Pascal's wager

Anti-sodomy laws and laws defining a valid/recognized marriage as between a man and woman only...

 

The problem in Western civilisation is typically where law gives benefits to married couples which are not obtained by registered partners. Gay rights proponents will either push for gay marriage or getting the law changed so it only concerns registered partnership and gives marriage status as registered partnership.

The problems with religion arise when they push for the former which is clearly against scripture of many religions (gay marriage).

Still. Gay rights are far ahead of what you see in some Middle Eastern countries.

 

But what if you live your life as if there is a Christian God, and die and find out the Muslims were right all along?

 

Many families ban discussion of religion and politics at the dinner table, and for good reason. People get caught in the crossfire, the calmness required for good digestion is ruined, and everybody goes away mad. Airing our personal issues in public reflects poorly on Priuschat, and that's not good. For the most part, the Priuschat 'family' has banned discussion of politics at the 'dinner table' of open forums. I think it's time to do the same with religion.

The particular problem with signatures is that they show up everywhere. Statements of a religious or political nature should be kept to the private, opt-in forums, and should not be permitted in the open public forums.

 

^ agreed in general.

A few are obsessed on this topic...I'd go so far as to speculate if some lost the use of their hands, they would be bent on finding a voice-activated browser to continue....they seem oblivious that compulsion reflects on them poorly.

A common Dilbert theme is someone that persists in continuing a behavior that creates issues and insists on doing it anyway...here at PC a few absolutely know their obsession of this topic is disruptive and don't stop as if some force has taken them over.

Still don't think ETC(SS) sig was that big a deal - there are far more provactive things I've seen on both sides .... Daniel is just being very sensitive.

If more than a fleeting mention of religion issues is moved to the private forums, that's a good thing. I'd be happy to discuss it at length, but it inevitably turns into a flamewar.

Frankly, I think a few have an agenda for this topic to be an ongoing public flamewar and the only resolution is to move it to the private forums.

 

Fair enough, but would it be Fred's House of Religion, Fred's Temple of Religion, Fred's Church of Religion, Fred's Mosque of Religion, or something else? We need a thread to decide; perhaps a public poll.

Tom

 

I'll take that chance.
But to answer your question I'll stand convicted before GOD (Allah, in this case) for my beliefs. Personally, most of the things that I've read about in the Qur'an (I haven't read the whole book) square up rather nicely with the same things I've read in the Bible.
Islamic extremists have perverted this religion into something that's about 180 degrees out of phase with my very humble and uneducated interpretation of the "good versus evil" thing. I'm a man without letters, since I spent much of my twenties knocking holes in the North Atlantic instead of sleeping through philosophy classes.
Christian extremists don't have a much better track record to be sure, which is one of the very things that have led to the founding of this country, and the establishment of a very thick and very high firewall between government and religion.
Yeah...I know.
That firewall isn't as robust as it should be, but life for the anti-religion left is a lot better here than it would be in some warm, sandy places that I've been to. Also the "Hate America First" crowd neglects to acknowledge (at times) that one of the greatest strengths of this country is the self-correcting mechanisms that have been built into the USC (as amended) that have moved this country away from some of the baser aspects of religious fundamentalism.
The wheels were designed to turn slowly.
We can look back to a past that wasn't as righteous as it could have been and excoriate the USofA for all of her sins, or we can push forward and try live by the high and noble words that were written in the foundational documents.
Your call.
Me? I prefer to look forward with hope and optimism, than backwards with hate and rage.
History (literally: HIS STORY) is important to be sure, but I prefer to study it as a "don't do this again" sorta exercise rather than an excuse to hate folks who think a little differently that I do about some issues.
Buuuuuut, that's just me being me again.
THAT's what I meant when I changed my signature.
If I'm right, and I stand before GOD...sinful and unworthy as anybody else, I'm not going to do so with a clear conscience. I screw up as much as (IF NOT MORE THAN) everybody else does. I don't think that GOD wants me to regale him (or her!) with stories of how I plunged my sword into the breast of the unbelievers, or how I berated folks for not going to Sunday school, or for how I defended religion in some turd flicking contest on a car forum.
I'm thinking that perhaps Judgment Day (if they can judge me in just one day ) will be a little bit deeper than that.

