotions, including that of being offended. It is what it is ....

Regarding what we teach children .... It's mind-boggling, isn't it? It's not just about religion, as far as I'm concerned. Back when I was in my early twenties, I was friends with a couple who had small children. I'm not a fan of creepy and crawly things and have an extreme startle response even on a good day. Well, we were taking the kiddos for a walk in a field. All of a sudden, a snake slithered in our path. I screamed and basically acted creeped out. Later, my friend talked with me about this incident. She talked about fears she had and said she was making it her mission in life not to let that come across to her girls. She was afraid of bugs, for example. Yes. But, she didn't want to teach her girls to fear bugs. I remember being blown away by that. I'd never thought of it that way before.

I think it's very important to be mindful of all of the things we teach children. For sure ....

[Shanna]

Shannon wrote: "Shanna wrote: "I'd never really been able to come up with a reasonable (not that it is "reasonable") reason for why a mother/aunt/grandmother or any other woman would do it to their own children es..."

I see your point.

[Shanna]

cs wrote: "My father is the Pope"
At best that makes you illegitimate, not qualified in anything.

[Travis]

Tim wrote: "Travis wrote: "
Not as if you can tell a three year old 'Yeah, kid go believe whatever you want.'
You'll end up with a sociopath that won't eat their green beans."

There's a big difference in tell..."

Not really, you, just by being around your child, force a belief system on them. There is no way to avoid that, short of locking them in a box till they are 18 ( and don't think I haven't considered it).

Not all of us are going with the talking snake plan, but the people that believe in the talking snake will teach their kids.
Even if you are an atheist you are 'forcing' that upon a kid.

I just thought your use of belief bullying and tone smacked of never having had kids and preaching ( to use an ironic phrase)

[Travis]

Lila wrote: "Maria wrote: "Lila said:

"And honestly, I'm not so sure you weren't trying to be offensive."

I was not trying to be offensive. It sounded like you meant that your daughter had no idea what ethic..."

Also my reply wasn't meant to be directed at Lila, but more the idea that schools should be teaching kids morals and ethics.
I'm sure Lila's kids are well behaved little tykes.

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Gary wrote: "*Checks time* Lets face it. Probably dead again! "

Ahahahahahaha!

Now, regarding the rest of your post ... lots of stuff to think about. Truly. The great thing, I think, is that we..."

But on the bright side, I believe Sean Bean died for your sins.

and considering the amount of times he's died, it makes me wonder what Shannon's been up to in her spare time.

[Travis]

Shanna wrote: "cs wrote: "My father is the Pope"
At best that makes you illegitimate, not qualified in anything."

Hopefully, not the current pope.

Then you'd be illegitimate and really creepy.

[[deleted user]]

On a lighter note, ... or not ....

While Sean Bean was alive on the last episode of Missing, I just learned that the show has been canceled and won't have a second season.

Sigh ....

Does cancelation count as "killing" Sean Bean?