 | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | (...) I have stated many times that *my* form of Christianity takes the form of leaving you to run your life the way you want as long as you reciprocate. It's the phrasing 'wacko Xtian' (and related spelling and ideas) which kinda started this whole (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: slight —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) "Only way?!?!" Aren't we talking about Big-G God here? The "only way" an infinite being can do something is however it wants to! And if that's not the case, then I can think of something greater than "a God who can't do things any way He (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: <snip> (...) Not only is my grammar atrocious, but my spelling as well. Sorry 'bout that--firstly no spell check via web interface, and secondly, I think, I type, and mostly don't bother to re-read. (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: slight —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) OK, so when Moses (or God, depending on what you believe) tells us not to covet the neighbor's wife, what do you believe you shouldn't do? Is it a sin to nail your neighbor's wife? What if she wants you to? What if her husband does too? There (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | | (...) Here's a thought--with freedom comes responsibility. Stop twisting and making irrelevant points--that point you made has nothing to do with my idea, which is the non-separation of body and soul. Nowhere in the 10 commandments does it command (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: slight —James Brown
|
| | | | | | | (...) I think Chris's point is that this is an absolute of Mosaic Law that goes against the "experiencing joy, love, happiness, sensualness, whatever" that was suggested as all ok in your comments. I'm certain that you didn't intend the "where-ever (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) And I think my point, reiterated, is that Chris twisted it into saying the Mosaic law says you cannot derive pleasure from living, which is far from the truth. Nowhere in the testaments does this concept even exist. I am not a biblical scholar (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —James Brown
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) <snipped the first chunk, becuase we're starting to argue in circles> (...) Not quite what I was saying; I should have been more specific. It is often necessary to the healing process for someone who has been in an abusive relationship to (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: slight —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I have a problem with this form of the Golden Rule -- it's in the form of an exhortation to some kind of action. I prefer "Do not unto others as you would have others not do unto you." Point being: I want to be left alone. The form you have (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —James Brown
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Same philosophy, different expression. Your version has the same inherent flaw: I do not want others to leave me alone, therefore I will not leave others alone. ;p Just about any pat rendering of morality or social expression will have a flaw (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Can you come up with an example that isn't wildly contrived or overly concerned with the fate of bacteria or ants? -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —James Brown
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Stunningly easy: "Jane" and "Joe" are in a relationship that is no longer working out. Staying together is causing a fair degree of pain and stress for them; seperating will also couse a fair degree of pain and stress. Neither action has the (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Well, I think you are stressing the word "harm" a bit here. Everyone knows it takes two to tango, but only one to stop the dance. Them's the breaks... I'll take this opportunity to quote Mr. Crowley: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —James Brown
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Hmm, I don't think so. My understanding is that most of the "harm" modern Wiccan philosophy means to address is emotional and spiritual in nature, rather than physical, although I'll admit that I haven't made an in-depth study of it. (...) (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | (...) "Fergus spake these words and he said, This shall be my Creed, whereby shall I live my life as it were a shining example of Virtue and Excellence, well worthy to be enshrined in Heaven as a model for all who are to follow. My Creed shall into (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | christian morals are inferior to tolerant morals —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) Why not? You'll have to present an argument other than "from authority" to convince me differently. Assuming we've named all the stakeholders, and they're all consenting adults who actually consented (posit this for the sake of the argument, (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: christian morals are inferior to tolerant morals —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) "Larry's morals and David's are equivalently good within your separate personal contexts." :) (...) Interesting note, though. In this particular case, you *haven't* judged David's theoretical person who *wouldn't*, whereas David has actually (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: christian morals are inferior to tolerant morals —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) It wouldn't. (at least absent more particulars anyway...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Forgetting authority, forget the laws of the land and forget the laws of the bible nad foget that I'm a Christian and that you're, well, not... Thank you for making my point so crystal clear. (and the following point does *not* make Christians (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I think you just dodged the question here-- unless you're insinuating that science should dictate our morals? IE that *because* we can eliminate STD's if we stick to having one partner, that it's morally good? But back to the point. Let's (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Let's face it -- that's exactly what this is, despite your denial. If diseases cannot succeed in one way, they will do so in another way. Or put another way: the diseases whose transmissal routes are frustrated will die; but the diseases whose (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Just because you say it is don't make the buttercups shine. I know what I said and I stand by it. I am on *record* of supporting same sex marriages. I don't care if you want a harem--gov't should *not* legislate morality. I know loving and (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Not a moral reason not to... (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —James Brown
