Welcome Guest ( Log In  ·  Register)



5 Pages < 1 2 3 4 > »  
Reply to this topicStart Poll
over 50% of Americans think earth under, 10K years old.
[ Standard ] · Linear+
Orion_Zorn
post Sep 25 2007, 02:58 PM
Post #16


General
Group Icon

Group: Silver VIP Member
Posts: 4,173

Submissions: None
Joined: 28-December 03

From: Upstate NY
Member No.: 2,212






QUOTE
In a perfect school system teachers should point out all major theories in their subject. In this case this means that a teacher should tell his students the pros and cons of evolution theory and creationism and he should tell them in which concept the majority of scientists believe. Also he should make sure to teach students to draw their own conclusions.


imo they shouldnt teach anything that has no evidence for it at all. teach any theory that has some data to support it, but creationism does not, so dont teach it.

QUOTE
Disclaimer: Thats my idea of perfect school, I dont claim my idea to be the non-plus-ultra in general.

Back when I went to school we had the subjects biology and religion. Although both subjects disgareed regarding the creation/evolution I never had the feeling that any of both teachers tried to manipulate us. Both told us to use our brains and to draw our own conclusions and to form our own believes.

Looking back I even have to admit that my religion teacher was my best teacher ever. We wrote many tests in religion and while the other students always tried to adapt to our teachers opinion during those tests (hoping this would make them get better grades), I refused to do so and I tried to refute our teachers opinion as good as possible whenever I thought it was nescessary. I feared that I would end up with worse grades but still I did what I considered to be appropriate.

The result was that I always got my tests back and the sheets were literally red because my teacher added so many comments with his red pencil. The cool thing was that I always had the best grades compared to my classmates. My religion teacher enjoyed this way of discussing, he liked the fact that I not copied his opinion and he told me more than once that he admired my eloquence and logic.

Im aware of the fact that all this sounds like Im bragging about myself but the point is that this religion teacher strengthend my self-confidence and he affirmed my quest for the truth. He knew that I was an atheist at that time but he never tried to bedazzle me in order to bring me back to religion.

Why do I mention that? Well, because I dont want you to lump together religious people and religion as subject.


I see your point, and he sounds like a very open minded person. unfortunately, many are not, and I guess my problem is that religion, by nature tends to push people to not be open minded.

edit: also, i dont think anyone here would feel you are bragging about yourself. you seem well grounded. Myself and a couple of others here take care of the Ego quotient (quota?) on the VIP forums. :P (in my defense, I try really hard to not let my ego get the best of me lol)

This post has been edited by Orion_Zorn: Sep 25 2007, 03:00 PM

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sKiLLfrEE
post Sep 25 2007, 03:03 PM
Post #17


Field-Marshal
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 6,487

Submissions: None
Joined: 4-May 04

From: Germany
Member No.: 5,674






QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ Sep 25 2007, 05:06 PM)

one thing - good parents teach their children to think for themselves.  Relgion does not. 


Please be fair when making such comparisons. Your statement implies that religious parents automatically are no good parents. My parents were religious (my mother still is my dad already passed away) and raised me strictly catholic. Would you consider me being unable to think for myself? I guess you wouldnt, at least I hope so. Religious education doesnt make you automatically a brainless conformist. 90% of my friends and relatives were also raised up by religious parents. None of them is a brainless retard, most of my friends are scientists (maths, physics, biology) or university graduates/academics who still believe in god and raise their kids religious too. If those kids become like their parents for the slightest bit I can guarantee you that they are worth to live and die for.


QUOTE
'philosophy is asking questions that can never be answered, Religion is giving answers that can never be questioned.'


Philosophy is asking questions that can not be answered yet, but philosophy also asked and answered a lot of other questions.

Religion offers answers to questions which might never be able to be proven by science, you can accept those offers or deny them.

Maybe some questions dont have to be answered. Maybe we are sometimes allowed not to measure everything we think and do on logic. Maybe, hopefully....





User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orion_Zorn
post Sep 25 2007, 06:32 PM
Post #18


General
Group Icon

Group: Silver VIP Member
Posts: 4,173

Submissions: None
Joined: 28-December 03

From: Upstate NY
Member No.: 2,212






i should have been clearer

i didnt mean to say religious people automatically taught kids not to think for themselves. I meant religion promotes 'not thinking for yourself'.

QUOTE
I guess you wouldnt, at least I hope so


nope, not at all.

