darth_ender

Very well done.  I really enjoyed that version of the mockup better than the first.

Well, I'm glad to see that people (at least to my knowledge) aren't arguing over religious beliefs here.  It seems they are instead talking about which actresses they would have sexual relations with and the legality of those relations.  This is...hmmm...definitely not how I expected things to go so quickly.

I want to clarify something here.  Though I had a nasty outburst elsewhere in relation to what was said here, I want all to be aware that it had nothing to do with the intelligent responses given by twooffour.  He had one of his best posts (at least that I've seen) in this thread, and I looked forward to responding to it.  But as I read further on the thread, I become very annoyed at how things were heading.  I foresaw another "I got the last word" thing going, and as twooffour often perpetuates that sort of thing, I lashed out at him.  I want to apologize here for not being able to take the time to respond, because now I am ignoring him and don't remember what he said.  Once again, however, I really liked the points he'd made, and I did look forward to continuing the debate.  My lashing out had nothing to do with his argument, which was both well composed, but also to which I was preparing rebuttals.  However, I simply cannot handle his style and the contention that seems to shadow him everywhere.  I really am sorry for how I treated you, twooffour, and I hope you continue to make good posts that others with more patience than I can respond to.

I don't know much of what was said here because I do have the ignore function on.  I posted this in anger, and then signed off, and after thinking things through, I wish I hadn't said things the way I did.  I want all to know that while I was extremely irritated, I should not have lashed out so much.  I apologize to twooffour as well.  It's clear we weren't made for each other ;)  That is my obscure humor, by the way.  I truly wish there were some way to convince you that you really have a knack for grating on others' nerves.  However, since it's clear that I could never convince you otherwise, I just want to make you aware that I am sorry for how I treated you here.  I will keep you on my ignore simply to keep the peace, since I can be a little hot-headed at times.  Say what you like, and those who are better at handling what you say can keep reading what you type.  Please know that this apology is sincere, though I wish you'd seriously reconsider your methods and style.  I really am sorry.

Hmmmm....Pennsylvania Jones joins a Star Wars site.  What do YOU think he is obsessed with?  The bloody rats of NIMH!

I think it's cool too.  Just teasing you.  You obviously really enjoy it.

Ziggy Stardust said:

I would discuss my religion, but I don't want to be looked at differently, so instead I will add my opinion every once and a while until you can solve the puzzle.

 I should add that none of us would look at you differently if you confessed to being a member of the Ministry of David Bowie and sang hymns every Thursday night, such classics as "You Remind Me of the Babe," and "Under Pressure."

Well, the politics thread is still around.  If those who are jerks are ignored, I feel it can also be a good platform for mutual understanding and beneficial discussion.

I love comparative religion, and would not look at you differently, regardless of your beliefs.  However, your thoughts are fair.  Besides, I already take you for an utterly hopeless weirdo, so I doubt your religion would change that.

Oops!  Rule 2! ;)

twooffour said:

The problem with stuff like the 10 commandments in front of a court house, is that stuff like that is very prone to actually being taken seriously by some.

Some imagery on old pots in museums or restaurants is one thing.
Making a rather bold insinuation that a COURT OF LAW may be somehow operating under Biblical authority, is something completely different.

So I take it that you have no problem with the 10 commandments being posted in a public park then?  After all, I doubt the no littering signs are operating under the 10 commandments.  And on the reverse, I doubt you are one of those liberal Muslim apologists who say it's okay for a Sharia court to operate in the UK.

Fine if they don't, but anyone putting something like that in front of a court house should be aware of the implications of it, and leave it as a form of provocation at best.
When the Bible and Christian imagery have become mere "cultural artifacts" in our society, then there would be no problem.

But there you are wrong, my friend.  Regardless of one's adoption of the religions themselves, our values today have been shaped by a Judeo-Christian cultural heritage.  If the majority of this nation's founders and citizens had been Hindus or Muslims, do you believe the same ideals would be represented in our society?  Certainly many similarities would exist, but there would be vast differences in the evolution of our present culture vs. this hypothetical one.  Our laws today, whether you like it or not, have been influenced by the 10 Ccommandments.

PS:
As for respect - there is no need at all to personally abuse people for their beliefs, BUT: if someone finds a belief stupid, they should be free to say so. It'd be a no-go in a friendly table debate among friends, but shouldn't be a taboo on an open discussion forum.

I don't see why "offense" should be something one should care greatly about when making statements. I simply don't.
If an insult is aimed at some acquaintance or loved one, fine, I can see that - but we also have a tendency to attach our egos to idols, authority figures or worldviews and get hurt whenever someone "insults" them, and I don't see any reason to show regard for that.

 I believe my first post said it was okay to criticize another's religion.  Just be respectful.  Simply saying, "Baptists are crazy, overzealous, Bible-thumping bigots" is not appropriate.  However, if one feels this way about Baptists, they need simply state, "I disagree with the overly-literal interpretations of the Bible utilized by Baptists, in addition to their rigid mindset and intolerance of others' ideas."  See the difference?

