The Never Ending Pool

raggedclown wrote:

QUOTE:
It's indecent, to put it mildly, for Huckabee to suggest that the innocent children were massacred because some people in America are using contraceptives or aborting foetuses (I have never heard of "abortion pills" anyway).

Remember RU486? Anyhow, it's obvious that a country reaps what it sows, and the principle holds true whether you believe in God or not. The problem with the Religious Right is that the only wrongdoing, selfishness, and disobedience to God that it's willing to acknowledge is the other side's. Legalized abortion hasn't led to mass murders. A tendentious, prideful and resentful reading of the 2nd Amendment has.

QUOTE:
But the Declaration is beautifully clear and simple here, and this is why it is completely independent of the man who wrote it. Those five words meant that the freeing of the slaves and equal civil rights for all were inevitable in the United States, though of course, it took nearly 200 years for those words to become a reality.

It's never inevitable that people will live up to their principles, but the principle that all men are created equal arose from and could only have arisen from "Love your neighbor as yourself" and "God so loved the world," etc.

QUOTE:
First of all, cruelty to children is something the Old Testament records, not that God endorses

QUOTE:
Unless you are an Amalekite, of course.

Thomas Jefferson was cruel to his slaves, selling off members of families, and having young teen boys whipped. Centuries early, the Israelites were even crueler to their enemies. It can take a long time for the full outworking of one's principles, and it took God a long time to get through to the hardheaded human race.

saut de basque wrote:

QUOTE:

Thomas Jefferson was cruel to his slaves, selling off members of families, and having young teen boys whipped. Centuries early, the Israelites were even crueler to their enemies. It can take a long time for the full outworking of one's principles, and it took God a long time to get through to the hardheaded human race.

This seems like an inappropriate time to interject with something I've been thinking about.

Stephen Hawking writes in a chapter called "The Origin & Fate of the Universe."

in a discussion of something called "the weak anthropic principle"

"one example of the weak anthropic principle is to "explain" why the big bang theory occurred about ten thousand million years ago. -It takes that long for life to evolve."

My point here would be,(besides the fact that it's questionable whether human life has evolved at this point given the circumstance, they still fall far behind dolphins and other loving creatures)

The great physicist believes that an extremely unique yet chaotic occurrence represents a finely
ordered coincidence of evolution, that in it's very uniqueness and intensely condition heavy circumstance seems to suggest to me a divine inspiration.

The question lie's in one's understanding or interpretation of the expression of the divine.

Is it possible,
that like us, the scientists, the creative design inspired nature of our own minds, have developed out of the inspiration of something like a universally inspiring being, who's own mind had the ability to set the stage,

with that "critical rate of expansion"

that defines our own universe, and with the fore thought that once that lengthy evolutionary process had occurred, the divinely inspired spirit or soul of sentient beings might begin to migrate to that life form or forms that we now consider our natural existence?

The clock that sets itself.
That's what one describes as the universe with no beginning.

The beginning can be determined to be a very small and precise instant, although it cannot be found by scientists.

The end cannot be described as either according to speculation.

It may take a long time for us all to remember the soul of divine inspiration that
moves through us, that was the initial intention of such a creator, and in that confusion,
"evil intentions" or more simply put "ill-intentions" may occur. And the living breathing
expression of the divine in children and other creatures will be hanging in the balance of
that suffering existence.

2
E=MC

Existence equals Mind times a constant squared

Love is that constant, but it must be squared.
It must be shared by a number equal to itself.

Love that's shared is squared.

and this one's for you Jack,
love to the power of two equals me and you!

JRCQED

here's a link that might help ease the pain of world news networks. http://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/

And some of you thought that math is not the universal language.

QUOTE:
raggedclown wrote:
The attack of the major religions on gays and lesbians does not stop for Christmas.

I knew there was a reason I stayed out of this thread !

They’ll stone ya just like they said they would !

QUOTE:
Is it possible,
that like us, the scientists, the creative design inspired nature of our own minds, have developed out of the inspiration of something like a universally inspiring being, who's own mind had the ability to set the stage,

I hate this warm blubbery female nonsense. You can't impose your own reality on the universe merely by spouting gooey fact-free abstract formulae that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

angelina wrote:

QUOTE:
My point here would be,(besides the fact that it's questionable whether human life has evolved at this point given the circumstance, they still fall far behind dolphins and other loving creatures)

Dolphins can be quite violent, they're known to bludgeon porpoises, each other, etc.

