Ram Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 :haha: Excellent, things are really going to heat up now... I am loving this!
CC1981 Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 Can we have a discussion relating to Samir Kantar/israel-palestine politics, etc. ?
Ram Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 Again for the nth time it comes down to how do "YOU" arrive at what is bashing and what is merely a discussion ..... are facts allowed to get in the way. To be brutally honest you are not the type that will provide substantiation. I may not participate in religious discussions yes, but I certainly 'know' whats religious discussion and whats religion bashing, thank you.
Ram Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 And I would greatly appreciate if I am allowed to speak for myself. Dont need other posters to either support me or explain things on behalf of me. Thanks again.
Ram Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 As I said, I trust my intelligence to differentiate between what is religious discussion and whats religion bashing. Dont need certificates from others on that. Anyways, too much discussion on moderation, that may never happen. Case closed.
THX_1138 Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 Yo whats so great about religion that we cannot debate it? Must we be equally accepting and tolerant of illogical, contradictory beliefs of others simply because they fall under the category of personal faith? I wont stop for a moment to criticize anyone for some ludicrous belief they might attempt to uphold in the field of mathematics or physics or chemistry or medicine, and vice versa. then why on earth does religion get a pass on this criticism for its inherently flawed logic? sriram if you are so sensitive about preserving the religious sympathies of fools who on most days of the week are logical, rational human beings; then maybe you ought to post at pp.net. great job they have done at preserving the sanctimony of religion. if you feel a debate is too redundant or boring for you to indulge in, then sit on the sidelines and have a jolly time pointing and laughing at those crossing swords.
CC1981 Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 Yo whats so great about religion that we cannot debate it? Must we be equally accepting and tolerant of illogical, contradictory beliefs of others simply because they fall under the category of personal faith? I wont stop for a moment to criticize anyone for some ludicrous belief they might attempt to uphold in the field of mathematics or physics or chemistry or medicine, and vice versa. then why on earth does religion get a pass on this criticism for its inherently flawed logic? sriram if you are so sensitive about preserving the religious sympathies of fools who on most days of the week are logical, rational human beings; then maybe you ought to post at pp.net. great job they have done at preserving the sanctimony of religion. if you feel a debate is too redundant or boring for you to indulge in, then sit on the sidelines and have a jolly time pointing and laughing at those crossing swords. I agree in essence, but the problems are of a more practical nature. I am no fan of religion but what irks me about religion is that amidst the pile of the same ol bull*****, people tend to gravitate towards a few particular religions to bash (given the demographic balance here). Talk about messianic paedophilia and you got a bunch of rambunctious sabre rattlers who will denounce such activities with their noses turned skywards and wagging fingers. But talk about a banished prince who ditched his wife coz some idiots questioned her integrity, or a peeping tom wannabe God and the same crowd will drip venom in their condemnation of you. This board has a complex of 'my God has a bigger d!ck than your God' complex, not of 'all Gods are figments of our immagination, lets bash away' complex. As such, its better IMO to skirt the topic alltogether instead of falsely potraying one religion as better than another when reality is, all religions are manifestly flawed in their own ways and contribute negetives to societies in their own ways and we are in no position to judge who does a worse job. A former gf of mine ( Chinese) shed some good perspective on the topic when she once told me that the greatest fascination (and point of ridicule) of her culture towards ours, is how we've been breaking our heads for several thousand years over religion and messiahs while their culture has steadily evolved out of such personalized nonsense weilding mass social power. And i more or less agree with her: EVERY major downturn in Indian society-today, at time of independence and in classical times- have been over religion. IMO, as a society, we will do very well indeed if we went around our way just ignoring the accursed word and all the extrapolations of this accursed word : religion.
fineleg Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 Who were you going to put to trila in those instances that I gave you finey ? You would have to convert pretty much Who would you put to trial? If you find the perpetrators, by all means put them to trial. If you dont find the perpetrators you cannot punish whoever you find for the sake of it. PS: Expressing outrage (non-violent expression only) or choosing not to express outrage is a personal choice of individuals. It is not a punishable offence.
fineleg Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 If {a, b, c...z} are residents of that town, and if 'c' did not commit the crime (for example), and you can prove the rest did, then yes, put the rest except 'c' to trial. If you guess "pretty much most of town T" did the crime - then you dont know which exactly amongst {a, b, c...z} did it, and cannot punish the entire town, just cos "most did it" and we dont exactly know who belongs to "most".
