quote:Originally posted by Puppy: King of Men, we've heard this from you before, and no one was impressed then, either. I can't imagine why you might think returning to it now is at all helpful to the discussion. We know you don't believe in any religion, and no one is asking you to. The mockery is out of line.
Comparing me to a five-year-old is not mockery? If comrade starLisa can make insulting statements on the basis of her beliefs, I don't see why I should not.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Comparing me to a five-year-old is not mockery?
Technically, she didn't compare you to a five-year old. She said that as she is to her five year old, God is to you. Since she equated you with herself in that analogy, it's clear she doesn't consider you a five year old.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I demand the right to be considered as a five-year-old if it means I can shout "She started it!"
No, seriously. Her beliefs are, really, pretty insulting to those of us who consider ourselves adults capable of making moral decisions independent of Big Brother.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think they fall into the realm of "things you can choose to be insulted by if you really, really want to, but are not intrinsically insulting" Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: quote: If comrade starLisa can make insulting statements on the basis of her beliefs, I don't see why I should not. Eye for an eye, and everyone ends up blind.
At which point I will be running around and stealing all your wallets.
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz: Don't Jewish people celebrate Christmas, not in the traditional sense, but with a movie and Chinese takeout?
A Jew and a Chinaman were talking one day. The Chinese guy says, "We've been around for 4,000 years." The Jewish guy says, "Huh. We've been around for 5,000 years". The Chinaman looks at the Jew with disbelief and says, "Oh, come on. What did the Jews eat for the first thousand years, then?"
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: And since your god is a figment of your over-active imagination, the "Yahweh-knows-best" bit is just silly.
<yawn> I honestly don't know what people were thinking when they said they were glad to see you back. Would you mind going off and playing while the grownups talk?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Clowns: Comparing me to a five-year-old is not mockery? If comrade starLisa can make insulting statements on the basis of her beliefs, I don't see why I should not.
Oh, pshaw. I wasn't comparing you to a five year old. Go ask a grownup what an analogy is, and why the concretes used in a particular analogy are irrelevant.
I don't think of you as a five year old, O King of Clowns. A particularly difficult and petulant 17 year old is more like it.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well then, why not take some advice from your elder brother (since morally you appear to be about five) : Just because Daddy asys it, doesn't mean it's true. And when we get down to "My dad said that his dad said that his dad said..." and so on for about a hundred generations, well. Ever play Telephone?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Well then Puppy, what do you care what a random atheist thinks?
KoM, probably no one cares what you *think* anyone's god is as long as you don't say it insultingly to thier face. You're entitled to your opinion (and I suspect my own opinion is much closer to yours than to the people you're arguing with), but show a little tact.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Well then, why not take some advice from your elder brother (since morally you appear to be about five) : Just because Daddy asys it, doesn't mean it's true. And when we get down to "My dad said that his dad said that his dad said..." and so on for about a hundred generations, well. Ever play Telephone?
Telephone with millions of people in parallel devoting their lives to passing a certain message down? That's a bit different than the single chain of whispering you're familiar with from your social events.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Well then, why not take some advice from your elder brother (since morally you appear to be about five) : Just because Daddy asys it, doesn't mean it's true. And when we get down to "My dad said that his dad said that his dad said..." and so on for about a hundred generations, well. Ever play Telephone?
Telephone with millions of people in parallel devoting their lives to passing a certain message down? That's a bit different than the single chain of whispering you're familiar with from your social events.
That would be why mainstream Judaism hasn't changed by a single jot, tittle, or smidgen since Moses invaded the sovereign territory of the Canaanites.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:starLisa said: Do tell. If I tell my daughter (who is 5) that she has to clean her room, she can't opt out of it. Is that unjust? No. I'm her Mom. I have that appropriate authority, and it's based on a lot of things. Among them are the fact that she wouldn't exist had it not been for me. She would not have a roof over her head or food to eat if it were not for me. That room I want her to clean? That's mine. I bought it and gave it to her for her use, but it's still mine. Also, I know things that she doesn't know. I understand why it's proper for her to clean her room, even if she doesn't quite grasp it herself yet.
I am curious. What do you believe the outcome would be if the only instructions you gave your daughter were purportedly 5000+ years old, though for some reason the originals were discarded and there were no way to really determine if that the instructions she was to follow had any relation to those she was originally given? And if those instructions were embedded in a mish-mash of folktale, allegory, seemingly arbitrary and pointless laws when not outright contradiction?
