|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,236 Likes: 15
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
|
OP
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,236 Likes: 15 |
So what does everyone think of religious figures such as the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and Pat Robertson running for public office?
Is this the right board for this question?
"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?" [center] ![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/blogban3.jpg) [/center] [center] ![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/jlamiska.jpg) [/center]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
|
|
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,236 Likes: 15
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
|
|
OP
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,236 Likes: 15 |
I hope nobody is moving threads...
"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?" [center] [/center] [center] [/center]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
|
|
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
I think that both Robertson and Jackson have a flawed take on religion. Not just religion as a philosophy, but also the religion of Christianity. And the way they incorporate that flawed take into politics is what makes them such poor political figures as well as preachers.
Last edited by Pariah; 2006-06-16 1:24 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
|
|
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,305
kung-fu treachery 5000+ posts
|
|
kung-fu treachery 5000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,305 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
MisterJLA said:
I hope nobody is moving threads...
You should make sure that teh person movieng them isn't hadicapped or ill, otherwise you're complaints will be looked apon with scorn from the righteous among us... Just as Peej ;p
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
I was villified. without lube. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Since "religion" is one forum, and "politics" another, maybe I should move half the thread to one forum and leave half here? Perhaps that would count as a separation of church and state.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,236 Likes: 15
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
|
|
OP
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,236 Likes: 15 |
"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?" [center] [/center] [center] [/center]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Is there a thread where we can bitch about what a stupid idea dividing Deep Thought was or is this it?
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Is there a thread where we can bitch about what a stupid idea dividing Deep Thought was or is this it?
The bitching thread is here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Let me ask: have politics ever been separate from religion?
The earliest civilizations tended to have religious edicts as their basic code of laws.
Many early religious laws were based, at least in part, on public policy grounds (ex: not eating pork to avoid trichinosis).
Most laws are based on a moral or philosophical underpinning. In turn, the vast majority of people get their moral or philosophical views from religion.
Is this all a big smoke screen? Is the "separation of church and state" merely a (sometimes) comforting illusion?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
I kinda like being able to discuss religeon in the other forum w/out it becoming a debate over the "Christian Right" and Bush in general.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Yeah, assuming certain people can do that...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
|
|
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Let me ask: have politics ever been separate from religion?
The earliest civilizations tended to have religious edicts as their basic code of laws.
Many early religious laws were based, at least in part, on public policy grounds (ex: not eating pork to avoid trichinosis).
Most laws are based on a moral or philosophical underpinning. In turn, the vast majority of people get their moral or philosophical views from religion.
Is this all a big smoke screen? Is the "separation of church and state" merely a (sometimes) comforting illusion?
It is an illusion. Bush caters (Panders) to the religious right so he can get re elected. He is one of them (One of us now, gooble gobble) and the seperation of church and state - especially with Bush pushing to make Gay Marriage unconstitutional... is an illusion.
And that is all a distraction in it's own way..keep people focused on this...appeal to their bigotry....while using key words like FAMILY VALUES, SAVE THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE, etc, etc, ad nausem.
It's like a flea circus...the guy will TELL you the fleas are their performing, though all you see is tiny little swings moving about..but there are no fleas,....but you are supposed to think you see them...so, you are SUPPOSED to think you can see a seperation of church and state.
"I offer you a Vulcan prayer, Mr Suder. May your death bring you the peace you never found in life." - Tuvok. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
No, you miss my point.
Regardless of who is in office...
regardless of the government...
regardless of whether its a "liberal" idea or "conservative" idea...
...is there really any separation between politics and religion?
After all...
Politics and government are nothing but the enactment, interpretation and enforcement of laws.
Laws are based on morality.
Morality is tied to religion.
Even so-called "liberal" policies are based on religious tenets such as charity, are they not?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
No, you miss my point.
Regardless of who is in office...
regardless of the government...
regardless of whether its a "liberal" idea or "conservative" idea...
...is there really any separation between politics and religion?
A person's political views are probably heavily influenced by their religion(or lack thereof), and, historically, religion has been heavily influenced by politics.
I think the "separation of church and state" has to do with action, though, not thought.
Quote:
Even so-called "liberal" policies are based on religious tenets such as charity, are they not?
Reinforced by, perhaps. Not "based on".
MisterJLA is RACKing awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
|
|
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
No, you miss my point.
Regardless of who is in office...
regardless of the government...
regardless of whether its a "liberal" idea or "conservative" idea...
...is there really any separation between politics and religion?
After all...
Politics and government are nothing but the enactment, interpretation and enforcement of laws.
Laws are based on morality.
Morality is tied to religion.
Even so-called "liberal" policies are based on religious tenets such as charity, are they not?
Ouch, sorry for my missing the point...but, based on what you just posted, if religion has rules for behavoir, and politics makes and enforces laws on behavoir...then..
I would say the two are definitely bound together, much like the nerves and muscles in the body are connected, thus enabling movement in living creatures.
Religion and politics both have rules, and where religion makes the rules, politics makes similar rules based on these codes for human behavoir, and enforces them.