The way I see it, religious people either think they have valid reasons to adhere to their beliefs, or they consciously believe in something they know is completely ridiculous on a rational basis.
The first group should be laughing at the ridicule; the second can still say "talk to the hand; the face realizes that".

The third group that tends to make stupid arguments and show complete ignorance of rationality or (common) knowledge, doesn't deserve much extra respect for their views imo.

Haven't seen any of those on here, though... or, there was a guy who PMed me to stop saying "god damn" on his thread because it was blasphemous... so if he comes here... LOL.

I'm glad you have a way you see it.  That's the value of opinions, and opinions are the reason I established this thread.  However, you oversimplify, and as our discussion was headed in the politics thread, you tend to disregard many of my valid arguments and beat other items to a pulp.  Let me finally reiterate my view from there without going into greater depth at this point:

There are multiple ways to view the universe, not just the skeptic's way.  While science leads to greater understanding of how it all workds, it is not the only way to appreciate the world.  Take art.  What is beautiful for one may be hideous to another.  To the one who finds the art beautiful, that is his or her truth, and all scientific studies could not disprove that person's understanding of what makes something beautiful.

Take illness.  Scientific studies have allowed physicians to treat and cure countless afflictions.  But when a doctor asks, "On a scale of 1 to 10, how  much pain are you in?" are they requiring scientific evidence to back it up?  If their screenings find nothing physically wrong with the person, or at least nothing that should warrant a severe pain, do they tell the patient, "You're just delusional; you're not really in that much pain"?  Of course not.

Our understanding of intuition is quite limited.  Even barring any supernatural reasons, when someone receives intuition later proved correct, how do we react?  "It's pure coincidence," you might say.  Or were they perceiving details and reasoning them out without conscious effort?  We may not be able to scientifically prove how they came to that conclusion, but that does not necessarily prove the conclusion as coincidental.

Occam's razor suggests that we accept theories that require the fewest assumptions.  Nevertheless, when we accept a theory as likely truth, we do not simply discard all other theories.  There are competing theories to define the "Theory of Everything."  I am not the one to tell which makes the fewest assumptions, but let it be said that there are certainly stronger and weaker theories.  Yet, in the end, we may find that one of the less popular theories is closer to the truth.

The same can be said of religion.  Assumptions are made, and it relies on subjetive data for the seeker to arrive at his or her conclusions.  But just like art, abstract concepts, illness, intuition, and so many other things out there, simply lacking evidence to prove it true does not make something false.  And just like so many things, there is more than one way to test for truth.  It simply is the case that not all things are as easily demonstrated to the rest of the world.

Now twooffour, we have had a tendency to butt heads.  I probably will ignore your future posts simply for the sake of keeping the peace and preserving a thread that I feel deserves a place here.  But if you are to proudly assert how insensitive he is to the rest of the world, don't be so dang sensitive when anyone makes a lighthearted jab or disagrees with you.  You sure get worked up over little things, even when meant in good fun and even if only directed at what you believe as opposed to you personally.  Lighten up.

The beauty of opinions is that they are varied.  Just because you can state your opinion with passion and many words does not make it correct.  But if you want people to listen, persuasion is a far more powerful tool than verbally clubbing us as if you were an arctic seal poacher.  And respecting other's opinions though you disagree might earn you a little respect in return.

Hope to hear more from you, but like I said, I will probably not reply.  No offense.  It's not like I hate your guts.  I just don't want another brilliant thread of mine locked by Big Mama.

WHAT?!?  OH NO!!!  How could you bring this bad news upon us all?  I bet it's that darn Bush economy!

^Ah, you were in Carthage, Illinois?  Or was it Liberty, Missouri?  Or perhaps you visited one of the lesser knowns, in which case, I have no idea which jail you visited.

Ziggy Stardust said:

:-/

Yes, this a thread that should be here, but I doubt that that many people want to share their belief system.

However, if handled correctly, this could be an interesting thread.

 I am generally rather open about my beliefs.  Hopefully I got it started on the right foot, and that it remains civil.

Now that I've created this thread, I want to address the topic of the supposedly ideal religiously-void society.  For instance, the 10 Commandments in front of a court house.  I oppose removing such images.  Even if I were not Christian (yes, Mormons are Christian) or Jewish, or even Samaritan (there are indeed a few of those still around), I would not demand such be removed.  We maintain cultural items, even if there is a religious element mixed in there.  Should I demand we remove Indian pottery with ancient religious symbolism from a public museum?  I don't think so, because even if you don't worship the same way the Anasazi did, you can still appreciate the cultural significance of their religion and its impact (albeit small) on our lives today.