I'm guessing she'd laugh and continue playing with Legos.
And I think she'd have made the right choice.
Posts: 38 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Well then Puppy, what do you care what a random atheist thinks?
KoM, probably no one cares what you *think* anyone's god is as long as you don't say it insultingly to thier face. You're entitled to your opinion (and I suspect my own opinion is much closer to yours than to the people you're arguing with), but show a little tact.
Humour aside, nobody would dream of calling for tact if I were to say "God is thus-and-so, because of this-and-that passage in the Bible." Why should disbelief have to be especially tactful?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: nobody would dream of calling for tact if I were to say "God is thus-and-so, because of this-and-that passage in the Bible."
There's a difference between that and "Athiests are ignorant fools; they just need to get thier heads out of thier rear ends and read this-and-that passage and then they'd see." Saying that someone's god comes from an "over-active imagination" is *really* insulting, and way, way over the line of polite discussion and into personal insults and irrational argument.
You didn't argue your opinion respectfully. No matter how firmly YOU beleive it, is still only ONE opinion. Be nice.
And, KoM, you think that just because something changes it's not still valid? How many ammendments are there to the U.S. Constitution again? And yet our country still stands on the same principles as it did 200+ years ago.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Such as slavery, a limited franchise, and an extremely weak federal government? But in any case, I do not argue that change makes something invalid. But since comrade starLisa apparently believes that a lack of change proves her world-view correct, well then.
On the issue of respect, well, yes, I am indeed lacking in respect for people who insist on believing in fairy tales. Especially fairy tales that show a fundamental lack of respect for human dignity.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Such as the self-evident equality of all. Note: slavery is illegal now. Which is my point.
And you're doing it again! Look, I AGREE with your views towards religion and *I'm* offended by how you express them. I don't believe in god, and I belive that all religion was developed as a tool to either keep the masses from harm (e.g shellfish not kosher because of red tied) or to control them (e.g. "the government is from god, please don't revolt"). I believe this because from what I know about life etc etc, it seems to be what makes sense.
But other rational, intelligent people believe differently. They belive what they believe with the same certainty that I believe what I believe. They hold thier beliefs sacred. Can you understand that? Surely there is something you hold sacred; imagine someone sarcastically reducing it to some sort of childish game or silly idea. There is nothing wrong with you sharing your beliefs in a CIVIL way, just as many others in this thread have.
And don't start saying that starLisa's p.o.v. is inherantly insulting to you as a human being. You think there is no god to whom she owes obediance, she thinks you are, in your words, under the watch of "Big Brother." Having a worldview and expressing it is not insulting. Bad-mouthing someone else's worldview obviously is.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Because there is something to be said for putting the federal holiday on a day when many people will take off anyway. My mom went to a school with a large enough Jewish population that they just decided to close the school on high holy days. It wasn't a support of Judaism or reasonable accomodation, but recognition that the religious beliefs of a large portion of the population will have a serious effect on the ability of the institution to function.
quote: There are Christians who don't celebrate Christmas. There are Christians who don't celebrate Easter or celebrate Easter on a different day than the majority. And there are very few Christians who cannot work on Christmas, Easter, etc. Church services come at all hours of the day as well as midnight so they can't have the excuse that they need the whole day off just to go to church. Few Christians have a religious requirement to take the day off work. I volunteer to work on holidays so the people with families can enjoy the day. I see a lot of nonChristians looking forward to such holidays too, to spend the day with family. And it is a choice to pick a job where you know you'll be required to take federal holidays as well as your Jewish days. Christians who have jobs where they may be required to work Christmas have to take that into consideration too.
Seems to me the real difference is that you have so many days you can't work for religious reasons, and Christians don't have that many, if any.
quote: I wonder how the Christians in the US would feel about Wiccans celebrating Beltane on the White House lawn. Probably a little bit like how I feel seeing a Christmas tree there.
These three points struck me the most in reading this thread. The first is Dagonee's, and it just plain makes sense to me.
The second is Theaca's. Christians get one real day mandated off to them, Christmas. The only other holiday of significance I as a Catholic ever try to get off is Easter, but I've had to work a double shift on it for the last three years running. How many days do Jews want off? I wouldn't object to giving Jews a floating holiday. They can have choose one of their high holy days, and they get that one off. That evens things up.
