BIGDAN Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Well, listen here buddie, My Dog.ma ran over your karma, ok? lol LIKE IT. FOR YOU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrycja Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 I don't respect everyone's beliefs. I don't respect religion that is developed through the abuse of energy. I don't respect religion that births war and hatred. I don't respect the fact that too many people tout party lines without having the sense to investigate for themselves. I don't respect that fact that the pope finds blasphemy in a carving of a frog hanging on a cross yet continues to do nothing to lighten the load of the needy. Really? Nothing? That's simply false. That seems contradictory to your earlier sentence of 'investigating for themselves' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zooma Posted October 6, 2008 Author Share Posted October 6, 2008 But what is your point? Are you saying that George Bush has espoused an Evangelical agenda? To not recognize that there has been a preponderance of Christianity in this nation, from the Pilgrims to our founding fathers and all through our history. And then to claim that the Chrisitanity in our history is equall to both the Jewish and Muslim history here, is to deny reality. Sorry, but your conspiracy theory is starting to sound a little crazy to me right now. I'm sorry Del, I'm not talking conspiracy theories when the facts are there to talk about. Just because you won't take the time to look at the bush administration's agenda within the Justice dept doesn't change the way it is. The founding fathers, men like Washington, Adams, Franklin, Jefferson. Hamilton had no use for religion and they did not help found a Christian nation. They and many more created a Republic, in which government took no side in matters of faith and religion. That was the way it was then and that should be the way it should be now. Instead of voting for candidates who will do the bidding of all the people they were elected to represent We demand those elected to high office have selected the appropriate religion before they will be even in the discussion. There are over 60 million Americans without any religious affiliation whatsoever and until we all stand up as a group to vote for, and elect officials to work for all of the people, we are going to have to suffer more from politician who believe in talking snakes, 900 year old men who ride in boatloads full of animals and clergy who chase children around for perverted fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kabbalahone Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Really? Nothing? That's simply false. That seems contradictory to your earlier sentence of 'investigating for themselves' ok, let me rephrase this... nothing compared to what's possible... the cheese is old and moldy, you know? nothing against blue cheese, but religious cheese is another kettle of fish. Did you know in Italy a judge got in trouble because he wanted to display a Star of David, so he took down the cross when he wasn't allowed to, and got in serious trouble with the Vat. Respect for the Elders does not reign in that domain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrycja Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 ok, let me rephrase this... nothing compared to what's possible... the cheese is old and moldy, you know? nothing against blue cheese, but religious cheese is another kettle of fish. Did you know in Italy a judge got in trouble because he wanted to display a Star of David, so he took down the cross when he wasn't allowed to, and got in serious trouble with the Vat. Respect for the Elders does not reign in that domain. Well the same thing can be said of just about anyone so it's not really a credible argument to knock the Vatican. And about your Star of David point, no I didn't know that that happened but I'm not understanding the connection. Is the point that anti-semitism exists? or that the Catholic church promotes it? Well, I think you could make a better case for that pre-Vatican Council II, but certainly not after. There are unfortunately examples more and less blatant than that every day and I abhor all of them. But again, how does that go to addressing your point about the Vat not doing anything for people? Wonder how rabbis would feel if a Star of David were taken down and a cross put up instead? They'd likely and rightly be equally upset, don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Well the same thing can be said of just about anyone so it's not really a credible argument to knock the Vatican. And about your Star of David point, no I didn't know that that happened but I'm not understanding the connection. Is the point that anti-semitism exists? or that the Catholic church promotes it? Well, I think you could make a better case for that pre-Vatican Council II, but certainly not after. There are unfortunately examples more and less blatant than that every day and I abhor all of them. But again, how does that go to addressing your point about the Vat not doing anything for people? Wonder how rabbis would feel if a Star of David were taken down and a cross put up instead? They'd likely and rightly be equally upset, don't you think? Well said. It's not about being anti-semitic. It's about replacing one religious symbol with a completely different one. Isn't Italy largely a Catholic country? Why would they want the Star of David hanging in the Vatican - the home of the Pope, God's 'representative' on earth of Catholics? It's not unreasonable to expect no place for the SoD in the Vatican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 The ocean is my religion and much less forgiving than all of yours combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
