Random Politics & Religion #09 |
||
Random Politics & Religion #09
Also, Booth apparently didn't hurt his leg in the jump, he hurt it when his horse fell on him during the escape.
Anna Ruthven said: » Also, Booth apparently didn't hurt his leg in the jump, he hurt it when his horse fell on him during the escape. it quit bothering him a couple weeks later Anna Ruthven said: » Also, Booth apparently didn't hurt his leg in the jump, he hurt it when his horse fell on him during the escape. Of course he wasn't hurt during the jump itself, there was a cart of hay down there. Shiva.Nikolce said: » Well if you would have just taken your nap first too you wouldn't be in such a hurry for her to answer so you can get to yours! Asura.Kingnobody said: » Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Not giving equal rights is discrimination. It as simple as that, your christian values doesn't give you the right to discriminate against other people. Last I saw, there are more Christians than gay people. Should we infringe and discriminate against a majority to satisfy a minority? Fishing in XIV, you will have to wait.
Garuda.Chanti said: » Fishing in XIV, you will have to wait. Shiva.Nikolce said: » Quote: The 1969 Roman Catholic calendar revision did not remove Nicholas when forty saints were taken off. Commemoration of ninety other saints, including Nicholas, was made optional. This means celebration of their feast days is not required for faithful Roman Catholics. Nicholas, with all the saints in this group, is still recognized as a real saint in the Roman Catholic Church. It was even stressed that there is no doubt regarding Nicholas' authenticity. I am not ofetn wrong. Remember this. There will be a test on it later. Offline
Posts: 753
Its pretty obvious to me that he was taking the piss and being sarcastic - since all those regimes were secular and in his previous sentence he was highlighting how everything in the middle east is blamed on religion.
maldini said: » Its pretty obvious to me that he was taking the piss and being sarcastic - since all those regimes were secular and in his previous sentence he was highlighting how everything in the middle east is blamed on religion. Sorry, I guess I should have stipulated I wasn't necessarily being sarcastic myself. I was having a hard time figuring out if he was, because it's the internet and I've learned not to assume. Anyhow. Religion itself has never been the problem because it's just a bunch of ideas about how to act and behave and which earthly men to give your money and devotion pretending they're some sort of earthly representative of your god(s). The problem is religious people going to extremes against people who don't agree with them. Which is hardly exclusive to religious cults, but not being exclusive to something doesn't mean that something isn't still a major problem. But again, this speaks to my bigger problem with religion in general, not just the Islamic faith and not just in the Middle East. Shiva.Nikolce said: » I agree that people have the right to live according to whatever crazy rules they feel like making up for themselves. If they want to be level five vegans and not eat anything that casts a shadow.. that's great. However. The moment they try to force anyone else to live under the same rules is where we run into problems. As an example, even now in 2016 we have idiots that refuse medical care for their own dying children because of their "religious" beliefs. We have people that believe they should be allowed to let their children dance around with poisonous snakes and drink diluted poisons to prove their faith in god. Once you create an exemption for idiotic behavior humans will almost instinctively race to test the very limits of idiocy. Ignoring how you readily displayed a form of "begging the question" fallacy (in your follow-up to Ravael too), how do you propose we deal with the bolded? You simply force them to live by your rules, because your rules are right (ergo "the reasonable ones"). How do you establish they're right? Through discourse. Eventually, some PoV will prevail and the other won't. Ramyrez said: » Are you being serious right now? Garuda.Chanti said: » Going to call BS on this one. Ragnarok.Zeig said: » Because Egypt, Tunisia, Syria etc has all been theocracies, with excellent human rights record. Or because it's the Muslim military generals who instigate coups and murder elected presidents whenever they dislike him in Turkey. Maybe it's because no Muslim country has flourished in 14 centuries. Garuda.Chanti said: » Wrong. Theocracies are not just rule by the divinely appointed. Israel is a parliamentary democratic theocracy. Saudi Arabia is a hereditary, none divine, monarchy that is also a theocracy. Japan is a constitutional, divinely ruled, monarchy that is not a theocracy. If I go by your definition, then the point Ravael raised when he said: Bahamut.Ravael said: » In many cases the only difference between religion and philosophy is the word "God"....If all of my values come from religious thought, and all of your values come from some the teachings of some secular sociopath, why is it that the latter should be treated with more respect in lawmaking? The point that matters is that there's no religious body controlling government, or a governor with absolute divine authority over people. Read about the concept of "shura", governance and theocracy in Islam to understand what difference that makes compared to the old Christian theocracies of the middle ages. Ragnarok.Zeig said: » ME politics are more complex than just blaming most or all their problems on religion (and claiming that they're better off without it). Quote: Seoul (CNN)A senior North Korean diplomat, along with his wife and children, has safely defected to South Korea, making it the highest-level diplomatic defection from North to South Korea in history. Thae Yong Ho, the deputy ambassador of the North Korean embassy in the UK, is under government protection, Jeong Joo-hee, a spokesman for the South Korean Unification Ministry, told reporters Wednesday. Thae defected because "he was tired of Kim Jong Un's regime. He respects the democratic system of South Korea and for the sake of the future of his family, he defected," Jeong told reporters. The Embassy of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or DPRK, was not immediately available for comment. The UK Foreign Office told CNN it will not be commenting on Thae's defection. Thae is listed as the second-highest official after the ambassador in a diplomatic list published by the UK Foreign Office. Thae and his family are now safely in Soputh Korea, Jeong said, but he did not elaborate on how or when the defection took place. "They are currently under the government's protection and are going