As for the last point, so long as the Secret Service is there to make sure everything is done safely and with no security risks, the Wiccans can party away for all I care.
If tomorrow the Federal government decided to no longer make Christmas a federal holiday, it wouldn't matter much anyway. The only thing it would affect would be federal employees. I highly doubt any businesses would suddenly open up that were closed before. It makes little sense for many of them to be open anyway. Why would retail stores be open on a day when people have just finished shopping and are clearly going to want to be at home with their families? The reasons go on and on.
But since the only people this really affects are federal employees, I say let them argue it out. I don't think I should have a say whether or not my mailman works on Christmas or not. But if I did, I'd say let him have the day off.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyr, nice summation. KoM, for this discussion the validity of any religion is not important. The validity of peoples beliefs is. starLisa has gone out on a limb by presenting her faith in a straightforward, no holds bar format. You can disagree with it all you want, she is not trying to convert you. However you both are on the same side--keeping church and state separate--yet you attack her beliefs, hence attacking her.
The main defense that certain Christian groups use for pushing closer ties between church and state is that they are being beaten down by overzealous evangelical atheists. That seems to be you, KoM.
That said, picture this scene. A group of kids and parents are protesting outside the principal's office. He recently banned football from highschool. They scream and shout, "You hate football. Without football there is no reason for school."
Finally the prinicpal comes out. He is a tall, thin elderly man with a white beard. He is very Uncle-Sam-esque. Some throw garbage at him, but he endures it, glaring back at them like only a great teacher can, which soon quiets the pack.
"I know that you are all upset at my decision to cancel all of the football programs here at the school. I know that students involved with sports programs are less likely to get involved with drugs, crime, or become pregnant. I know that school spirit is driven by successful teams, and that such spirit keeps other kids in school, and even increases the likelyhood of school taxes increasing. It is good for the students and it is good for the school."
The crowd sent a small buzz of agreement.
"However, the students and the overactive parents have been unable to control themselves at various games. When the teams come on the field with pointy sticks, clubs, knives, guns, and recently high explosives, I have no choice but to cancel the program. Not long ago a gathering of football fans this size, from the different teams within the school, would have only signified a riot. All of you would have been busy trying to maim, kill, or kidnap each other. I have cleaned up the mess of such meetings too many times. I can not allow it any more."
The crowd was silent.
"If you want to hate and despise me, fine. Most of you aren't trying to kill me. Its much less violent that when we ran the football programs. And don't forget, your kids can still play football outside of school when ever they wish."
"Its just not the same" yelled one father. "We need school money to buy the equipment!" yelled another. "We want the band and the cheerleaders like we used to have!" demanded a third.
The principal raised his hands and the crowd quieted. "I know this will make no difference to any of you, but I want it stated for the record. I canceled school sponsored football not because I want to see sports removed from the school, but because, frankly, you folks couldn't play well with others."
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Well then, why not take some advice from your elder brother (since morally you appear to be about five) : Just because Daddy asys it, doesn't mean it's true. And when we get down to "My dad said that his dad said that his dad said..." and so on for about a hundred generations, well. Ever play Telephone?
Telephone with millions of people in parallel devoting their lives to passing a certain message down? That's a bit different than the single chain of whispering you're familiar with from your social events.
That would be why mainstream Judaism hasn't changed by a single jot, tittle, or smidgen since Moses invaded the sovereign territory of the Canaanites.
Correct. And the fact that it appears to be different to you only reflects the extent of your knowledge of Judaism. 'Tain't just a book getting handed down. It's a system. If I use my microwave to heat up food and my partner uses it to cook something from scratch, it's still the same microwave.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:starLisa said: Do tell. If I tell my daughter (who is 5) that she has to clean her room, she can't opt out of it. Is that unjust? No. I'm her Mom. I have that appropriate authority, and it's based on a lot of things. Among them are the fact that she wouldn't exist had it not been for me. She would not have a roof over her head or food to eat if it were not for me. That room I want her to clean? That's mine. I bought it and gave it to her for her use, but it's still mine. Also, I know things that she doesn't know. I understand why it's proper for her to clean her room, even if she doesn't quite grasp it herself yet.
I am curious. What do you believe the outcome would be if the only instructions you gave your daughter were purportedly 5000+ years old, though for some reason the originals were discarded and there were no way to really determine if that the instructions she was to follow had any relation to those she was originally given?