Let me give you an example of what I feel is not the ideal: the country of Uruguay does not have a Christmas or Easter holiday.  Now they still acknowledge such days as holidays, but give them some generic name, like Tourism Week for for Holy Week, etc.  Of course anyone can celebrate the religious holiday if they wish, but the religious aspect is completely ignored by the government.  Again, there is cultural significance to these days, even if you choose not to take part in the religious aspect.  I would have no problem living in a foreign nation and getting a day off and calling it by the prevalent religion's name without taking part in the religious aspects.  Heck, I might even go ahead and take part in the religious aspects, just to understand the people better!

Finally, where I work and where so many work, you cannot display Christmas decorations at Christmas time.  To me, this is not appropriate.  Would you ask a Buddhist not to display a Buddha statuette on his or her desk?  Would you ask a Wiccan to remove plants from his or her work area?  I think that these things would be overstepping bounds.  And Christmas has been secularized to the point that one need not even allude to Christian origins.  Why can I not celebrate what is part of my culture, simply because other people don't share that cultural identification?

A thread that is sure to be locked if not used carefully, but one I could not find, and one I think this site deserves.

Besides, since my brillian thread over here was locked, I figure we deserve another, perhaps less sarcastic, look at religion.

Clear rules should be set up and followed here.  Of course I have no way of enforcing such things, but they are sensible guidelines to prevent this thread from being locked.

1) Be respectful.  You have the right to disagree with anyone's belief system.  You may even think it worth nothing but doodoo.  But when addressing the largest single religious organization (The Catholic Church) or a cult followed by a single individual, speak respectfully.  Again, this does not mean you cannot point out aspects with which you disagree.  It simply means that when you disagree, do so with respect.  Have I been redundant enough?

2) No personal insults.  Pretty obvious, but since we're dealing in a particularly sensitive topic, things could be easily misconstrued.

3) Take time out.  If a conversation becomes heated, don't be afraid to agree to a break in discussion till heads are cooler.

4) Be cautious in humor.  While you may feel you are being innocently playful, be aware that your comments may still offend.  I have no problem with people making jokes (go ahead and make some multiple wife joke at me, I promise I'll smile and go home and tell my wife about it; and my other wife; and my concubine; and my betrothed; and my mistress).  Just be cautious, and if you do offend someone, don't be afraid to apologize.

5) Don't tell my one and only wife about the above made joke, or I won't even have any wives to joke about :)

That's it for the rules, guidelines, suggestions, etc.  Let's have a good, clean brawl.

The Simpson's episode: The Shinning

*Shhhh*  Wanna get sued?

The Simpsons OR Family Guy

There once was an Alderaan princess
Because of her, everyone winces
Her brother is Luke?
Now I'm gonna puke
After all of those wet, mushy kisses

Either that was her tongue or she's got three lips.

And I've never licked a spark plug

And I've never sniffed a stink bug

And I've never painted daisies on a big red rubber ball

And I've never bathed in yogurt

And I don't look good in leggings

And we've never been to Boston in the fall

Beat ya!

Oh no! What we gonna do?
The king likes Daniel
More than me and you
Oh, no! What we gonna do?
We gotta get him out of here.

We could use him as a footstool
Or a table to play Scrabble on
Then tie him up and beat him up
And throw him out of Babylon

Baby, I need to tell you something
I don't got a belly button
Belly button no, no, no, no
No belly button

^^Can I laugh at this?  What kind of a fight?  I'm not a swearer, and I'm not a fan of others swearing either, but for one who got so offended by a book using the term appropriately, especially in contemporary British, you didn't seem to mind using what is definitely a potty word in American English.

Of course, the whole thing may have been meant as a joke, in which case, I'll just laugh at your witty humor instead of the irony.

Edit: Oops...Frink beat me to being the first reply.  Two carrots (^^) to signify two posts up.

Ah...I'm glad you brought up sequels.  My brother, who has always been a far more prolific reader than I, said that he didn't enjoy anything after the first book.  I have always remembered that, but since getting into the first book, I didn't want to believe it was the only good one.   I'm glad to see you like those two sequels.  I'll check them out when I finish this one.  What do you think of the Anderson/Herbert prequels?  And Asterisk, I know what you mean.  It is a novel of subtlety and people, not of action and gadgets.  The science fiction elements provide an interesting setting, but the characters as individuals and societies actually drive the story.

While we are on the topic of the movies, though not on topic of the thread, I easily could see a good epic film as well.  Lawrence of Arabia is an excellent analogy.  I recently downloaded the Alternative Edit made by Spicediver from FE.org.  I didn't want to watch to much to prevent spoiling the story (since it's been so long since I saw the original 1984 that I don't remember the story anyway).  But even with his editing skills, I can't help but dislike what was originally filmed.  The Baron was already an obviously sick man in the novel, but the movie takes that to a ridiculous extreme.  I recently checked out the miniseries from our library, and I hope to watch it soon, if I can possibly get the chance.