through necessary procedures conducted by relevant agencies, which are standard procedures," Jeong said. Defections from North Korea are not uncommon. The impoverished country is known for its harsh demands of loyalty to the regime and almost complete isolation from the rest of the world. And Pyongyang's relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons has put it at odds with the international community. The most senior diplomat to flee the regime was a former DPRK ambassador to Egypt who defected to the United States in 1997. And the highest defection to date was Hwang Jang Yob, who fled to South Korea after holding high-profile positions in the North Korea's Worker Party. He was credited with developing the North Korean ideology of "juche," or "self-reliance." According to the South Korean Unification Ministry website, 749 people defected from the North to the democratic South in the first six months of 2016. In April, most of the serving staff of a North Korean restaurant in Ningbo, China, defected en masse to South Korea. A spokesman for the North Korean Red Cross called that defection a "group abduction" of DPRK employees "in broad daylight," according to DPRK state media. Ragnarok.Zeig said: » how do you propose we deal with the bolded? You simply force them to live by your rules Human sterility by enhancing the zika virus or some sort of chemical that dissolves in water. .... It's a WIP Phoenix.Amandarius
Offline
Sylph.Jeanpaul said: » Ragnarok.Zeig said: » ME politics are more complex than just blaming most or all their problems on religion (and claiming that they're better off without it). YouTube Video Placeholder
Garuda.Chanti said: » I am not ofetn wrong. but thank altana there is some jerk on the internet just waiting for you to make a mistake! I am that jerk! /hero pose Ramyrez said: » I couldn't care less about the lizards... I just want to see the panic and fear in everyone's faces when they realize what has happened. Now I just need to somehow cross zika with the flu to get it airborne and make it stronger. <insert lab beaker bubbling sounds here> Interesting interview. Most of us can agree with what Taibbi is saying even though it was published by Slate.
Has Donald Trump Ruined Journalism? Matt Taibbi says most political media is shilling for one side or the other. I think it was the corporate decision that news had to be a part of the profit picture. And that can't be blamed on Trump. Garuda.Chanti said: » Interesting interview. Most of us can agree with what Taibbi is saying even though it was published by Slate. Has Donald Trump Ruined Journalism? Matt Taibbi says most political media is shilling for one side or the other. I think it was the corporate decision that news had to be a part of the profit picture. And that can't be blamed on Trump. Here's something I think of quite a bit during elections. Maybe I'm just cynical but let's talk about voter stories and on-screen rally participants.
For starters, the voter stories; one candidate may say that a voter or rally participant has confided something, often with "tears in their eyes" to the candidate who is basically a complete stranger. My question is are any of these actually true? Why would a person confide such information such as financial issues to a stranger? How would they do this? Candidates are guarded and don't entertain the average Joe or Jane. When do they tell the candidate these things? Candidates are busy and on the move, they don't have time for this. The way it sounds when a candidate tells these stories is that they sat down with an individual for a lengthy heart to heart. This just doesn't happen. So, these stories are either heavily stretched or completely made up by speech writers. Which is it? Secondly, have you ever noticed that some rally participants on-screen behind the candidate seem to act unlike the everyday audience? People clap, hoot, whistle, and hold up signs when they hear something they like. But all too often I see people on-screen who act with somewhat unnatural body language. They do as I mentioned above but in addition they also nod with an assured look on their face, perhaps they may nod to or in unison with the person beside them. Some of them are conveniently wearing work clothing, not just work clothing but clean, presentable work clothing. No grease or oil on that Cintas work shirt with a name embroidered on it, no smudges or dust on that conveniently placed miner's shirt. So, I'm supposed to believe a person either took their lunch break to attend a rally but didn't do any work up until lunch or they took off work to attend the rally but still wore work clothes? Are these people plants? This stuff is about as convincing as infomercial acting to me. >.> You'd be surprised how much personal info some people are willing to dump on a complete stranger. The campaign is probably actively screening for those sob stories so it doesn't seem too farfetched to me that candidates make time for the especially sound byte worthy ones.
I think plants are probably a given but some people really really get into this ***and watch it with the same enthusiasm and attention as a random sportsball game. Most people are weirdos. Much easier to rationalize things when you accept that lol. Cerberus.Pleebo said: » You'd be surprised how much personal info some people are willing to dump on a complete stranger. The campaign is probably actively screening for those sob stories so it doesn't seem too farfetched to me that candidates make time for the especially sound byte worthy ones. I think plants are probably a given but some people really really get into this ***and watch it with the same enthusiasm and attention as a random sportsball game. Most people are weirdos. Much easier to rationalize things when you accept that lol. Why is it that evangelists say they are "doing the Lord's work" but the second you do something with stem cells or something, you're "playing God"?
Aren't there a bunch of stories about Jesus healing the sick? Why aren't scientists "doing the Lord's work" too? Offline
Posts: 35422
Anna Ruthven said: » Why is it that evangelists say they are "doing the Lord's work" but the second you do something with stem cells or something, you're "playing God"? Aren't there a bunch of stories about Jesus healing the sick? Why aren't scientists "doing the Lord's work" too? Because scientists are jerks. Look at Bill Nye for example. Offline
Posts: 35422
You can believe whatever you want to believe religion or no religion. But Science acts like it is holier than religion. That is why scientist always seem off putting to me.
Offline
Posts: 35422
Also who needs some dork in a robe telling you about electrons and neutrons. That ***is for the birds !
|
||
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|