QUOTE
Religious education doesnt make you automatically a brainless conformist.


no, not at all...but wouldnt you agree it isnt a good thing to teach kids that something is Fact, when it is not a proven fact? Isnt it better to teach kids to be skeptical? See I feel this is healthy thinking.

“Do not believe on the strength of traditions even if they have been held in honour for many generations and in many places ; do not believe anything because many people speak of it ; do not believe on the strength of sages of old times ; do not believe that which you have yourself imagined, thinking that a god has inspired you. Believe nothing which depends only on the authority of your masters or of priests. After investigation, believe that which you have yourselves tested and found reasonable, and which is for your good, and that of others.” - Buddha

I have no idea how Buddhism works, but to me, this statement is about as perfect as anything i have ever read. Its fine to believe in god, but do not do so because someone taught you to, inspect things for yourself, and make your own decision.

By religions and religious schools teaching that their version is Fact or Truth, it does not promote children to act like the quote above.

that is what i meant, not that religious people are stupid or anything.

QUOTE
Maybe some questions dont have to be answered.


This is EXACTLY my thinking!

Religious people don't do that at all. They answer the question that CANNOT be answered - what happens when you die. Why do they need to feel they have to dream up an answer to something that cannot ever be answered? Logic says that nothing happens, but i dont believe that just because logic says it is the most likely outcome. I just feel ill find out if i get there. If there is no afterlife, i wont know it. If there is, and god is upset i didnt believe, ill just say 'not enough evidence God, not enough evidence!'. :)

Some questions dont have to be answered at all. Thats why I am an atheist.

This post has been edited by Orion_Zorn: Sep 25 2007, 06:38 PM

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
StarGazeR
post Sep 25 2007, 06:59 PM
Post #19


Brigadier
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 2,386

Submissions: None
Joined: 26-April 05

From: USA
Member No.: 16,150






@Zorn

I am a bit surprised that in the end, you answered "no", that you would not support such legisation.I don't understand why you are back pedaling on this. The only reason I asked those questions was because of your idea.

QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ Sep 24 2007, 07:04 AM)
ideally, kids under 18 are not allowed in church, but i know this is just wishful thinking on my part.
*




Do you stand behind that statement or not?

I can't believe I just read YOU saying "I have feelings for both sides" or "there are many really good religious people out there" or " If you have a truly Good person heading a church, it can be great" or "It can even promote peace".

This isn't consistent with any of your previously stated opinions on religion. It almost seems that when asked a direct question, you are attempting to hold your position and be politically correct at the same time. I don't think you can pull that off in this situation. I just want you to be honest and consistent. I only want to know exactly what you believe and what you would support as far as legislation regarding religion.

You have said religion is dangerous. You have said it promotes closed mindedness and stupidity. You have claimed that religious people are intellectually inferior. You have said religion brain washes people, especially children. You even said that you don't think minors should be allowed to go to church.

Given what you have said about religion, I find it almost impossible to believe that you would not support legislation to remove it or restrict it.

My 1st reply in this topic was asking for a solution. If you don't support such legislation, and stick with an answer of "no" to my previous questions, then you have yet to offer any solution to what you see as a serious problem, religion.

So again, what is your solution?

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sKiLLfrEE
post Sep 25 2007, 08:38 PM
Post #20


Field-Marshal
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 6,487

Submissions: None
Joined: 4-May 04

From: Germany
Member No.: 5,674






QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ Sep 25 2007, 11:32 PM)
i should have been clearer

i didnt mean to say religious people automatically taught kids not to think for themselves.  I meant religion promotes 'not thinking for yourself'.


So religion as such promotes brainless behaviour but the people who live religion dont do that nescessarily? Where´s the problem then? If religious people as such aren´t automatically "evil" how can religion then be automatically "evil"? What is religion without people? Still dangerous?

QUOTE
no, not at all...but wouldnt you agree it isnt a good thing to teach kids that something is Fact, when it is not a proven fact?  Isnt it better to teach kids to be skeptical?  See I feel this is healthy thinking.


From my experience I can tell you that actually most religious parents teach their children both, religion and scepsis. They dont tell their children to shut up when they ask questions regarding religion, they want their children to question everything because they dont want their children to become brainless victims/conformists/followers of political leaders, social leaders (e.g. trendsetters), company leaders or leaders of other religious leaders.

