First, let me say that I hope you aren't offended by my asking questions. I mean no harm, just asking. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>if they want to believe in a God then i'll ask them to defend their position. if they ask me to defend my position that there is no God i'll kindly explain to them that i don't argue for a negative like this any more than i argue that there are no unicorns -- technically, i am not espousing a belief to defend<p><hr></blockquote><p>whew. I would hate to be your child! Seriously though, I understand that atheism is not a belief, but that statement you wrote just comes off strange to me. They have to defend believing in something, but the only way you would accept their answer is if they had evidence??<br><br>Belief in God requires faith. That's what it's all about. There is even a story in the Bible about Thomas and how he doubted. I can't recall which book or verse, but people know it by "doubting Thomas". <br><br>The bible is not to be taken literally. It is a story. One meant to inspire people to do better in the world.<br><br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>i merely explain that religion is faith-based and that i don't choose to have that faith with no evidence.<p><hr></blockquote><p>faith <br>Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.<br>Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. <br>Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.<br>often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.<br>The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.<br>A set of principles or beliefs.<br><br><br>Kind of a catch-22 you have going on there eh? <br><br>eh, I had more but I accidently deleted it (stupid Winblows.) and I have to get going. <br><br>my beer blog<br>
while i don't go as far as Paul is going with his views on religion, i can also see the point he's making . . . that people who are religious make it seemingly acceptable for bad things to happen in the name of religion (e.g., he explained how polygamist communities still exist because citizens in that part of the country allow it). if, as a society, we didn't accept that stuff then we could have arrested the offenders long ago and little girls wouldn't be getting raped in the name of marriage and God.<br><br>
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>They have to defend believing in something, but the only way you would accept their answer is if they had evidence??<p><hr></blockquote><p>i believe we're probably talking past each other a bit. i can see you picturing my household and it's not at all how i really live with my kids. i do not accept faith as rationale for how my kids are educated and i want them to hold the same standard. when they sit in class, i expect them to ask questions when they don't understand something. if the teachers jump to a conclusion that hasn't been explained or proven then i hope my kids have their hands shooting into the air. i have the same expectations from them that i hope they have of their teachers and of me. if i say something that they don't understand, i hope they question me. <br><br>how do i teach this behavior? well, when i talk with my kids i'll often have them summarize something if it was an important talk. i'll try and get them to generalize the concept from the teachable moment to other situations. of course i don't make it seem like learning; rather, i try and make it fun and i also explain to them why a concept or topic is important -- i'd tell them that the better they can synthesize what we've just discussed helps to demonstrate that they do understand what we've discussed and that this learning can help them to grow their brains. if they can't summarize and explain the talk we had, i then decide whether to keep going and better explain things or whether i need to simplify the concept and wait until they are older to better get it.<br><br>likewise, if my kids tell me something that causes me to be skeptical then i am not going to play along and allow a lie to be accepted as truth. i would much rather have my kids speaking what they know than pretending to know about things that they don't know but instead believe based on faith.<br><br>
Stop using a dictionary incorrectly! Words have many meanings and the fact that they do not agree with each other does not create a "Catch 22" although an irony would be more appropriate.<br><br>When speaking of religious faith your highlighted definition is the one that fits:<br><br>[color:blue] Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. </font color=blue><br><br>Now if you looked up fantasy, magic, superstition, and Santa Claus, those definitions also include words like "does not rest on logical proof or material evidence."<br><br>Because from ghosts to gods, there is no material evidence or logical proof.<br><br>No Catch 22, no irony. Just logical use of the dictionary.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
Not really to, for, or about Polymerase...Just generally rambling here...<br><br>But the thing that I couldn't ignore ever since I got passed the "Age of Reason" <br>was how people never seem to question that 95% of The Judeo/Christian dogma<br>relies on a book that was not only written by a man, but a man that was raised<br>as an EGYPTION, and not just any Egyptian, but a member of the RULING CLASS,<br>which grew up in the time-honored tradition of using the gods to not only explain<br>but to intimidate and manipulate the masses into doing their bidding. Yet people<br>never seem to question that in writing the first several books of the Bible, and <br>"the Law of Moses" that he was doing the very same thing that's been established <br>throughout this very thread... DOING EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS RAISED TO DO use <br>the gods (in this case GOD) to lead the people that he wanted to lead how, where, <br>when and why he wanted to lead them, through a desert, for a LO-O-O-ONG Time!<br><br>Moses didn't invent God, per se', the nomadic people from the tribe of Abram<br>had already found themselves in the Land of Egypt having gone from shepherds<br>to advisers, to bankers, and had their applecart overturned to make them slaves.<br>Moses didn't invent God, but I do believe that he added to the mythology that <br>eventually became the basis of the 3 most popular Western Religions today.<br><br> I simply got tired of being lead around by the nose & started thinking for myself.<br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
_________________________ . "...or am I a butterfly dreaming she's a woman?"
Proud MacBabe. Happy everything to everybody.
Loc: B.C. Canada
I simply got tired of being lead around by the nose & started thinking for myself. (and you look much better without that ring in your nose.)<br><br>equals<br><br>Believe nothing just because a so-called wise person said it. Believe nothing just because a belief is generally held. Believe nothing just because it is said in ancient books. Believe nothing just because it is said to be of divine origin. Believe nothing just because someone else believes it. Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true.<br>Buddha<br><br>
I agree, Giz.<br><br>What started this amazingly civil and well visited thread was the story about children abused in a polygamist setting. And that seriously begs the question ~ at what point does someone else's beliefs become our business?<br><br>We've careened around some interesting corners, but bottom line, and I think we're all missing this if we want to stay on the original topic, which we never do ~ arrest the bastards and prosecute them to the fullest.<br><br>Anyway, that's my Cliff Notes version, if you haven't read all three gazillion posts.<br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
_________________________ I always deserve it. Really.
Buddha got a lot of stuff right. Too bad to be a Buddhist you have to hang out with other Buddhists. <br><br>Woah, watch a bunch of granola eating wankers. (See I am equal opportunity slammer of all religions.)<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
In perfect agreement Lea and the Cliff Notes shouldn't stop there. Arrest the cops in town who are FLDS followers who are protecting the rapists. Arrest the politicians that also ignore it. And on down the line.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
"i am raising my kids to be atheists"<br><br>Was your quote, and no five year old is going to form the opinion that there definitively is or isn't a God or gods unless he was told by an authority figure he trusts.<br><br>And unequivocally, I think that is as wrong as someone pushing God on their kid. I am paraphrasing (but if I have to, I can go back and find some quotes) but you said that you are sure to tell your kid(s) that they have to understand that some people need this psychological crutch of God and religion deal with life, etc etc. Well, if that is not teaching a superior attitude towards all those poor believers/ignoramuses (ingorama?) I don't know what it is. <br><br>If a kid asks about God or gods (or other issues of this nature) the only responsible answer is to tell him/her (and I have done so before) that it is something he will have to work out for himself. Or to put it more simply, say, "What do you think?", because what kids think without adult intervention is also important.<br><br>It is certainly not incumbent upon me (or anyone else) to give a child a packaged world view which he is going to take as gospel and that is eventually going to bang up against all the other "truths" and cause his adolescent and even adults years to be more confusing than they already are.<br><br>We are what we repeatedly do. -Aristotle
_________________________ We are STILL what we repeatedly do - insists Aristotle
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.