Jump to content

All-Purpose Religion Thread


mjmooney

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

That's not predjudice, that's reason. 

I kinda  knew it would be justified somehow , VT's hypocrisy never fails to impress me   :)   (i mean that in a nice way and not with any malice ) 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I kinda  knew it would be justified somehow , VT's hypocrisy never fails to impress me   :)   (i mean that in a nice way and not with any malice ) 

I don't see it as hypocrisy. I can explain tbe Brexit arguments to a reasonably intelligent child, and explain why I've reached the conclusion I have. And it's not "Because God says so". 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

I don't see it as hypocrisy. I can explain tbe Brexit arguments to a reasonably intelligent child, and explain why I've reached the conclusion I have. And it's not "Because God says so". 

is that a similar  explanation to the one that calls Gove a word removed regardless of any case being put forward to try and and least open a discussion that he isn't what some peoples preconceived ideas are  :)

Do you think every 5 year old child dragged along to the Brexit march was sat down given a dossier of pros and cons and allowed to make up their own mind before deciding if they wanted to accompany Mum and Dad to London for a protest ?

 

 

Edited by tonyh29
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

is that a similar  explanation to the one that calls Gove a word removed regardless of any case being put forward to try and and least open a discussion that he isn't what some peoples preconceived ideas are  :)

Do you think every 5 year old child dragged along to the Brexit march was sat down given a dossier of pros and cons and allowed to make up their own mind before deciding if they wanted to accompany Mum and Dad to London for a protest ?

No, of course not. But I'm sure the five year olds weren't sat down and told what to think, like some sort of 'Brexit Sunday school'. They were just having a day out with mum and dad and eating lots of ice creams. 

As for Gove... yeah, he's a clearing in the woods. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, limpid said:

How can the lack of a belief ever be puritanical? That's a bizarre adjective to pick. How can someone without a belief in god(s) be (like) an English Protestant from the late middle ages?

I don't believe in things without evidence. I think that's a really good life choice.

Come on, the use of (like) in brackets shows you already know what I was getting at.

 

I've googled the Oxford dictionary:

Quote

 Censorious moral beliefs, especially about self-indulgence and sex.

‘an era of sexual puritanism'

‘the extreme puritanism of the hardliners grated on people’

  

But I'm happy to accept the Oxford dictionary may be wrong. I'm not puritanical about it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I've googled the Oxford dictionary:  

But I'm happy to accept the Oxford dictionary may be wrong. I'm not puritanical about it.

I don't know how that adjective can be applied to a noun which describes the lack of a belief in god(s).

Can you puritanically not believe in bigfoot? Can you puritanically not believe that Thor makes lightning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok, I'll try another work around.

When I read something on a blue sign on the motorway, for example 'Birmingham 26 miles' then I will take that literally, I will read it and believe it means that Birmingham is 26 miles away.

But when I'm reading something on social media, I'll not take stuff quite so literally, I'll expect more colourful descriptive language. I can understand what the use of puritanical means. Just like when I might suggest someone has 'soul'. I don't literally mean they have a little whispy translucent angel in them. I mean they're one of the good guys.

I suspect I'm being trolled. But I do not believe you live under a bridge and eat goats.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

could you not also argue as a nation we have a responsibility to respect what parents do and don’t want their children to be taught in our schools?

No. We shouldn't have parents deciding the curriculum like that.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

ok, I'll try another work around.

When I read something on a blue sign on the motorway, for example 'Birmingham 26 miles' then I will take that literally, I will read it and believe it means that Birmingham is 26 miles away.

But when I'm reading something on social media, I'll not take stuff quite so literally, I'll expect more colourful descriptive language. I can understand what the use of puritanical means. Just like when I might suggest someone has 'soul'. I don't literally mean they have a little whispy translucent angel in them. I mean they're one of the good guys.

I suspect I'm being trolled. But I do not believe you live under a bridge and eat goats.

Are we missing each other because you don't recognise that atheism is a lack of something? It's not an assertion.

It's like using colorful language about no trolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I'm happy to recognise that atheism is a lack of belief in any form of god. I get that. But it doesn't stop somebody being zealous about it, or puritanical about it, or evangelical about it.

Maybe a similar thing, not a perfect example, would be to say James Randi is puritanical about there not being real magic?

Can you maybe not see that some people have a belief in atheism that they want to spread and share? I mean, you can't ever actually scientifically prove there isn't a god. You can only reason there isn't one and find more and more complex scientific ways of not finding one. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

No, I'm happy to recognise that atheism is a lack of belief in any form of god. I get that. But it doesn't stop somebody being zealous about it, or puritanical about it, or evangelical about it.

Maybe a similar thing, not a perfect example, would be to say James Randi is puritanical about there not being real magic?

Can you maybe not see that some people have a belief in atheism that they want to spread and share? I mean, you can't ever actually scientifically prove there isn't a god. You can only reason there isn't one and find more and more complex scientific ways of not finding one. 

 

 

 

Jesus... just use the Vegan example for Christ's sake!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, villakram said:

Jesus... just use the Vegan example for Christ's sake!

I considered using veganism as an example but it tends to polarise opinions which isn't really in the spirit of this thread.

I'm a bridge builder between the good guys and the zealous atheists.

Edited by chrisp65
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

I considered using veganism as an example but it tends to polarise opinions which isn't really in the spirit of this thread.

I'm a bridge builder between the good guys and the atheists.

Agnosticism is where it is at!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â