They teach their children the difference between "believe" and "fact", knowing that they will be confronted with questions of their kids, questions regarding religion, questions which they probably can not answer and this is the point where the kids have to make a conscious decision pro or contra the religion which was taught them by their parents. Scepsis and religion....that is no contradiction. Doubts are part of religion and if you read the bible you will notice that even Jesus said (hanging on the cross): "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me" (Mark 15:34). You know that I dont believe the bible to be true but if the authors of the bible let the main person say such an expression of deepest doubts in one of the most important moments in this book, do you then (also considering what I said above) really think that scepsis and religion is a contradiction? It is allowed to doubt religion, religion doesnt promote blind conformism.






QUOTE
“Do not believe on the strength of traditions even if they have been held in honour for many generations and in many places ; do not believe anything because many people speak of it ; do not believe on the strength of sages of old times ; do not believe that which you have yourself imagined, thinking that a god has inspired you. Believe nothing which depends only on the authority of your masters or of priests. After investigation, believe that which you have yourselves tested and found reasonable, and which is for your good, and that of others.” - Buddha


Great quote, I agree but I like this it better with this changes:

You dont have to believe on the strength of traditions even if they have been held in honour for many generations and in many places ; you dont have to believe anything because many people speak of it ; You dont have to believe on the strength of sages of old times ; you dont have to believe that which you have yourself imagined, thinking that a god has inspired you. You dont have to believe in anything which depends only on the authority of your masters or of priests. After investigation/consideration, believe that which you have yourselves tested and found reasonable, and/or which is for your good, and that of others.

;)

If you question everything, then you should also question reason, sicence and logic.


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
StarGazeR
post Sep 25 2007, 09:21 PM
Post #21


Brigadier
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 2,386

Submissions: None
Joined: 26-April 05

From: USA
Member No.: 16,150






Well, well, well, I don't have to wait for another answer after all. You, sir are an out right liar.

QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ Sep 25 2007, 01:51 PM)
Anyway, if i had to make a choice, i would not support laws outlawing religion, or kids in church, or anything like that.  People can make the choice to go to church, or a catholic schools, just keep it out of public schools because many families have no choice but to send their kids there.
*




QUOTE(Zorn @ Sep 3 2007)
There should be a law that people cannot go to church until they are 18
*



It doesn't get much plainer than that.

I found this proof of your dishonesty on your own site, oddly enough called dontfearthetruth.com. God I love irony. Why do you fear the truth and tell others not too? :whistling:

Why didn't you just answer me honestly? I already knew you would support legislation to restrict religion if it ever came up. I just wanted to see it in type for the record, but apparently you lack the courage of your convictions.

Now I have another question. If someone in congress were to try to have the following statement added to the constitution;

QUOTE
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.


in order to prevent any future law makers from ever restricting, banning, or otherwise infringing on religious freedom would you be against it?


Seriously Zorn, if you are ashamed to say what you really believe and let people see who you really are outside of your own anonymous blog, perhaps it is time to reevaluate your beliefs and who you really are.

This post has been edited by StarGazeR: Sep 26 2007, 06:55 AM

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orion_Zorn
post Sep 26 2007, 07:28 AM
Post #22


General
Group Icon

Group: Silver VIP Member
Posts: 4,173

Submissions: None
Joined: 28-December 03

From: Upstate NY
Member No.: 2,212






wow and i thought we were actually getting somewhere. I guess not.

I said the original statement flippantly. When you asked the serious question, was it not obvious that i realized this is not a simple issue?

That was why i explained my thought process.

So yes, i said it initially ( i thought i even said it here...?) , and when i really thought it through, i realized that even though it is not a cut and dry issue, i would not support legislation.

this is weird. Have you never realized after thinking something through more thoroughly that your initial idea was wrong? Do you remember everthing you have ever said about an issue?

you spend time on my site, comparing what i say there to what i say here, to catch me in a discrepancy??? lol

the key is, I DID answer you honestly. I changed my mind, after discussing it with you, and thinking about your points - 'how do you charge the family members' etc etc. Is that what you want to hear? Do you think it is a big deal that you enlightened me? Is that why you are spending time on my site? Ill admit, discussing this with you has opened my eyes to many things. All of these discussions have.

And that is the difference though, you havent learned a thing. Still stuck in your ideas, determined not to be wrong. Damn you are one weird great guy.

(I can see you now, hunched over your keyboard like a sniper waiting for a target. "If Zorn says he doesnt back legislation, i will show him that i have scoured his blog and found that 3 weeks ago he said something different!)

lol what a weirdo

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orion_Zorn
post Sep 26 2007, 07:34 AM
Post #23


General
Group Icon

Group: Silver VIP Member
Posts: 4,173

Submissions: None
Joined: 28-December 03

From: Upstate NY
Member No.: 2,212






hey a year ago I said i would vote for a democrat, now I am voting for Ron Paul. When i think of these things I will let you know. :whistling:

This post has been edited by Orion_Zorn: Sep 26 2007, 09:21 AM

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
StarGazeR
post Sep 26 2007, 11:40 AM
Post #24


Brigadier
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 2,386

Submissions: None
Joined: 26-April 05

From: USA
Member No.: 16,150






QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ Sep 26 2007, 06:28 AM)
wow and i thought we were actually getting somewhere.  I guess not.