If GOD's name is Allah, or Yahweh, or George, we're going to be well and truly past the point of counting how many times I've been to Mecca, or whether or not I like bacon with my cheeseburger.

Just sayin'

 

Maybe Fred's House of Holey Pancakes?

Assuming we can come to an agreement about the need for such a place...

 

We need such a place, and once we get the combatants, I mean participants, loaded, we blast off the B Ship.

Tom

 

Thank you. I think that's helpful.

Agreed. Although, it might be going a bit far to call it anyone's personal agenda to fan the flames for the sole purpose of cleansing the forums of religion....oh wait....do you think it would help?

I think it's fair to say there are strong feelings on all sides, and experience tells us that every point will be met with a counterpoint.

The 'Freedom Of Religion Includes Freedom From Religion' concept protects everyone's rights.

 

However it got implemented, I predict at least a couple of members perhaps busting their monitors or getting extremely upset for pushing their luck. They would HATE that - HATE IT.

I consider this the "nuclear option", but one that needs serious consideration.

This is as bad or worse than some political discussions - again, some WANT this flamewar to remain public.

The deterrent is to set up such a forum.

 

Yeah, but getting everybody loaded first will just create more emotion and angst. Not to mention all that spacebarf floating around in zero-g.

 

hyo_silver,

I think your proposal is necessary, even if goes a bit in the other direction of echewing the religion topic.

Daniel in post #12 stated he is posting to rally other non-religious people, but it's been done with way too much strife. Besides, I have not attacked them and don't know if others have - not often.

It's kind of like earlier in my thread mentioning Bill Russell. What if he met me at that point in his life: "Chuck is white - he MUST be a racist!" Never mind I did not do anything - I simply look like a lot of racists he suffered. Some of that goes on on this topic and definitely in the very reason for this thread.

I think a lot of people could discuss religion calmly - in other settings I have with people of different beliefs.

It's just way too adversarial here.

 

^it's interesting that you choose imprisonment for pacifism, and yet you seem to fight bitterly against those who would force their religion on you.
That's certainly not a critique...I'm in no way qualified to judge you or anybody else.
I just don't think that seeing the G-word mentioned in public meets my personal standard for hate crime.

I'm also fascinated by techniques that some (not you personally) in the anti-theist movement use that mirror those used by the fundamentalist theists.
See GOD mentioned in a public school? STAMP IT OUT!
See GOD inscribed on a public building? STAMP IT OUT!
See GOD mentioned on currency? Well......you get the idea!

BTW....I too would like to see them hit the delete button on "In God We Trust" on our currency. I have no heartburn with, nor am I offended by the mentioning of the G-word in public however (comma!!!) I think that IGWT stamped on money is debasing to GOD, not the United States.
JMHO...

 

If the member of PC would be able to interact in a religious discussion without resorting to personal attacks and flames... would it then still reflect negatively on PC?

 

^ Yes, plus there are other things:

- Agree to disagree - it's obvious some will not be a peace unless everyone agrees with them it seems, and that's obviously not going to happen.

- Avoiding extended discussions. That's not bad in itself, but it's usually the result of some members being incapable of agreeing to disagree as in the 1st point. There are simply some issues people are not going to change their mind. That and frequent threads attempting to put the other viewpoint on the defensive.

 

Regardless of what us inmates think we want, I rather doubt the guards want yet another playground within their jurisdiction. It's taken quite some time to get the political fights under control, and even now there are still hotspots to extinguish. I can picture the mods swearing and ripping their hair out at having to respond to every complaint about religious content. Yet, it seems that may be the path of least resistance if things keep going the way they are. Sorry, Mr Moderators; my suggestion for a separate forum was not intended to make your lives more difficult.

 

^ Most laws happen when a few get carried away - the more excess - the more regulation, i.e. "nanny state."

If the tone of discussion on this topic can improve - problem solved!

Otherwise, I think a private forum is necessary.

 

^ which usually happens and all is well for 5-6 months.