THX_1138 Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 I agree in essence, but the problems are of a more practical nature. I am no fan of religion but what irks me about religion is that amidst the pile of the same ol bull*****, people tend to gravitate towards a few particular religions to bash (given the demographic balance here). Talk about messianic paedophilia and you got a bunch of rambunctious sabre rattlers who will denounce such activities with their noses turned skywards and wagging fingers. But talk about a banished prince who ditched his wife coz some idiots questioned her integrity, or a peeping tom wannabe God and the same crowd will drip venom in their condemnation of you. This board has a complex of 'my God has a bigger d!ck than your God' complex, not of 'all Gods are figments of our immagination, lets bash away' complex. As such, its better IMO to skirt the topic alltogether instead of falsely potraying one religion as better than another when reality is, all religions are manifestly flawed in their own ways and contribute negetives to societies in their own ways and we are in no position to judge who does a worse job. A former gf of mine ( Chinese) shed some good perspective on the topic when she once told me that the greatest fascination (and point of ridicule) of her culture towards ours, is how we've been breaking our heads for several thousand years over religion and messiahs while their culture has steadily evolved out of such personalized nonsense weilding mass social power. And i more or less agree with her: EVERY major downturn in Indian society-today, at time of independence and in classical times- have been over religion. IMO, as a society, we will do very well indeed if we went around our way just ignoring the accursed word and all the extrapolations of this accursed word : religion. horse manure comes in many flavors... some nutty and fresh and some downright revolting. thus, while we might withstand the nutty and fresh for a little while, maybe even prod it with a stick to humor ourselves, its the downright revolting stuff that when we get a wiff of, we leg it in the opposite direction with our nostrils securely constricted. its tedious to criticize certain dogmas that have both wisdom and only a small spattering of logic within them such as say Jainism, Buddhism, and to some extent Hinduism... whereas there are some dogmas that are downright humorous in their inconsistencies: Mormonism and Islam topping the list. this so called evolution of the chinese has been helped along the way by illegalization of religious proselytizing as it has often been viewed as a possible infrastructure to protest or even oppose the dragoonian central government. furthermore, the chinese have had the advantage of insightful philosophers while other civilizations have had a generous helping of "messiahs", "prophets", "mahagurus" etc etc.
THX_1138 Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 I agree in essence, but the problems are of a more practical nature. I am no fan of religion but what irks me about religion is that amidst the pile of the same ol bull*****, people tend to gravitate towards a few particular religions to bash (given the demographic balance here). Talk about messianic paedophilia and you got a bunch of rambunctious sabre rattlers who will denounce such activities with their noses turned skywards and wagging fingers. But talk about a banished prince who ditched his wife coz some idiots questioned her integrity, or a peeping tom wannabe God and the same crowd will drip venom in their condemnation of you. This board has a complex of 'my God has a bigger d!ck than your God' complex, not of 'all Gods are figments of our immagination, lets bash away' complex. As such, its better IMO to skirt the topic alltogether instead of falsely potraying one religion as better than another when reality is, all religions are manifestly flawed in their own ways and contribute negetives to societies in their own ways and we are in no position to judge who does a worse job. A former gf of mine ( Chinese) shed some good perspective on the topic when she once told me that the greatest fascination (and point of ridicule) of her culture towards ours, is how we've been breaking our heads for several thousand years over religion and messiahs while their culture has steadily evolved out of such personalized nonsense weilding mass social power. And i more or less agree with her: EVERY major downturn in Indian society-today, at time of independence and in classical times- have been over religion. IMO, as a society, we will do very well indeed if we went around our way just ignoring the accursed word and all the extrapolations of this accursed word : religion. well said, however, i find those stories quite amusing that the individual, as you correctly stated, revered as god and virtually infallible, is impressionable like a teenage girl in a high school popularity contest into abandoning his wife and children; but we must admire him for his generosity for embracing his children after he drives his poor wife into shame driven suicide. hinduism is just as flawed in philosophy as other religions, however, it has certain saving graces: equality of justice (though i do recall reading something ages ago in the gita to the contradictory), assimilation of philosophies and no special punishments such as "stoning to death" for nonbelievers. as i said in the previous post, its easier to pick holes in islam and other abrahamic faiths (though a special vile tongue is reserved for islam as opposed to judaism and christianity), than it is to pick holes in buddhism and jainism.
Gambit Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 AHA ! The ace is back .... Watch out DR !:--D First King Khan and now The Ace? KR, tu galat logon to jhaad pe chadhaa deta hai :D
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 First King Khan and now The Ace? KR' date=' tu galat logon to jhaad pe chadhaa deta hai :D[/quote'] :hysterical: so true he will start crying pretty soon even over this sample.. come on dude show some class pick right horses..
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 Fact remains one particular religion stinks the most and throws its stink on one and all ........others stink at worst are harmless............
THX_1138 Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 Fact remains one particular religion stinks the most and throws its stink on one and all ........others stink at worst are harmless............ no religion is harmless, except maybe for truely nonviolent religions suchs as jainism and buddhism.
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 oke let me rephrase it stink of may be all religions would have been harmful at some stage but as of today all but one have harmless stink..
CC1981 Posted July 25, 2008 Posted July 25, 2008 oke let me rephrase it stink of may be all religions would have been harmful at some stage but as of today all but one have harmless stink.. No, most religions have a stink to them..i can think of only jainism and buddhism** with wicca and daoism are the only ones that doesnt leave much of stink and you should be proud that two of those religions are the product of your soil. **: It is truely interesting debate if we can call Buddhism a religion or not. On the surface of it, it is practiced like a religion, with certain doctrines held purely religiously and staunchly upon faith and many Buddhists see Buddha the same way as hindus see Krishna. However, ALL canonical scriptures-and even the non-canonical ones categorically say that Buddha was not a God or a messiah or an avatar. Infact, ALL of them categorically quote Buddha HIMSELF categorically stating he isnt a god,messiah or avatar. The question of God too is categorically left untouched in the cannons, with Buddha categorically saying such a question is largely irrelevant and akin to a man missing his immediate tasks for a purely hypothetical one.
Recommended Posts