I said the original statement flippantly.  When you asked the serious question, was it not obvious that i realized this is not a simple issue? 

That was why i explained my thought process. 

So yes, i said it initially ( i thought i even said it here...?) , and when i really thought it through, i realized that even though it is not a cut and dry issue, i would not support legislation.
*



QUOTE
Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


You made a statement that directly contradicts the first ammendment of the United States Bill of Rights, and your excuse is that you didn't think it through? Don't you think such statements should not be made "flippantly"?

It is one thing to make a silly remark among a small group of friends, but it is another matter completely when you are discussing publically or running a blog where your intent is to show people "the truth".

This is from your site.
QUOTE
About The Site
Don’t Fear the Truth is a site with a little of everything, run by four friends. The name of the site means we post things you might not want to hear, because most people don’t want to hear things that are True, they want to hear things that make them feel safe, happy, whatever.

God might not exist, the goverment might be corrupted. You might not want to hear those things, but the most important thing is to find the Truth, not what makes you feel better.


Don't you think, as someone who claims to be an educator and enlightener, that in order to adhere to that criteria it is your highest responsibilty to "think it through" before you say it?

QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ Sep 26 2007, 06:28 AM)
this is weird.  Have you never realized after thinking something through more thoroughly that your initial idea was wrong?  Do you remember everthing you have ever said about an issue?
*



I have adjusted my position. I have been wrong. My errors have mostly been factual, such as getting a date or location wrong or some overlooked detail. My core beliefs however have remained fairly consistent.


QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ Sep 26 2007, 06:28 AM)
you spend time on my site, comparing what i say there to what i say here, to catch me in a discrepancy???   lol

the key is, I DID answer you honestly.  I changed my mind, after discussing it with you, and thinking about your points - 'how do you charge the family members' etc etc.  Is that what you want to hear?  Do you think it is a big deal that you enlightened me?  Is that why you are spending time on my site?  Ill admit, discussing this with you has opened my eyes to many things.  All of these discussions have.
*



I think it is great that you have had a change of heart regarding religion. I feel great that I played a part in changing your mind, but I am bothered by the fact that this change of heart is only displayed here.

As of last night, you have not retracted this statement on your blog.
QUOTE
There should be a law that people cannot go to church until they are 18


If you truly have changed your mind on this, shouldn't you correct it? Is it not possible that someone could read that and think it is a good idea without thinking it through, just like you did?

If you are going to push truth as your primary agenda, then you owe your readers the truth, even if it means sharing a change of mind.

Did you ever post that the zogby poll you posted was sponsered by Iran?

QUOTE
wow and i thought we were actually getting somewhere.  I guess not.


Please don't let the harshness of my last post discourage you from discussing with me. I get furious when I think someone is lying to me. That is where the anger came from. Truth is, I think we are getting somewhere.

This post has been edited by StarGazeR: Sep 26 2007, 11:45 AM

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sKiLLfrEE
post Sep 26 2007, 11:48 AM
Post #25


Field-Marshal
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 6,487

Submissions: None
Joined: 4-May 04

From: Germany
Member No.: 5,674






QUOTE(StarGazeR @ Sep 26 2007, 04:40 PM)
Truth is, I think we are getting somewhere.
*




*Haaaallelujah, Hallelujah, Hall-ehe-lujah* :lol:

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orion_Zorn
post Sep 26 2007, 12:06 PM
Post #26


General
Group Icon

Group: Silver VIP Member
Posts: 4,173

Submissions: None
Joined: 28-December 03

From: Upstate NY
Member No.: 2,212






QUOTE
Did you ever post that the zogby poll you posted was sponsered by Iran?


It WASNT paid for by Iran, did you read my reply here? And it isn't even on my blog.

as for the 'blah blah its different when you publicly state things'

dude, its a blog. I know blogs that talk about cats, and how to knit sweaters for them. I have seen blogs where people said what they had for dinner that night. The beauty is, i can say whatever i want on it. And retract *nothing*. Only the fruittards like OReilly seem to think blogging is bad. Its a diary. Don't like it? Don't read it.