In this way is human behavoir kept in check, at least as much as it can be.....
"I offer you a Vulcan prayer, Mr Suder. May your death bring you the peace you never found in life." - Tuvok.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,816 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,816 Likes: 41 |
The true seperation happens where a religion's dogma isn't incorporated into our nation's laws. Such as we're not forced to observe religous holidays, women can wear pants & us gay boys are not jailed for laying with another man.
And of course no religion acts as a branch of our government.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
The true seperation happens where a religion's dogma isn't incorporated into our nation's laws. Such as we're not forced to observe religous holidays, women can wear pants & us gay boys are not jailed for laying with another man.
And of course no religion acts as a branch of our government.
What do you mean by 'forced to observe' religious holidays?
I think I saw a woman wearing pants just the other day. Could be wrong though.
Who went to jail for being gay again?
I'm not sure what country you live in, but I feel sorry for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,816 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,816 Likes: 41 |
Those were examples that I thought showed that there was true seperation of religion & state here in America. As you noted, those things are not illegal.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
The true seperation happens where a religion's dogma isn't incorporated into our nation's laws.
Are you sure it isn't?
For example, the Judeo-Christian bible says "Thou Shalt Not Kill." Our nation's laws say murder is illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
The true seperation happens where a religion's dogma isn't incorporated into our nation's laws.
Are sure it isn't?
For example, the Judeo-Christian bible says "Thou Shalt Not Kill." Our nation's laws say murder is illegal.
"Are sure it isn't?" Is that lawyer talk?
Every society has been against murder and theft. That's simply maintaining order.
Yes, there are exceptions but its pretty much a common rule.
Murder/theft bans are not dogma.
However eating pork, using condoms, taking the lords name in vain, false idols, etc is dogma.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Every society has been against murder and theft. That's simply maintaining order.
Yes, there are exceptions but its pretty much a common rule.
r3x refutiating his own point = Priceless
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Every society has been against murder and theft. That's simply maintaining order.
Yes, there are exceptions but its pretty much a common rule.
r3x refutiating his own point = Priceless
Every society has been against murder, and every society has had its own exceptions to the rule. Abortion in the middle ages would be seen as murder, but their witch testing would be seen by us as murder.
You're right that my statement was flawed. I typed it thinking it would be read by adults with some level of reading comprehension. I'm sorry for that.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Every society has been against murder, and every society has had its own exceptions to the rule. Abortion in the middle ages would be seen as murder, but their witch testing would be seen by us as murder.
Which is precisely not the context you used to express conjunction between the shunning of murder and the very breakdown of this rule.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,816 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,816 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
The true seperation happens where a religion's dogma isn't incorporated into our nation's laws.
Are sure it isn't?
For example, the Judeo-Christian bible says "Thou Shalt Not Kill." Our nation's laws say murder is illegal.
"Are sure it isn't?" Is that lawyer talk?
Every society has been against murder and theft. That's simply maintaining order.
Yes, there are exceptions but its pretty much a common rule.
Murder/theft bans are not dogma.
However eating pork, using condoms, taking the lords name in vain, false idols, etc is dogma.
Yes, by dogma I'm referring to those rules that one religion may consider a sin but another wouldn't. They tend to be those rules that have no significance outside of that religion.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
However, that "dogma" is in the same pursuit of what our current laws are reaching toward: An essentially healthy lifestyle that would contribute to society as a whole when practiced by the individual citizens.
In comparison to the Ten Commandments (the cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian philosophy) and our current laws, are you really gonna say they're that far off?
Last edited by Pariah; 2006-06-20 3:14 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
However eating pork, using condoms...
Actually, at the time of the events in the bible, eating of pork was prohibited on solid public policy/health grounds. At the time people who ate pork were likely to get trichinosis.
Similarly, using condoms prevented pregnancy, which lessened the population. At the time, public policy favored expanding the population for, among other purposes, the military.
So, again, the "religious" law and the "secular" law went hand in hand.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
However eating pork, using condoms...
Actually, at the time of the events in the bible, eating of pork was prohibited on solid public policy/health grounds. At the time people who ate pork were likely to get trichinosis.
Similarly, using condoms prevented pregnancy, which lessened the population. At the time, public policy favored expanding the population for, among other purposes, the military.
So, again, the "religious" law and the "secular" law went hand in hand.
Your points are built on falsehood, G-man. Everyone who ate pork did not get trichonosis. Only the Jews forbade it. If it was such a succesfull public health policy then why have the Jews never had thriving population growth? The Chinese, large consumers of pork on the other hand, have by far the largest population, even without the sanitation methods introduced in the last 100 years.
Condoms were not made to be a contraceptive. They were invented in the 1700s to prevent the spread of syphillus. They originally were made of sheeps intestines. Just like a sausage casing! Naturalamb was sold until at least the 1980s.
What I'm saying, G-man, is you're completely full of shit!
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Your points are built on falsehood, G-man. Everyone who ate pork did not get trichonosis. Only the Jews forbade it. If it was such a succesfull public health policy then why have the Jews never had thriving population growth?