Gosh. I've never heard that before. Your razor logic has convinced me.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, where do you get "the originals were discarded"? What "originals" are you talking about? Are you supposing that the Pentateuch is all we claim to have been given at Sinai?
quote:Originally posted by Ser Bronn Stone: And if those instructions were embedded in a mish-mash of folktale, allegory, seemingly arbitrary and pointless laws when not outright contradiction?
There's a thread called "Torah 101". Your assignment is to go and read it and come back with questions on anything you don't understand.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As entertaining as sarcasm can be, I would like to ask that folks tone it down a HUGE notch. First off, there are plenty of other places on the web where this kind of talking at each other is the norm, rather than the much regretted exception.
Here, we normally don't have it.
And it's because, normally, people try very hard to maintain a level of politeness not found elsewhere.
Maybe the people who want this kind of nasty back and forth in their "discussions" could agree to take it elsewhere? Maybe over to Ornery if you want to do it in the confines of an OSC-sponsored site.
It's up to you. The rest of the people here can probably just stay out the thread, but there's absolutely no reason for this. It isn't fun, or funny, or interesting, except in the sense that burning houses and car crashes have.
It happens to most of us, eventually, on topics we care about. But, seriously, enough already.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bob, you're right and I'm sorry. I responded to rudeness with rudeness, and I should have used more restraint.
I will ask King of Men to stop referring to me as "comrade starLisa", as I find it offensive. If he continues it, I'll escalate my request to the moderator.
And Rakeesh, I hope you're wrong. If I can take Bob's words to heart, hopefully others can as well.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: KoM, for this discussion the validity of any religion is not important. The validity of peoples beliefs is. starLisa has gone out on a limb by presenting her faith in a straightforward, no holds bar format.
And I expressed my beliefs in a straightforwards, no-holds-barred format, and people jumped all over me.
Also, I do not understand how the validity of a religion is irrelevant to the validity of belief in it. Does a false belief become suddenly valid just because you stick the label 'religion' on it?
quote:The main defense that certain Christian groups use for pushing closer ties between church and state is that they are being beaten down by overzealous evangelical atheists. That seems to be you, KoM.
So what you are saying is that, because the bad guys are worried they are losing, they should be left alone?
quote:Correct. And the fact that it appears to be different to you only reflects the extent of your knowledge of Judaism. 'Tain't just a book getting handed down. It's a system. If I use my microwave to heat up food and my partner uses it to cook something from scratch, it's still the same microwave.
I did specify 'mainstream'. I seem to recall that you observe your faith rather differently from the other Jews on this forum; it follows that either your observance, or theirs, is different from the original. Also, I don't recall if you were there for the discussion some weeks ago about Asherah, but Judaism seems to have lost a mother goddess somewhere along the way.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I gotta say, I don't see that KoM has been any more rude or inappropriate than starLisa has been, if not in this thread than in others over the weekend. And yes, she's been called on it, same as he has been numerous times. I'd imagine neither of them is too likely to change their rather abrasive posting styles any time soon, as they've both stated in the past that they enjoy arguing this way.
Personally, my response has become that any post where the level of vitriol is higher than my tolerance level, I don't consider a valid part of the conversation. If this sort of post annoys you, you might want to consider doing the same.
posted
You recall incorrectly. And no, I didn't see a discussion on Asherah, and such tree worship was never a part of Judaism. We never had more than the One God.
And I have to repeat my statement that you don't know enough about Judaism to make a valid judgement of it. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but uninformed opinions are not deserving of respect. Certainly not when informed opinions are around.
I don't say this as an attack. I can say that I disagree with the common interpretation of the redshift, but my knowledge of physics and astronomy isn't sufficient for it to be of very much value. Oh, I could give some arguments, and they may even be valid. But the moment someone who really knows the material walks in, he's either going to label what I've said a no-brainer or a no-brains, and all my wanting him to be wrong isn't going to matter.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Personally, my response has become that any post where the level of vitriol is higher than my tolerance level, I don't consider a valid part of the conversation.
AMEN!
There are some posts that are so obnoxious that my only civil response is to ignore it. Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a classification system: Hatrack and Idiot. The nasty, vitriolic posts go in the Idiot column, and their presense is the price we pay for the Hatrack column.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but uninformed opinions are not deserving of respect.
