-
@nostrildamus said in Religious type discussion:
@jegga yes Mayans in Central America have traditionally prayed for chocolate:
Ixcanil, Goddess of Seed, hear me.
Ixtoq, Goddess of Rain, help me.
Ixcacao, Goddess of Chocolate, see my tears and come to my aid.Sweet, is there a prayer to summon Nigella* and a pile of Whittaker's?
*in the original ad , she looked way milfier in those ones and a bit scary in the recent one.
-
Ok, it's gone off topic and I'm bored at work, so I'm going to expand on why I disagreed with your view that Kirwan was being arrogant or whatever.
In my opinion, there it little more things arrogant than religion itself. The fact that you can't wear what you want in certain countries, but then when people from these countries think they are entitled to wear their full coverings for everyday life in other parts of the world. Including local governments, court systems, schools etc. If that's not arrogance, then what is?
And to address the point of Saturdays prayer. Well, hang on a second, those players decided to get together in the middle of the field and show the world their religion. They know they are role models, they know that kids mimic them, they know that when they get down and do that, plenty of children will be going - "why are they doing that", "can we do that", "if I do that will I be a sports star", which is effectively shoving it down their throat. That's rather arrogant isn't it?
Athiests, on the whole, are certainly in no way more arrogant than religious types with their views. In fact, the tolerance they must have, as religion is everywhere in society, is higher than most.
-
I love the fact that one of the mods (not me) decided to start this new thread from the "you can pray for chocolate" post by @jegga
-
TBH I was short on time, so hadnt trawled back further to see if anymore should be moved, but I thought the point was made
-
@MajorRage said in Religious type discussion:
Ok, it's gone off topic and I'm bored at work, so I'm going to expand on why I disagreed with your view that Kirwan was being arrogant or whatever.
In my opinion, there it little more things arrogant than religion itself. The fact that you can't wear what you want in certain countries, but then when people from these countries think they are entitled to wear their full coverings for everyday life in other parts of the world. Including local governments, court systems, schools etc. If that's not arrogance, then what is?
And to address the point of Saturdays prayer. Well, hang on a second, those players decided to get together in the middle of the field and show the world their religion. They know they are role models, they know that kids mimic them, they know that when they get down and do that, plenty of children will be going - "why are they doing that", "can we do that", "if I do that will I be a sports star", which is effectively shoving it down their throat. That's rather arrogant isn't it?
No.
-
Ultimately the world is a pretty evil, fucked up place full of evil, fucked up people. If believing in some god-like entity gives people hope and happiness then good on them. So long as that faith does not affect anyone else who really cares. If the prayer session on Saturday was in fact for Leilefano then I see no problem. I believe he's religious himself and as someone literally fighting for his life he probably greatly appreciated it. No harm done.
That stuff is benign, but when religion basically becomes law and has an affect (even deadly)on people who want no part of it, then that is a big big problem.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Religious type discussion:
> > That stuff is benign, but when religion basically becomes law and has an affect (even deadly)on people who want no part of it, then that is a big big problem.``` I agree, that prayer is about as meaningful as someone looking up at the sky afer scoring a try etc. If it means a lot to them, then that's cool and it certianly doesn't hurt anyone by them doing so
-
@Hooroo said in Religious type discussion:
Why doesn't the ''' ''' quote thingy work for me?
don't thnk you use those??
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel Yep, totally agree.
I don't have a problem with what happened at all. I just have a problem with the hypocrisy of the arrogant comment.
-
@akan004 said in Religious type discussion:
@No-Quarter said in Wallabies v Springboks:
Ohhhh one of those fence sitters aye. Comon @akan004 make up your mind... is the Easter Bunny real or not??
I haven't met one atheist who can categorically say that there's no God- ultimately we cannot know for sure. Even Dawkins agrees with this. But the level of arrogance among most atheists is undeniable..
LOL... one of the single most stupid things I have ever had the displeasure of reading on the Fern.
I honestly doubt you are anything close to agnostic because no one who is truly agnostic would say such a thing about Atheists!
You do understand it is near on impossible to prove a negative and that to take it further, the onus and burden of proof lies with those making the claims. And quite frankly, thus far there is not a single substantiated piece of proof or evidence for the existence of any god or gods claimed to exist by their followers.
Further, Atheism is simply the lack of a belief in any god or gods....
Of the thousands of gods created and worhsiped by mankind over the many millennia, the Atheist simply does not hold a belief or faith in the existence of any of those gods.
And really, the only difference between an Atheist and any one of the say monotheistic religions is that the Atheist lacks in a belief in one more god than the montheist.
It is only the ignorant theist who tries to shift the burden of proof on to those who do not hold the same belief.
My honest opions about religion go like this... An individual's private faith in the existence of a god or gods is their own business. However organised religions are a scourge and have been throughout history. They way they always attempt to dictate how everyone should think and act regardless if they are of another faith or without faith.
The one thing that I absolutely cannot stand in the typical theist is the absolute abhorrent and gross arrogance, egotistical way where they thank "god" for all the wonderful things in their life or some sporting achievement thinking that some "god" has bestowed upon them this special honour or special talent yet has allowed how many millions of innocent children to die and how many millions of people who have suffered in every way possible.
That attitude makes me sick to my stomach.
It is not the Atheist who is arrogant, but the theist who thinks that their own personal beliefs and those of whatever religion they follow dictates have more value than the person and persons beside them or on the other side of this planet.
The thing that every theist fails to consider is that why is their belief and faith any more important, why is their god or gods any more important and real than those other religions which they discount and abhor! The Christian belief is not any less or any more real than that of the hindu, buddhist, etc.
The Marriage Equality debate here in Australia will display those traits in a very typically ugly way!
-
@RoninWC said in Religious type discussion:
The Marriage Equality debate here in Australia will display those traits in a very typically ugly way!
Isn't that the same "ugliness" that is on display now from some supporters of same sex marriage who label those that don't share their view as bigots, homophobes, out of touch, etc
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Religious type discussion:
@RoninWC said in Religious type discussion:
The Marriage Equality debate here in Australia will display those traits in a very typically ugly way!
Isn't that the same "ugliness" that is on display now from some supporters of same sex marriage who label those that don't share their view as bigots, homophobes, out of touch, etc
How do you suggest someone who doesn't support Marriage Equality should be labelled? It's going to be for one of the reasons you mention or one of the etc.
-
How about they just say they don't agree with it and not resort to that.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Religious type discussion:
@RoninWC said in Religious type discussion:
The Marriage Equality debate here in Australia will display those traits in a very typically ugly way!
Isn't that the same "ugliness" that is on display now from some supporters of same sex marriage who label those that don't share their view as bigots, homophobes, out of touch, etc
Those are rather ugly lables but they are often at the heart of the matter.
And let me say, this debate is not "same sex marriage". To put this more correctly, this is about "Marriage Equality". Yes, there is a subtle but very important distinction.
And quite frankly, I find it disgusting that anybody should want to deny any other human being from the joy of being able to celebrate the love they have for another person.
That is where this debate should start and end.
Marriage is not a religious construct. It is a civil act and should have no bearing on religion except for those who wish to get married in a place of religion. But it is most often those with "religion" that want to deny this right of marriage to other human beings.
It is a quite simple fact that marriage equality will not result in any harm to any religious person or any religion yet it is most often the religious and those representing religions who are most staunchly opposed and those who wish to impose their own beliefs on others.
Religious type discussion