Are you really so stupid? Pigs, among other fecal-eaters/carnivores, were considered "unclean", according to the Bible, because they were inconsumable. The animals that weren't considered unclean were herbivorous. Are you seeing a pattern yet? When humans eat other omnivores/carnivores, they get sick. It doesn't take a genius to realize this. Before the Jews developed the concept of Kosher food, they didn't have a way of cleaning the pork properly. This is a known fact among secular sources everywhere. Other civilizations, during the time Judea was in existence, got sick from eating pork--I don't understand how you don't know that.
What other civilizations during the existence of Judea are you comparing the Jews' to exactly?
Quote:
The Chinese, large consumers of pork on the other hand, have by far the largest population, even without the sanitation methods introduced in the last 100 years.
Large population huh? Is it a healthy population? No.
Also: Please pull up a citation that proves they don't clean their meat.
Quote:
Condoms were not made to be a contraceptive. They were invented in the 1700s to prevent the spread of syphillus. They originally were made of sheeps intestines.
First of all: It was sheep's bladder.
Second of all: The first condom's were used in 1200 BC, not 1700 AD.
Third of all: When they were used in the 1700s, it was, in fact, for the sake of not producing children. Keeping from getting an infection was also a reason, but because the animal guts weren't that healthy to use, people still got sick. People still used them anyway. If they entire point of using them was to stop infection, then they would have stopped using them after the nobles (the only people who could afford them) were getting infections.
About the only thing you got right is that the first condoms weren't used for overtly sexual purposes. Previously, they acted as kind of pseudo-codpieces. However, the first Egyptian and Aborigeny(sp) designs had no relation to the European ones.
Last edited by Pariah; 2006-06-20 4:35 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Your points are built on falsehood, G-man. Everyone who ate pork did not get trichonosis. Only the Jews forbade it. If it was such a succesfull public health policy then why have the Jews never had thriving population growth?
Are you really so stupid? Pigs, among other fecal-eaters/carnivores, were considered "unclean", according to the Bible, because they were inconsumable. The animals that weren't considered unclean were herbivorous. Are you seeing a pattern yet? When humans eat other omnivores/carnivores, they get sick. It doesn't take a genius to realize this. Before the Jews developed the concept of Kosher food, they didn't have a way of cleaning the pork properly. This is a known fact among secular sources everywhere. Other civilizations, during the time Judea was in existence, got sick from eating pork--I don't understand how you don't know that.
Well, everyone else in the world ate pork. Trichinosis is a consequence of under cooking. So don't order the pork chops rare, meathead.
If one uses population growth as a measure of the success of an ethnic group, the Jews are not very succesfull, experiencing at best an arithmatic growth rate while those of their European and Asian cousins have been exponential. Biologically, Jews are not very succesful.
What other civilizations during the existence of Judea are you comparing the Jews' to exactly?
Quote:
The Chinese, large consumers of pork on the other hand, have by far the largest population, even without the sanitation methods introduced in the last 100 years.
Large population huh? Is it a healthy population? No.
Also: Please pull up a citation that proves they don't clean their meat.
See the above.
Quote:
Condoms were not made to be a contraceptive. They were invented in the 1700s to prevent the spread of syphillus. They originally were made of sheeps intestines.
First of all: It was sheep's bladder.
Second of all: The first condom's were used in 1200 BC, not 1700 AD.
Third of all: When they were used in the 1700s, it was, in fact, for the sake of not producing children. Keeping from getting an infection was also a reason, but because the animal guts weren't that healthy to use, people still got sick. People still used them anyway. If they entire point of using them was to stop infection, then they would have stopped using them after the nobles (the only people who could afford them) were getting infections.
About the only thing you got right is that the first condoms weren't used for overtly sexual purposes. Previously, they acted as kind of pseudo-codpieces. However, the first Egyptian and Aborigeny(sp) designs had no relation to the European ones.
I'm sorry but both of us are a little off the mark. Indeed the Egyptians did use condoms made of strips of lenin for the prevention of infection. There is evidence that the Romans used them in some small way as well, probably to prevent Papal bastards!
They came into more popular use in the 1700s and were quite expensive and made of animal intestines. Not only did my intestine statement make a better metaphor, it was also true!
A sock for Pariah's cock
Source Avert
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Your points are built on falsehood, G-man. Everyone who ate pork did not get trichonosis. Only the Jews forbade it.
And Muslims. Meaning that two of the dominent religions of the world at the time.
A lengthier explanation of the fact that the religious prohibition on pork may be grounded in public policy can be found here.
As for your claim that "everyone who ate pork did not get trichinosis", I'm not sure how that is relevant.
Typically, health rules are not based on 100% correlations even today, but on chance or liklihood. Therefore, if the Jews and Muslims noticed that pork was making their people sick, they had reason to adopt a "better safe than sorry" approach no different than we do today.
And, as for the condoms, my point was less about that specific form of birth control and the idea that there could very easily be a secular, as opposed to religious, reason for a policy against any form of birth control.
|
|
|
|
|