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) ...except in a very esotaric sense that taking action to prevent harmful diseases is life-affirming. <GD&R> :) James (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I already said there are "no other stakeholders". If one of the participants has an STD, there are other stakeholders. Nice try though. (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Except those passed from mother to child, like HIV, right? And those with other transmision vectors right? And anyway, let's imagine that everyone on earth got an authoritative bill of health and a list of their transmissible infections was (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) During my teen years there would have been no greater incentive NOT to have sex than to have to watch my parents going at it. Dave! (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Oh I so agree with you. Parents... sex... Ick!!! Dave K (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I'm not sure what degree of humor is intended by either of you, but I've heard that before and bet you're both wrong. If you had been raised seeing sexual expression of your parents love as a normal event, you would not be squicked by the (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I was indeed being facetious, but I can see the issue you're addressing. I note that you're already putting a spin on it that presupposes your view to be right and mine to be wrong; specifically, you are saying that your favorable emotional (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) Actually, I didn't. I said that I "bet" that you would feel differently if things had been different. (...) That would be fine with me. But I think the "ickyness" that we feel when considering our parents having sex is based on having sex be (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Darn it Chris, I'm trying to pick a fight here. Rise to it, man! Rise to it! (...) That would indeed be a strange lab to perform. Dave! (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) K, this one made me laugh out loud. That would be something to see (but probably still have a high 'Ick" factor). Again, something that others can do, but I probably would *ahem* abstain... Is like the new law in Ontario which states that (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Stephen Hurn
|
| | | | | | | | (...) This is why hypothetical situations fail, particularly when in relation to members of the opposite sex :). Thus far all that has been discussed is based upon a series of hypothetical people who all think that sex is something that is based (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | You have so completely oversimplified the possibilities in your analysis that a complete evaluation would be quite lengthy. (...) No one thinks this. At least not any more than every feeling-complex is purely physical because our brain contains our (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: slight —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | | | (...) covet (...) nail (...) too? (...) Pishtosh. If all involved have no problem with it, then there is nothing immoral about it. Marriage is what you make of it, not some hard-coded morality. (...) While I do believe somewhat in moral absolutes, I (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: slight —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | I thought we might agree on something fundamental from the way you were talking. Alas... (...) I agree. (...) It does have to do with the pleasure of the flesh and the pleasure of the spirit. I'm not twisting or making irrelevant points. And I think (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I don't mind your points at all--I like them just fine, and I think I responded to them. The way I saw it, though, was twisting the original intent of the message, which is the bible does not deny physical pleasure and it does not separate the (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | David, I get your stance on the commandment now. They aren't actually laws that God passed down about how to live your life. They're just good ideas. I'm pretty sure that's not how most Christians would characterize them, but that's really neither (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Love is limitless, 'cause, for me it comes from a limitless God, but that's neither here nor there. If it feels good, do it, is a claim of moral reletivism. I know that it's too simplistic, so lets dispense with that 'cause I think we all (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Not only do I think "if it feels good, do it" is a grand philosophy, I think it's the only philosophy. It's the one that we all follow every day, every time we make any kind of decision. You make the assumption that it must be short-sighted, (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) You forgot to mention vasectomies, which are the "best" of the above, IMO, because one man can impregnate 100s of women, but not the reverse ;-) (i.e., 1 man and 10 women can easily result in 10 or more babies within a year, but 10 men and 1 (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Skin heads feel better if there are no coloured people around. 'If it feels good, just do it' is *not* a grande philosophy. I'm debating in this thread now because I enjoy it--the second I stop enjoying it is the second I'm outta here, but (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: slight —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | (...) Name one. I'm not saying that there isn't one, I just think you need to establish that with a bit more certainity than you present. And yes, I'm actually asking for some supporting evidence, not just a name. :-) Bruce (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) And far too much that's not addressed, such as: What if my neighbor's wife covets me? What if I covet my neighbor's daughter? What if I covet my own daughter? What if I covet my sister? What if I covet my neighbor? What if the only way to keep (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) I dunno about you but I'd prefer something a little better than 60-70% accurate! (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) This reminds me of that old George Carlin skit, when he related the story of him and his buddies trying to trip up their Padre, 'Um Fathah, if we missed holy communion, but we were on an airplane and crossed the international dateline, but we (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) If every christian really believed this, and acted in accordance with it, I'd have no beef with christians and christianity. But they don't. So many professed christians in positions of power use that power to enforce their morals on others (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —James Brown
|
| | | | (...) I would be inclined to rephrase that as "So many people in positions of power use that power to..." I don't think that Christians, professed or otherwise are alone in abusing positions of power to set their world view on people; the Taliban (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —Lester Witter
|
| | | | (...) <snip> < Admittedly, (...) It seems to be a fundemental flaw in human nature that the type of personality required to reach a position of power is exactly the type of personality that you do not want that person to have Lester (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: slight —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) A point wnderfully articulated in book 1 of the 5 book Trilogy, The Hitch Hikers Guide the the Galaxy, in reference to Zaphod Beeblebrox, the then president of the universe. (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