59LesPaul Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 The ocean is my religion and much less forgiving than all of yours combined. I'll say it is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kabbalahone Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Well the same thing can be said of just about anyone so it's not really a credible argument to knock the Vatican. Wonder how rabbis would feel if a Star of David were taken down and a cross put up instead? They'd likely and rightly be equally upset, don't you think? The judge didn't attempt to replace to cross but to augment it with a star. I will try to dig up the article, the reasoning behind it too was interesting. He took down the cross because of the blatant anti-semitism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirchzep27 Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 I saw an interview with -bill maer on live morning news last week, promoting this movie. He made a point of saying he doesnt call himself an -atheist, but one who claims not to know...or something like taht. I'm sure he worded it differently, but i think its any honest person can understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrycja Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 The judge didn't attempt to replace to cross but to augment it with a star. I will try to dig up the article, the reasoning behind it too was interesting. He took down the cross because of the blatant anti-semitism. Is this in the Vatican or in Italy or in a court room? And again, what if the same were done in a synagogue? ok but again, how does that go towards proving the Vat does nothing for people? I just don't get the connection here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDAN Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Well said. It's not about being anti-semitic. It's about replacing one religious symbol with a completely different one. Isn't Italy largely a Catholic country? Why would they want the Star of David hanging in the Vatican - the home of the Pope, God's 'representative' on earth of Catholics? It's not unreasonable to expect no place for the SoD in the Vatican. Because it also represents the "Masonic Orders" and the Catholic Church condems "Freemasonry", while on the other hand "The Church Of England" through the Royal Family actually Run Freemasonry in England. The Queens cousin Lord Mountbatten was the head of English Freemasonry now it is another cousin the Duke Of Kent. Regards, Danny http://www.ugle.org.uk/ugle/whos-who.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_of_David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 First off, it's NOT "Religilous" but Religulous (with a "u"). Second, as a proud, proud Jew, I REALLY want to see this movie. It looks freakin' awesome! Third... on religion as a whole... I think anybody who claims to have the "Truth" should be shot so they can go to Heaven and interview God himself. Here's a fact, people. In the entire lifetime of this planet, past, present, and future, you will never, ever, see someone interview God. Never. It won't show up on CNN, MSNBC, Fox, the Christian channels... hell... you won't even see such a thing in the National Enquirer. There is no way in hell that anyone of us living has any sort of "Truth." Not the Theists, and not the Atheists. Despite proof or non-proof, all we have is theories. That said, here is a link to Bill Maher on The Daily Show talking about Religulous: Bill Maher part 1 Bill Maher part 2 As a proud Jew, there is one statement Bill makes (in part 2) that I can't help but agree with: "How come God, who's all-powerful, always goes through a prophet? He always takes somebody up on a hill or out in the middle of the desert or in the woods where nobody's around (darn the luck) and he says 'here's the deal... and you go tell everybody else.' Why doesn't- he's God, he can do anything- why doesn't he go 'hey, folks! Take a break... it's me, God... and I just wanna tell you that the correct religion is...'" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zooma Posted October 7, 2008 Author Share Posted October 7, 2008 See the movie Nathan, it's very funny and eye-opening at the same time. And thank you for correcting the spelling of the title. Never was a very good speller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 See the movie Nathan, it's very funny and eye-opening at the same time. And thank you for correcting the spelling of the title. Never was a very good speller. Oh trust me. I plan on it. And no problem. I doubt it was because you're a bad speller, but because "I" is next to "U" on the keyboard... I'm a hunt-and-picker (I never bothered to learn the home keys... I think think the whole home-keys thing is utterly stupid and pointless), so believe me when I say I make that mistake and more a billion times over. The worst one I have is any word in which "e" follows "h," like the word "the." I almost always spell it "teh" and have to go back and correct it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zooma Posted October 7, 2008 Author Share Posted October 7, 2008 No, trust me I'm just a bad speller, although I usually take the time to see If I missed an obvious word. This time I guess I didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.