QUOTE:
E=MC2

Existence equals Mind times a constant squared

Love is that constant, but it must be squared.
It must be shared by a number equal to itself.

Love that's shared is squared.

Hoo boy...

angelina wrote:

QUOTE:
Love that's shared is squared.

I like that formulation!

I guess the idea that a concept like
"the critical rate of expansion"

which in my opinion provides concrete evidence that
our universe is and was created by an intelligient consciousness
seems to have escaped the thread bearers because of a little female
expression of truth.

I mean no matter how you slice it, the thing that gives life
on this earth is the magnetic attraction of the species.

The idea that negative action as an earthly property doesn't exist,
is not my point.

I guess the need to look upon the human race as "only good"
or the need to believe in the possibility of a human race that doesn't
have a destructive nature is something that religion is trying to define a path toward.
The idea that a place exists like heaven, or hell where people are punished
or rewarded for their actions in life is ludicrous.
the evolution of soul is something we should pay a little more attention to.
To simply rely upon an instruction manual from thousands of years ago is not enough
anymore. It's one of the places to go for understanding, but the answers within
are just as important, if your soul is going to find a way to cope with the pain
and the suffering of the physical condition of this life and the next, it's going to have to accept that there is only one thing that carries it forward and that is the love
that has been shared between it and others like it, no matter the form, whether it's
person to person, person to plant, person to pet, scientist to religious fanatic,
gooey female to prickly male, it is the only thing that's going to carry you forward in your evolution as a spiritual entity.

All the egotistical understanding, all the hatred, anger, jealousy, false pride,
all the ignorance we can muster as a species is not going to solve the questions of the soul.
I believe in needing to bear witness to the violence, as indicated by the horrifying images
posted and discussed in this blog recently, but it is still important to bear witness to
the hint of intolerance portrayed even still by people who believe in their own ability to do just the opposite. My femaleness is still up on trial here, and I'm kind of disappointed in that.

Even if it is only a metaphysical form of stoning.

Peace

angelina wrote:

QUOTE:
To simply rely upon an instruction manual from thousands of years ago is not enough
anymore. It's one of the places to go for understanding, but the answers within
are just as important,

Why would the two necessarily be in conflict?

[quote]it is still important to bear witness to the hint of intolerance portrayed even still by people who believe in their own ability to do just the opposite./quote]
The thing is, that everyone's naturally intolerant. Everyone. So we all have to fight it in ourselves. As Ross Douthat writes in the NY Times.

QUOTE:
Our society is divided between an ascendant center-left that’s far too confident in its own rigor and righteousness and a conservatism that’s marched into an ideological cul-de-sac and is currently battering its head against the wall.

"far too confident in its own rigor and righteousness" - intolerance by people who believe in their own ability to do just the opposite.

QUOTE:
As Ross Douthat writes in the NY Times. who believe in their own ability to do just the opposite./quote]

"a conservatism that’s marched into an ideological cul-de-sac and is currently battering its head against the wall.

I love this metaphor.

I don't think there is a conflict between a modern search for truth and any of the true meanings behind religious beliefs.
But I guess my feeling is that one can't just believe in the rule of law, religious or otherwise,
and not look into their own conscience to ask the question, is it righteous?


I think the answer to the question,
Is religion a force for good in the world?
is this, nothing is a "force" for good in the world,
Except for the "force" of our naturally creative and positive intentions.

The need to find that within yourself, is pretty much the only reason you're here.
All the rest is man made. And although it can be a lot of fun to be human,
it's also a living hell for some people, and it could be different.

Anyway, here's a line from a classic Dylan song:

"Strange how people who suffer together
have stronger connections than people who are most content
I don’t have any regrets, they can talk about me plenty when I’m gone
You always said people don’t do what they believe in,
they just do what’s most convenient, then they repent
And I always said, “Hang on to me, baby, and let’s hope that the roof stays on”

Read more: http://www.bobdylan.com/us#ixzz2FzLRVAk0

Thank you, Angelina. "Nature brings to every time and season some beauties of its own" Charles Dickens
http://www.lebret-irfed.org/spip.php?article512
Religions do not only play a role in the relations between humanity and nature, but also . . .