QUOTE
It is one thing to make a silly remark among a small group of friends, but it is another matter completely when you are discussing publically or running a blog where your intent is to show people "the truth".


Bullsh1t. Tell you what. All religious people should be moved to an island by themselves, with no communication with the rest of the world. Then they need to hold grapes in between their toes all day long. If they squish a grape, they get hit over the head with a mackerel. A mackerel that is filled with goat cheese. Oh IM SORRY I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOMETHING CALLED FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE USA!

Hows that for speaking publicly? You can knock all Canadians but I can't say kids shouldn't be allowed to go to church?

QUOTE
Don't you think, as someone who claims to be an educator and enlightener, that in order to adhere to that criteria it is your highest responsibilty to "think it through" before you say it?


you are one weird dude.

QUOTE
Please don't let the harshness of my last post discourage you from discussing with me. I get furious when I think someone is lying to me. That is where the anger came from. Truth is, I think we are getting somewhere.


how's this for letting the harshness discourage me?

Go Fvck Yourself.

This post has been edited by Orion_Zorn: Sep 26 2007, 12:36 PM

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orion_Zorn
post Sep 26 2007, 12:22 PM
Post #27


General
Group Icon

Group: Silver VIP Member
Posts: 4,173

Submissions: None
Joined: 28-December 03

From: Upstate NY
Member No.: 2,212






just to make this clear:

you are saying that when you call all Canadians Hippie Moose fruiters, or just attack random posters here, (please note the unprovoked attack on Canada (the AOT player, not the country) in this thread!)) its just 'funny' but I should be more responsible with what I say ON MY OWN BLOG? AND that when I change my mind, I need to go back and EDIT IT?????

you are by far the weirdest human being I have ever met. You think we are getting somewhere because of the two of us, i am the only one that admits he is wrong, or has learned anything. Riddle me this smart guy - if Clinton advocated 500K dead iraqi children in the 1990s, and it wasn't big news.... *what kind of country do you live in*?

Not to mention, prior to the invasion of iraq, the american media talked about hussein's brutality, but omitted the timeline of when Hussein gassed the kurds - he did that 20 years ago -*when he was still supported by the US government and guess what - THEY DIDNT CARE!

what a freak.

This post has been edited by Orion_Zorn: Sep 26 2007, 12:33 PM

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sKiLLfrEE
post Sep 26 2007, 01:12 PM
Post #28


Field-Marshal
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 6,487

Submissions: None
Joined: 4-May 04

From: Germany
Member No.: 5,674






Ok, I guess again it´s time for us all to take some.....koolaid (right? ;) ).

There is really no need to become angry. Let us discuss respect- and peacefully, our discussions wont change the world anyways, no matter which opinions we represent. ;)

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
StarGazeR
post Sep 26 2007, 01:14 PM
Post #29


Brigadier
Group Icon

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 2,386

Submissions: None
Joined: 26-April 05

From: USA
Member No.: 16,150






@Zorn
Now that you are angry enough to be honest, would you please answer these questions again, honestly this time?

1. Would you support restrictions on what is taught in private schools and the abolition of private Christian or other religious based private schools?

2. Would you support legislation to outlaw church attendance by minors? If so, what penalties do you think would be just to impose on parents who violate such a law?

3. Would you support legislation to make it illegal for minors to be taught religion at home?


QUOTE
Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


4. Do you support the 1st ammendment as is or would you like to see it removed or revised?


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orion_Zorn
post Sep 27 2007, 08:18 AM
Post #30


General
Group Icon

Group: Silver VIP Member
Posts: 4,173

Submissions: None
Joined: 28-December 03

From: Upstate NY
Member No.: 2,212






private schools should be outlawed. public school for everyone. Teachers are required to have huge breasts, and short skirts. Even the male teachers.

home schoolers are shot on sight with big bean bag guns. (it gives them a nice bean bag chair to sit on)

All churches need to be painted purple. Religious people are all sent to Chile, in inflatable rafts painted in a Mickey Mouse theme.

Religion is not to be taught anywhere. Anyone saying the name God is tied to a tree, covered in tomatoes and ravaged by the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Then, they go to the inflatable rafts, off to Chile.

I think the 1st Amendment should be removed. No more habeas corpus, who needs the bill of rights anyway. :)

Ill burn the Constitution for a little heat this winter. I hear it's going to be cold.



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

5 Pages < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicTopic Options
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
 

Task


Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 07:00 AM
About Us  ·   Advertising  ·   Contact Us  ·   Terms of Use  ·   Privacy Policy