Good for you Yadda.

I have no problem with people believing in something that works for them.
I do have a problem with the overriding presumptuousness that we see from too many religious people, that the answers they accept, need to be imposed onto others, especially when this includes dictating what is acceptable behaviour.

I am happy for people to challenge me with scripture if they like, a lot of scripture has terrific sentiment which I would not argue with.
I agree that for many, they find their personal morality from scriptures, I just disagree that it is the best, or only source of inspirational teachings.

I could argue against a lot more, but it would be a little like me trying to impose my beliefs onto others if I went too far down that track, plus I don't want to spoil something that others like, if it isn't hurting me.

Of course.  When it comes to somebody's freedom though, there really should be proof.

Which brings us back to my other question, what is your alternative?

muso wrote on Oct 30^th, 2008 at 9:28am:

OK. As long as you're still not wearing the costumes and the make-up. 

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 30^th, 2008 at 12:13pm:


When I'm with friends I sometimes come out with lines from shows I was in 9 years ago that seem appropriate. The lines just trip out of my mouth when I'm not paying attention. Sad isn't it?

Quote:


I don't think Jk Rowling was ascribing hermione's voice as other than, just her mind playing along with her story.

Now if you are telling me that people that hear a voice in their head, and identify it as the supreme being, who created the whole shooting match, and is just popping in to chew the fat with them, if you're saying that ain't crazy, then I don't know what is.

It is one thing to be aware of the power of the mind, and your inner voice, and something totally different to a guy who thinks he has Napoleon in his head, telling him to invade russia.

How about accusing religion of causing all the world's problems, then saying the government should take children away from religious people to protect the children from 'dangerous ideas'?

mozzaok wrote on Oct 30^th, 2008 at 7:30pm:


Of course she wasn't. The word I disagree with is in bold. The human mind is an amazing thing. Religion gives some people the chance to harness that potential. Why deny them that chance? Some people brag about their religion. I brag about my motivational system too. What's the difference?

As far as the creator of the universe coming in for a chat, well I guess if a cheap laptop can be multitasking, why not the creator of the universe?

The point is that there is plenty of room for a God or even gods in cosmology, and while I don't believe in any myself, a lot of people much smarter than me don't seem to have a problem with the idea.

To state that you have an exclusive angle on how the universe works is somewhat arrogant - in fact just as arrogant as that of a fundamentalist  "One True Church" Christian .  

Quote:


Crazy is seeing things in a way that other people don't necessarily agree with. It's about seeing things that are totally illogical if we apply the principles of 'common sense'.

Common sense gives us things such as sitting on the paddock fence watching the cows - a nice ordered little corner of the world that obeys causation, the laws of thermodynamics and Newtonian physics.

Crazy gives us things like charmed mesons, quantum entanglement, subatomic particle behaviour that depends on the observer, tachyons and dark matter. Religion can be totally crazy.

You think religious people are crazy? How many mathematicians have you met? Now they are totally stir crazy. The smarter they are, the less common sense they have. There must be a message in there somewhere.

Sometimes crazy is good. Let's not knock it.