Cardinal Bernard Law kisses the pope's hand at a weekly general audience in St Peter's Square at the Vatican. Law is the only bishop to resign over the child sex abuse scandal that the Church covered up for as long as it humanly could. He was immediately given a plum job in Rome (from which he resigned last year at the age of 80).



Pope greets the Ugandan speaker of parliament, granting her a personal audience and a blessing in the week she promised to pass the "kill the gays" bill before Christmas "as a Christmas present to the Ugandan people."



The Pope used his own Christmas message to demonize gays and lesbians and transgender people:

QUOTE:
Pope Benedict used his annual Christmas message to denounce gay marriage, saying that it destroyed the “essence of the human creature.”

In one of his most important speeches of the year, the Pope stressed that a person’s gender identity is God-given and unchangeable. As a result, he sees gay marriage as a “manipulation of nature.”

"People dispute the idea that they have a nature, given to them by their bodily identity, that serves as a defining element of the human being," he said at the Vatican on Friday. "They deny their nature and decide that it is not something previously given to them, but that they make it for themselves."

The Pope has said that gay marriage, like abortion and euthanasia, is a threat to world peace.

A biology lesson from a man who has never studied science, followed by a libel against millions of people. Happy new year to you too, Ratzinger.

A couple of points, ragged. I was struck by your recent comment that you still don't speak to a man who said something offensive after 9/11. Christianity places an extremely high value on forgiveness and acceptance. Sinners, even the worst of sinners, are to be loved and accepted in the Church because they are loved and accepted by God. That doesn't mean Law should have got that job, or that the Pope shouldn't condemn that proposed Ugandan bill. The symbolism of the Pope's publicly greeting the Ugandan woman stinks, I'll grant you, because it suggests that he doesn't recognize the evil of her proposition. But as individuals, she and Law nevertheless have immeasurable dignity and value before God, and nothing they can do can lessen that. God loves us all, regardless of our merits.

Also, the Pope, whose familiarity with science is, I'll wager, much greater than you allow, is talking theology, not biology. We are creatures - i.e., we aren't the accidental, almost incidental, products of unguided evolution, but rather we were created. And since we were created, we have a nature. Some things are natural, and others are not. I'm not going to rehearse the natural law arguments against homosexuality, and I will remind you that I believe God is pleased with monogamous homosexuality, but the Pope's view of homosexuality proceeds logically from that core belief. And any behavior contrary to nature is by definition a threat to a healthy human society.

raggedclown wrote:

QUOTE:
The Pope used his own Christmas message to demonize gays and lesbians and transgender people:

I knew there was a reason I stayed out of this thread !

Here is an interesting and amusing article by Lebanese writer Joumana Haddad that was published in Now.Lebanon in December last year. It is written from a middle-eastern perpective but nonetheless valid for us too. :

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/commentaryanalysis/all_day_they_dream_about_sex

QUOTE:

"Nothing optional - from homosexuality to adultery - is ever made punishable unless those who do the prohibiting (and exact the fierce punishment) have a repressed desire to participate"- Christopher Hitchens

[...]

It makes you wonder, though: What's the story with religion and sex, and why are all these religious leaders obsessed with the way we use our private parts? We are surrounded by phony puritans, from the late Osama bin Laden and his alleged stack of porn, to the saga of homosexual and pedophile priests around the world. Well, it can all be summed up in one word: control.

I was reminded of this issue when a dear friend of mine, who is about to get married, told me that he went to a religious marital consultation with his fiancée. He admitted he couldn't get over his shock when the priest bluntly told them that position 69 is a sin, and that he and his wife should always pray before they make love. I almost burst out laughing, but the friend in question - a good Christian - was devastated. Can you imagine having to do the sign of the cross and perform a prayer before having sex? A prayer for what? A long-lasting erection? Talk about perversion!

[...]

Christians are indoctrinated to believe sex is evil: You can have it, but only with the man (married, of course) on top of the wife (obedient and modest), and only for the purpose of creating children. Everything else is a wicked sin that will send you directly to hell.

[...]

There is no doubt about it: Religious fundamentalists think with their dicks. One final vivid proof of that is the hilarious fatwa disallowing women from eating phallic-shaped foods like cucumbers, bananas and carrots, because "touching or consuming those are bound to turn women on and make them engage in sinful fantasies."

What's next? Avoiding oranges and apples because they could remind women of balls?

On second thought, no danger there; those men don't have any.