General Chat / NE 2012 U.S. Election discussion.

What it basically means is that free speech > religious feelings ALL. THE. TIME.

Nobody has the right to never be offended = Nobody has the right to stroll through their lives without having to sometimes endure the fact that somebody doesn't believe in the same imganinary friend they have and also stands by that.

In a nutshell - there is never to be censorship based on religion. In NO case whatsoever.

I see what you're saying now, but that statement is a bit awkward since the capacity to take offense to something is subjective. If I am generally a laid-back person that doesn't take offense to anything, then I will go through life without ever being offended. It isn't a right.

But nobody can enforce their "right" to never be offended in case they feel offended. Nobody should be allowed to ban science in the classroom because it doesn't "sound right". And no, I don't argue to ban religious education instead because it doesn't "sound right". It's just purely immoral.
-> http://www.youtube.c...h?v=CYaQpRZJl18

Especially if you are a member of a group that might be the biggest bunch of mass murderers in history.
And no, I won't take that back. Read a book about history other than the one some ancient rednecks wrote ~ 2000 years ago.

Thats bullshit. People from Europe have been mass-murdering, yes. And they all were christian until a few years ago. But they did not mass-murder because they were christian. Now I havend read books about the history of other peoples, but I'm sure they mass murdered too. Whatever you mean with mass murder anyway, when i think of the prototypical mass murderers of the last century, they were not exactly christian...

I'm not christian by the way.

Please explain to me how religion ( Christianity ) is immoral?

And you are right about being offended though, and that's why I believe that it is unfair for people to give up long-time religion based traditions in school. You can't appease everybody.

Wicksteed: I'm talking about everything that (mainly) the catholic church did for the last 2000 years. From crusades to fucking young boys. And yes, the Vatican looked away when the Nazis started industrializing killing people.

Shotguns?: Watch the video I posted. It's a clear line of reasoning that presents to you multiple accounts of why monotheistic religions can not be but immoral.
In relation to christianity:
The definition of morality is accepting one's individual responsibilities and acting accordingly. Christianity tells you your wrongdoings will be forgiven, your individual responsibility will be lifted from you. Christianity and morality exclude each other.

Religion is by no means immoral. But neither is being non-religious. In the same way that straight marriage is not immoral, so neither should gay marriage.

The problem with creating "Civil Unions", or whatever the Conservatives would like to call them, is that whenever they get put into action, straight Conservatives will start complaining that they don't have equal rights, and that it's unfair that they can't get Civil Unions.

Fuck the World. We're all doomed.

Gay marriage and straight marriage are just like bikini's and bra's. They're the exact same thing, but only one is allowed in a public place.

You're not allowed to wear just a bra in the US?

If someone did, I imagine there would be complaints.

I was at a mall once, where two men were obviously making out. They both were promptly arrested ten minutes later.

You're not allowed to wear just a bra in the US?

It's not so much illegal as it is frowned upon... like.. masterbating on an airplane.

Yeah, thanks a lot Bin Laden!

But nobody can enforce their "right" to never be offended in case they feel offended. Nobody should be allowed to ban science in the classroom because it doesn't "sound right". And no, I don't argue to ban religious education instead because it doesn't "sound right". It's just purely immoral.
-> http://www.youtube.c...h?v=CYaQpRZJl18

If the science isn't sound, it should not be taught in the classroom. There are a lot of problems with the 'big bang theory' but at the moment it's the best science has to offer. It is taught but it should be be emphasized that it's theory, not truth.
I agree about the religious teachings, it has no place in a secular education system.

So I want to know what you think about Buddhism. Is it immoral?

If someone did, I imagine there would be complaints.

I was at a mall once, where two men were obviously making out. They both were promptly arrested ten minutes later.

Where are you from? I don't know the laws against PDA... but this sounds strange to me.

If the science isn't sound, it should not be taught in the classroom. There is a lot of problems with the 'big bang theory' but at the moment it's the best science has to offer. It is taught but it should be be emphasized that it's theory, not truth.
I agree about the religious teachings, it has no place in a secular education system.

So I want to know what you think about Buddhism. Is it immoral?

I don't know much about the studies of Buddhism. I tend to stay silent about things I don't know enough about.
My mum is a priest. I know my way around Christianity, which enables me to talk about why it's immoral.

Where are you from? I don't know the laws against PDA... but this sounds strange to me.

Don't know the circumstances, but malls are private property, right? So I imagine that they didn't get arrested, they just got kicked out by mall cops?

Thats bullshit. People from Europe have been mass-murdering, yes. And they all were christian until a few years ago. But they did not mass-murder because they were christian.

This is true. Hitler was a Christian, Stalin was atheist, neither one did what they did because of their religion. It's the people that murder in the name of their religion (or any other act that is detrimental to another human being, or society, or humanity at large) that is a problem. Religion is not an inherently immoral concept, but when people can use it as a scapegoat - or worse, generally believe it justifies their actions - we run into problems.

If the science isn't sound, it should not be taught in the classroom. There is a lot of problems with the 'big bang theory' but at the moment it's the best science has to offer. It is taught but it should be be emphasized that it's theory, not truth.

Do you understand the difference between Scientific Theory and theory? Because it does actually mean something else. I'm curious to know what these holes are in the big bang theory, though. Getting new scientific material admitted into the school curriculum via textbooks not only isn't easy, but takes quite a while.

Don't know the circumstances, but malls are private property, right? So I imagine that they didn't get arrested, they just got kicked out by mall cops?

Paul Blart is a homophobe.

Stalin was not an atheist.

- He actually was in a seminary and just failed because he didn't show up for the finals.
- His official state position was that of a god-like person.
- He revived the Russian Orthodox Church in order to intensify patriotic support for the war effort.
- He was part of a council convened to elected a new church Patriarch.

-> No atheist, used the mythical aspect of religion(s) to establish a personality cult.

Oh shit, you're right. I meant Mussolini.

It's been too long since I took a WWII class.