True. But even informed opinions can be misguided, and it is for that reason I wasn't offended by KoM's comment about religion resulting from an over-active imagination. No matter how much I don't like that idea, I can't argue that it's entirely possible that he may be right, thus his "uninformed" opinions are at least somewhat valid.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
KoM, I didn't read the posts about Asherah, but Judaism definately spoke against anyone who worshipped the tree poles. Check Deuteronomy 12 for more information about this.
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love it when people are completely incapable of considering a point of view other than their own. It makes me feel better about myself.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but uninformed opinions are not deserving of respect.
True. But even informed opinions can be misguided, and it is for that reason I wasn't offended by KoM's comment about religion resulting from an over-active imagination. No matter how much I don't like that idea, I can't argue that it's entirely possible that he may be right, thus his "uninformed" opinions are at least somewhat valid.
I was speaking to the specific of him making statements about Judaism without possessing the requisite knowledge. He can't claim that there are contradictions if he doesn't even know what Judaism says or how it works. That just doesn't make sense.
If he wants to trumpet his atheism, that's fine. But when he gets specific about something where his knowledge isn't sufficient for his opinions to mean anything, I'll call him on it.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Add me to the list of religious people who think that religion should be separate from government. Including what some people think is "trivial". It does not seem trivial to those "on the outside". In this country, there shouldn't be an outside.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:In this country, there shouldn't be an outside.
I believe that it is practically impossible for there to not be an outside whenever dealing with three or more people.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: posted October 24, 2005 12:51 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In this country, there shouldn't be an outside. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe that it is practically impossible for there to not be an outside whenever dealing with three or more people.
Okay. In this country, there shouldn't be a governmentally recogized "outside'. Better?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It may be practically impossible for there to not be an outside, but a community can strive to be inclusive or exclusive. A democratic society must strive toward being inclusive or it will inevitably become oppressive.
[ October 24, 2005, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
The argument about the separation of Church and State is what this thread was originally about. What is important in that argument is not how logically valid any one religion is. What is important is the fact that there are people who believe in there religion, and believe in it with deep, unyielding, heart felt devotion.
The secret to keeping Church and State separate is not by destroying all churches. All that attacks like that due is drum up support for the people being attacked.
quote:So what you are saying is that, because the bad guys are worried they are losing, they should be left alone?
When did they become bad guys?
When did belief in God become the sin?
They say, hate the sin but not the sinner. You are saying that they are bad guys and need to be unconverted.
Like you, I am not church goer. However I have met many people who are. They are not bad people. Sure there are a few who grab the headlines by doing stupid things, or saying stupid things, or just confusing themselves with the diety they are supposed to be worshiping.
However it is the majority of good people that you will scare with your rants and your insults, into thinning the gap between church and state.
The closest I come to converting has been not by Christians ranting and threatening me with damnation, but by Christians who lead a good and quiet and peaceful life. I see the good people that they are and want to emulate them.
Then I see the same goodness in agnostics, Jews, Muslims and others from around the world.
If you want to get people to accept logica agnosticism instead of what you believe is a dangerous fantasy, then you have to demonstrate to them that people who do so are not bitter, loud, and rude.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that if we, the people of various religions, nations and traditions, are going to live together in a pluralistic way we're going to have to agree on some celebrations we can all join in on (in addition to our religious/traditional celebrations).
Of course, no one's ever going to legislate this kind of thing. It's just going to happen over two hundred years or so.
posted
starLisa, I for one appreciate your words after my last post.
I'm not reading the rest of the new posts here, for a variety of reasons, but I do thank you for that post.
I also am extremely uncomfortable with the realization that my most recent 5 posts or so have been of a scolding nature. I'm going to stop it now. I figure people don't need me contstantly telling them how to act, and I don't want to become a Hatrack nanny (or ninny, for that matter).
I need to remember that my enjoyment of a thread (or lack thereof) is not the sole determinant of its worth to others.
Have fun, y'all.
I'm paddling out to catch a wave of fluff.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: You recall incorrectly. And no, I didn't see a discussion on Asherah, and such tree worship was never a part of Judaism. We never had more than the One God.
How do you know? Granted that the books which come down to us represent Asherah as a heresy, it's worth noting that they were written by the victors. Still, from the amount of groves that were chopped down, it seems clear that Asherah worship was moderately widespread. If the priests of Yahweh were indeed so righteous and powerful, you would think they would have smashed such a danger to their peoples' souls long before it could grow so poewrful. Moreover, everybody else had a mother goddess; why should the Jews be any different?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
